Supremes vote for religious bigotry

[finnbow]

Would this SCOTUS ruling allow a corporation owned by Christian Scientists to deny any and all health care insurance to their employees?

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Would this SCOTUS ruling allow a corporation owned by Christian Scientists to deny any and all health care insurance to their employees?

Not only that, consider that since employer provided healthcare insurance is simply part of the total compensation package what does this ruling allow? Can Hobby Booby now prevent an employee from buying such contraceptives withe her wages? The idea of including health insurance was only introduced to circumvent wage and price controls in the first place. Sorry folks but this dumb misogynistic decision is going to make the Olympic downhill look like a stroll in the park. And we can thank the five old men of SCOTUS for yet another screwup. Surely the line in the Constitution "shall hold their offices during good behavior" (Article III) applies and it is about time to clean house?

[merrylander]

Ha on the local news last night I see we do have a Hooby Booby in the Columbia Mall, well we rarely go there any more so the chances of accidentally patronizing those whack jobs is remote and Michael's is closer.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Ha on the local news last night I see we do have a Hooby Booby in the Columbia Mall, well we rarely go there any more so the chances of accidentally patronizing those whack jobs is remote and Michael's is closer.

Keeping in mind that Hobby Lobby's customer base is largely women, it will be interesting to see whether America's women will now shop elsewhere.

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

But you can use health insurance to circumvent ED, hardly a life threatening condition and surely an elective procedure.

As and HR type you must admit that Health insurance is part of the total compensation package. If her employer can dictate how that is parceled out then is it not just a step along to say said employer can dictate how the rest is spent? This asinine decision by five old men is about what I have come to expect from the Robert's court. Next on the agenda is probably the rollback od women's suffrage.

The point is that employers make decisions all the time about what is / isn't covered under their plans, or how much of a particular procedure is covered, particularly under SELF INSURED plans like that offered at Hobby Lobby. FULLY INSURED plans in 27 states because those states have passed laws requiring fully-insured employer health insurance plans that also cover prescription drugs to provide "equitable" coverage for contraceptives. In short, if an employer is going to offer prescription drugs, contraceptives have to be among the options.

This SCOTUS decision was quite narrow because it only applied to companies that have self insured plans, and only to companies whose owners have bona fide religious issues with the requirement.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Would this SCOTUS ruling allow a corporation owned by Christian Scientists to deny any and all health care insurance to their employees?

No, it would not.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Would this SCOTUS ruling allow a corporation owned by Christian Scientists to deny any and all health care insurance to their employees?

By the way, if you read yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it relies heavily on a 1993 law that " your guy" Clinton signed, and passed through the House and Senate with near unanimity.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

This SCOTUS decision was quite narrow because it only applied to companies that have self insured plans, and only to companies whose owners have bona fide religious issues with the requirement.

Considering the brilliant minds from which it emanated I am not at all surprised. Mau'dit tete de pioche

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

By the way, if you read yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it relies heavily on a 1993 law that " your guy" Clinton signed, and passed through the House and Senate with near unanimity.

No it relied heavily on a collection of five old misogynistic men who then scrambled about looking for something on which to hang their half assed decision.

Face it disease insurance in this country has all decisions made by men for men and that is a simple fact else why is ED considered a 'treatable' disease. I mean it is easily controlled just eat more starchy foods. Five old farts that can't get it up any more and they want to make everybody's life miserable.

Ever since smiling Roberts took over SCOTUS has been a bloody disaster.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

By the way, if you read yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it relies heavily on a 1993 law that " your guy" Clinton signed, and passed through the House and Senate with near unanimity.

Funny how that law says nothing about corporations and the intent was to protect native American religious practices from undue prosecution and persecution for peyote use. Like the Citizens United decision handed down by this same Robert's court, they're contorting the law for political aims.