URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The Forum
  HTML https://thewiforum.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: National topics
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 14407--------------------------------------------------
        Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: rapids_60
       Date: July 3, 2014, 10:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hobby Lobby ruling is used to reverse the court of appeals and
       allow an employer to refuse coverage for all forms of birth
       control.
  HTML http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/07/03/hobby-lobby-fallout-catholic-soy-milk-mogul-wont-cover-drugs-that-prevent-procreation/
       In October, the U.S. Court of Appeals decided against Potter,
       ruling that Eden Foods, as a for-profit corporation, couldn’t
       exercise religion.
       Now, in the wake of this week’s controversial Supreme Court
       ruling recognizing craft chain Hobby Lobby’s religious rights,
       the court has changed its tune.
       The day after the Justices decided evangelical Hobby Lobby
       billionaire David Green doesn’t have to cover certain
       contraceptives for his employees, the Supreme Court vacated the
       judgment against Eden Foods ...
       So that "narrow ruling" on 4 specific drugs  expanded to any and
       all forms of birth control in barely one day.  Slope feeling a
       bit slippery?
       #Post#: 14408--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: rapids_60
       Date: July 3, 2014, 11:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       And now,  emboldened by the HL decison,  they want an exemption
       so they don't have to hire Teh Gays
  HTML http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/hobby-lobby-is-already-creating-new-religious-demands-on-obama/373853/
       #Post#: 14410--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: Notso
       Date: July 4, 2014, 6:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       That would be something.  Obamacare may very well collapse under
       it's own weight and the only thing surviving the rubble would be
       erosion of certain things commonly called reproductive and gay
       rights.  That law of unintended consequences just might bite
       some folk once again.
       #Post#: 14412--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: trollslayer
       Date: July 4, 2014, 7:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: rapids_60 link ---
       >
       > And now,  emboldened by the HL decison,  they want an
       exemption so they don't have to hire Teh Gays
       >
  HTML http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/hobby-lobby-is-already-creating-new-religious-demands-on-obama/373853/
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       And you really think this is going to fly?
       #Post#: 14414--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: trollslayer
       Date: July 4, 2014, 7:33 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: rapids_60 link ---
       >
       > Hobby Lobby ruling is used to reverse the court of appeals and
       allow an employer to refuse coverage for all forms of birth
       control.
       >
       >
  HTML http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/07/03/hobby-lobby-fallout-catholic-soy-milk-mogul-wont-cover-drugs-that-prevent-procreation/
       >
       > In October, the U.S. Court of Appeals decided against Potter,
       ruling that Eden Foods, as a for-profit corporation, couldn’t
       exercise religion.
       > Now, in the wake of this week’s controversial Supreme Court
       ruling recognizing craft chain Hobby Lobby’s religious rights,
       the court has changed its tune.
       > The day after the Justices decided evangelical Hobby Lobby
       billionaire David Green doesn’t have to cover certain
       contraceptives for his employees, the Supreme Court vacated the
       judgment against Eden Foods ...
       >
       > So that "narrow ruling" on 4 specific drugs  expanded to any
       and all forms of birth control in barely one day.  Slope feeling
       a bit slippery?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       How has it been expanded?  It hasn't.  Eden Foods is going to
       have to spend more money fighting it in court.  Nothing has
       changed based on the Supreme Courts ruling.  You left out an
       important part of the quotation you posted
       --- Quote ---
       > The day after the Justices decided evangelical Hobby Lobby
       billionaire David Green doesn’t have to cover certain
       contraceptives for his employees, the Supreme Court vacated the
       judgment against Eden Foods and sent the case back to the U.S.
       Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for further
       consideration.
       --- End Quote ---
       Perhaps Forbes can check into their investments and find out who
       they have been doing business with as well since they are under
       the impression this is an important aspect of the case.
       Also in your article, it states they never did pay for
       contraception for their employees so I guess you can't use the
       hypocrisy argument in this case.
       #Post#: 14415--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: Notso
       Date: July 4, 2014, 7:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: trollslayer link ---
       >
       > And you really think this is going to fly?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Could happen, there is no overall special protection for
       homosexuals in the work place.  Some states have them and of
       course a employment contract may protect them, but they are not
       a "special group" like some minority's and women that covers all
       employment.  Most jobs are at will, you can be let go for any
       reason at any time, just like you can quit for any reason and at
       any time.
       #Post#: 14416--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: trollslayer
       Date: July 4, 2014, 8:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Notso link ---
       >
       > Could happen, there is no overall special protection for
       homosexuals in the work place.  Some states have them and of
       course a employment contract may protect them, but they are not
       a "special group" like some minority's and women that covers all
       employment.  Most jobs are at will, you can be let go for any
       reason at any time, just like you can quit for any reason and at
       any time.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I can not see, under any circumstances, any law or provision
       being made that would allow any employer the right to not hire
       somebody based on sexual preference.  That doesn't mean it's not
       happening of course.
       #Post#: 14417--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: Notso
       Date: July 4, 2014, 8:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: trollslayer link ---
       >
       > I can not see, under any circumstances, any law or provision
       being made that would allow any employer the right to not hire
       somebody based on sexual preference.  That doesn't mean it's not
       happening of course.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Nope, according to current law an employer cannot ask about
       sexual preference and if a employment candidate offers up that
       information it must be ignored so an employer has no legal way
       of knowing a potential employee is homosexual in the first
       place.  That's that law of unintended consequences again.  But
       that's just for the hiring process.
       #Post#: 14420--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: rapids_60
       Date: July 4, 2014, 2:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: trollslayer link ---
       >
       > Nothing has changed based on the Supreme Courts ruling.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Seems to me they at first did not pay, then a lower court found
       against them, stating they needed to keep their religion
       separate from  their business.
       At that point they did pay, up until this week's SC decision,
       reversing the lower court decision. They are now free to not pay
       again unless the lower court reaffirms their previous decision.
       The expansion is using that "Narrow" decision that only applied
       to abortion-causing drugs to cover any and all forms of birth
       control the employer may object to.  That's exactly what
       happened here.
       Watch carefully as a Muslim employer  one day soon files suit to
       preserve their religious law in employment.  That's when things
       will get interesting.
       May well be the righties  who so vigorously defend  Hobby Lobby
       inadvertently opened the door to having to equally protect
       parts of Sharia law in the US.
       Unintended consequences and all.
       #Post#: 14421--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Well that didn't take long. 
   DIR By: rapids_60
       Date: July 4, 2014, 2:11 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Notso link ---
       >
       > Could happen, there is no overall special protection for
       homosexuals in the work place.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       State by state. Wisconsin has it, quite a few do not.   But-
       were the Supreme Court to decide that being forced to hire
       homosexuals violated one's "deeply held religious beliefs", who
       knows.  Their decision would invalidate any state protections in
       place.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page