Doer
Well-Known Member
I have no knowledge on that subject, nor would I poke it, iac.is that a poke at my tiny, tiny penis?
Try some other meanings?
I have no knowledge on that subject, nor would I poke it, iac.is that a poke at my tiny, tiny penis?
but wait a minute!..wasn't this what it was all about?..the religious control thingy..when will they realize a country cannot be ruled by the religious few who follow a book from ancient times, literally..sounds kinda like the muslims but we're talking christianshttp://www.occupydemocrats.com/obama-just-neutralized-the-hobby-lobby-decision-with-new-obamacare-rules/
WOOOOOOPS!
you guys stilll lost anyway. women are still gonna get contraceptives.
fucking cry, losers.
if their beliefs that birth control is murder were sincerely held, then why do they have $73 million invested in companies that produce said forms of birth control?HL owners don't have to violate their (sincerely held) religious beliefs ...The fight wasn't about women getting contraceptives, it was about forcing religious people to participate in an activity they deemed sinful....they just refused to pay for a few that they (sincerely) believed were abortifactants.
which sinful activity was being forced on them to participate in?Sounds like a good compromise. HL owners don't have to violate their (sincerely held) religious beliefs and women get access. That is a good way to coexist peacefully with religious people.
The fight wasn't about women getting contraceptives, it was about forcing religious people to participate in an activity they deemed sinful.
HL's insurance even provided birth control for its female employees before the big fight, they just refused to pay for a few that they (sincerely) believed were abortifactants.
you don't understand.which activity was being forced on them to participate in?
Purchasing abortion inducing drugs. That was their objection. They provided insurance that covered contraceptives. There were two or three drugs they objected to paying for.which activity was being forced on them to participate in?
hobby lobby never had to buy any of those, even though they have $73 million already invested in the same.Purchasing abortion inducing drugs. That was their objection.
so in essence, they are really doing an injustice to their own investments..oh noes! not the portfolios!you don't understand.
if a fertilized egg is prevented from implanting on the uterus, that's a sin and they can't be forced to participate in that!
but if they have $73 million invested in the exact same contraceptives they refuse to cover, they have no problem participating in that.
nor do they mind getting 93% of their inventory from china, the land of state enforced abortions.
ya gotta pick and choose your sincerely held religious beliefs.
plan B? that's over the counterPurchasing abortion inducing drugs. That was their objection. They provided insurance that covered contraceptives. There were two or three drugs they objected to paying for.
From what I understand, HL actually treats their employees pretty well. I can't understand how a craft business makes so much money. They must charge a lot for their pipe cleaners.
i'm with ya bucky..it was contraceptives..i never heard anything about over the counter 'plan B'..could it be you have the facts wrong, DD?hobby lobby never had to buy any of those, even though they have $73 million already invested in the same.
you're dumb as shit.
not even plan B. these "abortion inducing drugs" he is talking about are mirena, ella, and copper IUD.plan B? that's over the counter
could it be you have the facts wrong, DD?
Here are the very few contraceptive and contraceptive devices they did not want to cover from wiki, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burwell_v._Hobby_Lobby_Stores,_Inc.i'm with ya bucky..it was contraceptives..i never heard anything about over the counter 'plan B'..could it be you have the facts wrong, DD?
i know it's hard to keep up..trust me, vote for bernie
so then condoms are taboo too? that prevents an egg from possible fertilization, therefore you are obstructing what the good lord and savior jaheeeeeeeeesus christ intended! amirite?you don't understand.
if a fertilized egg is prevented from implanting on the uterus, that's a sin and they can't be forced to participate in that!
but if they have $73 million invested in the exact same contraceptives they refuse to cover, they have no problem participating in that.
nor do they mind getting 93% of their inventory from china, the land of state enforced abortions.
ya gotta pick and choose your sincerely held religious beliefs.
To many Catholics, you're dead on accurate, especially in other countries. Probably quite a few denominations of Christianity as well.so then condoms are taboo too? that prevents an egg from possible fertilization, therefore you are obstructing what the good lord and savior jaheeeeeeeeesus christ intended! amirite?
that's what intercourse is for correct? to procreate. if you have a condom on..that's actually blasphemous.
born catholic, i was product of wedding night bliss and in order to get my mom hot, my dad (whose birthday was up for early 'nam) said to my mom "you're not what i wanted, but you'll do'..total marriage made in heaven..rythm method and my brother was born when i was 14 months old..almost an irish twinTo many Catholics, you're dead on accurate, especially in other countries. Probably quite a few denominations of Christianity as well.
well isn't that special that 2 families in the whole of the us live the lords word..so then each couple within these families have 19 kids? because you see..they are fucking hippocrites..any birth control is against the word of god..if you are going to follow this b.c./a.d. doctrine.Here are the very few contraceptive and contraceptive devices they did not want to cover from wiki, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burwell_v._Hobby_Lobby_Stores,_Inc.
Specific contraceptives contested by plaintiffsEdit
The Green and Hahn families believe that life begins at conception which they equate to fertilization, and object to their closely held for-profit corporations providing health insurance coverage to their female employees of four FDA-approved contraceptives that the Green and Hahn families believe may prevent implantation of a fertilized egg (many doctors and scientists disagree), which the Green and Hahn families believe constitutes an abortion.[17][18][19][20]
- Emergency contraceptive pills (sometimes inaccurately called "morning after" pills)
- Plan B (levonorgestrel) and its generic equivalents
- ella (ulipristal acetate)
- Intrauterine devices (IUDs)
- ParaGard (copper IUD)
- Mirena and Skyla (levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs)
Edit: plan b wasn't available OTC until 2013, the year following the filing of their suit. So at the time of the filing, plan b was prescription only.