Hobby Lobby Must Provide Morning-After Pill

A federal judge has denied a request by Hobby Lobby to block the part of the health care overhaul that requires it to cover the morning-after and week-after pill for its employees. Hobby Lobby, which is owned by a Christian family, claimed the healthcare mandate violated its religious beliefs and that the morning-after pill is tantamount to abortion. However, a government lawyer said that the pill is not abortive and that—while religious organizations are exempt from the mandate—secular, for-profit businesses are not. "It is by God's grace and provision that Hobby Lobby has endured," says David Green, Hobby Lobby's founder and CEO. "Therefore we seek to honor God by operating the company in a manner consistent with biblical principles." The family is expected to appeal ...


JaKe (not verified)

You are not actually confronting the argument presented to you. The "it" that guest 2 is referring to is a fertilized egg and you know that. Please be intellectually honest with your replies. Read and respond to my post above on your initial post because THAT is what real pro-life people believe.


Nothing against Hobby Lobby, but it's hard to argue that a secular, for-profit business is anything but that, no matter who runs it.

I'm not going to act like it's all cut-and-dry, but ... it's difficult to legislate your personal beliefs within a secular business without indirectly legislating your employees' personal lives ... especially if they didn't agree to such oversight when they started working there.

JaKe (not verified)

Are you saying that a private business should not be able to provide the type of health care that is consistent with their values? I know this is what the government is arguing, but is that what you think is right? I believe that government should keep its grubby little hands out of the lives of private citizen and private business. There is no end to the depths the government will dig once they get their hands into something.


Well, I understand your point, but in the same vein, I can argue that there is no end to the depths that a business will go to get profits. (See the documentary about Walmart, the high cost of low prices, for example.)

A private business is still operating at the discretion of this country's laws and society. Private businesses aren't independent countries; they operate on American soil, subject to federal & state laws, within communities of tax-paying citizens, on roads and facilities built by taxpayer money, with police and firemen for safety, etc.I'm no expert, but sometimes the "grubby little hands" need to keep some businesses' powers and freedoms in check. Examples: equity among race, gender, etc. in hiring because it shouldn't be easier for certain members of a community to get advancement over others; anti-monopoly laws; minimum wage; child labor; etc.The power of wealth and business can elevate or sap a community, and this should be checked.Anyway, I get that the owners feel conflicted about the pill, but ... it's difficult to justify a matter of conscience towards other people's bodies and choices (that everyone has different opinions on) when operating a secular business.

Why? Because, in a sense, it *can* be a slippery slope. Businesses may deny parts of healthcare to cut costs and cite religious reasons, even though it's not a religious business. Maybe that's silly ... ?

Now ... say the employees wouldn't have their morning-after pills covered. So what, right? But nonetheless, it's a precedent that indirectly influences their employees' personal lives.

What if your employer didn't want you to have an abortion? Your health care for abortions is cut. What if you kept the baby, but had it out of wedlock? The owners may find that "unChristian" and terminate you.

Well, they can just quit, right? But, were the employees, once hired, made aware that they would have to live their lives according to the owners' moral standards? It sounds silly, but these hypotheticals are not without precedent.

Which brings me back to what your question: is it right?

Well, when faith and religion is mixed into secular affairs, it's complicated.

But I'll ask this: Should your faith or belief system be used, even reduced, to an exemption from secular standards? Or should your faith inspire people outside of them, influencing rather than demanding morality from people?

Because the more I see faith and religion being twisted up in politics and secular affairs, the more ugliness it creates.

JaKe (not verified)

You articulate yourself very well, and I'm thankful for such a great response. The issues that we run into in this case is that The government is trying to force a business to purchase a form of health care that they do not want to provide. This is real problem because the government will begin to put these mandates on business and eventually it begins to spill over into the life of the individual.

No one is saying that government should not put forth laws to protect hiring equality, minimum wage, child labor, or whatnot, this is a completely different issue. This is an issue of the government mandating that private business PURCHASE something for their employees that directly goes counter to the values of the company. And this is NOT a value that affects an the job performance or employee safety, this is a private issue for each individual. It would be like if a company said, we do not allow our employees to wear blue during their shifts and the government saying that they must allow employees the right to wear blue or they will be fined.

A private business that provides HC to its employees will inform the employees of their coverage and the employee has the right to accept what is provided or find another place to work that gives them the HC they desire. The government has no right to tell businesses what they must buy for their employees when it comes to things like this.

Anywho, this is just the beginning in this country. No politician has the guts to solve the very real systematic financial problems that we have. All politicians want to do is give out "free candy" to the people to get themselves reelected. I tell you that our generation, 18-30 is going to be the ones who will have to pay all these bills and it is not going to be a pretty day when the bill comes due. This can only last for so long before chaos breaks out all over this once great land.

Please log in or register to comment