Guest / Limited Access /

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today announced two proposed changes to its mandate that companies offer health insurance that includes coverage of contraceptives. The changes largely remove controversial language that narrowly defined ...

Read More

Displaying 1–18 of 18 comments

J Thomas

February 07, 2013  11:11pm

Johnson, Hobby Lobby is absolutely under persecution. They are being singled out for their faith and having their business taken from them because of it. That's persecution. In America. It's time to wake up.

Report Abuse

g Johnson

February 07, 2013  4:17pm

I'd like to know how many of you would also support the religious freedom of Jehovah's Witness. Do they also get a 'faith' pass on paying their part for blood transfusions? They truly believe this is a sin. Why then should they pay for other people's blood transfusions? And how about business owners who are Christian Scientists? Since they believe all sickness is an illusion and prayer is the only way to help, why should they pay their part at all? I hope in my lifetime that we move to universal single payer health system where my employer cannot dictate what he will and won't cover for my insurance according to his faith.

Report Abuse

g Johnson

February 07, 2013  4:11pm

J. Thomas: People who consider this persecution are doing a real disfavor to Christians around the world who are literally tied up and beaten to death for their faith. As far as I know, no one is tying you up and forcing birth control pills down your throat to make you experience the sinful horrors of not ovulating. As I stated before, Hobby Lobby provided the very items they are now so piously fighting against in their previous health coverage. Look it up. It's true. If they are so very concerned about the small chance that they will indirectly pay for these items that they previously covered, why on earth would they set up factories in China knowing very well that the money paid to the Chinese government will go directly into paying for state funded abortions? At any point of the pregnancy. You can praise them all you want, but do some research before you blindly try to back them up.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 07, 2013  9:50am

Johnson, advocating evil because it is counter-weighted by something you perceive as evil just doesn't seem like the right way to analyze morals. Have you ever heard the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right"? We should stand with Hobby Lobby in their attempt to preserve religious liberty for all of us. God bless them. We should all be praying for intercession that the Lord steps in and changes the hearts of those who have become hardened toward Christianity so that they do not continue to persecute us legally.

Report Abuse

Nancy Danielson

February 06, 2013  8:51am

Just as nonprofit corporations consist of individual persons, so do for profit corporations. Religious Liberty does not depend upon whether an individual or group of individuals is part of a nonprofit or for profit group. An employer has the right to employ those who support the mission of his company and should not be forced to provide contraception coverage, which is not Life-affirming or Life-sustaining, promotes promiscuity and the sexual objectification of the human person and in some cases actually destroys human life.

Report Abuse

g Johnson

February 05, 2013  7:43am

Phillip. Let's stick to the subject. Hobby Lobby is not suing the government over dictatorships or illegal detention and the federal funds received by planned parenthood do not go into providing abortions. The owners Hobby Lobby specifically claim that their faith does not allow them to very indirectly pay for contraception for their female employees, ever. They are hypocrites because a) birth control pills, Ella and Plan B were provided under their previous health plan. b)The money they pay the Chinese government for doing business there goes directly into funding abortions at any time of the pregnancy. The billionaire Green family turns a blind eye to this fact and continues to worship the almighty dollar while duping their 'loyal' customers and hoping they are not smart enough to figure this all out.

Report Abuse

Philip K

February 05, 2013  3:54am

@g Johnson - the logic you use is bizarre. So setting up factories in China is indirectly funding abortion?! So setting up a factory in the US must be equivalent to funding illegal detention, abortion (doesn't the US govt fund Planned Parenthood), dictators (doesn't the US govt prop up many dictatorships around the world)?

Report Abuse

g Johnson

February 04, 2013  8:10pm

It is a VERY reasonable comparison. No one is forcing Hobby Lobby to do business in China. They have CHOSEN to set up factories there and pay the Chinese government for this. There are plenty of countries in South America, Africa and the Middle East where abortion is illegal. If they were so against abortion and plan B, why on earth would they choose China, the abortion capital of the world? Hobby Lobby also provided the very items (contraceptive pills, Plan B, and Ella) in their previous health plan that they are now so piously fighting. What a bunch of money making hypocrites.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 04, 2013  7:31pm

The Chinese arent a free people, and we have no say in their politics. That's not a reasonable comparison.

Report Abuse

g Johnson

February 04, 2013  5:03pm

The sheer hypocrisy of Hobby Lobby is mind boggling. The Greens made their vast fortune by setting up factories in China. Does the Green family pay the Chinese government to do business there? Absolutely. Does some of the money that the Greens pay the Chinese government go directly in to funding abortions. You betcha.

Report Abuse

g Johnson

February 04, 2013  1:53pm

Jim Gustafson: "Contraception is a lifestyle choice??" I guess you think that endometriosis, severe PMS, heavy bleeding and fibroids are a lifestyle choice. When was the last time you suffered from these? A lifestyle choice would be eating too much, getting fat and developing type 2 diabetes. Should we refuse to pay for the medications of people who choose the fat lifestyle choice? Pregnancy and childbirth are also not medical treatments; they are lifestyle choices. Perhaps we should not shell out for these too, especially in all too often case of expensive c-section births.

Report Abuse

Jim Gustafson

February 02, 2013  3:39pm

Contraception is not a medical treatment -- it is a lifestyle choice. Just like pills for erectile dysfunction. No healthcare plan should be forced to pay for contraception or boner pills. If you want either, pay for it yourself. On the other hand, if a religious institution/employer must provide contraception as part of their health benefit against their (corporate) conscience, why cannot the faithful among their employees be counted on to not use the forbidden contraceptives, even if they are free? Do these institutions really need the power of the state to keep their own "faithful" in line? If so, heaven help them. Literally.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 02, 2013  10:11am

John, individuals are given the freedom to worship as they see fit under the first amendment. If you don't like that aspect of the constitution, then amend it, like is supposed to be done through the political process. If you agree that you want to pay for the abortions of children then by all means, start a non-profit and begin raising money for abortions. Solicit those same ivory tower liberals who seem to think its so important to abort poor children because they see them as a scourge. Thank God our founders had the insight to keep meddling politicians out of our religious convictions.

Report Abuse

Kevin Snyder

February 02, 2013  8:16am

Dr Martin: Please explain to me why it is MY responsibility to make sure YOU don't get anyone pregnant? Thank you in advance.

Report Abuse

John Holmes

February 02, 2013  6:59am

Attention J Thomas What rights do such church associated institutions and in some cases organizations with no direct organizational links with any Church with respect to ownership, or activities have in discriminating against the religious freedoms of their workers or imposing on them the organizational religious views. The separation of State and Church is just that. Render unto Caesar.... If the institution receives NO support from the Government including tax concession etc, there may be reason for it to do so. To discriminate against the gardener who is doing nothing different to what any other gardener for any other organization does, and there are directives to do so for all similar situations, How so? Otherwise it is back to the Medieval Church's expectation of rights above that of the nation. Bit Imperial hey what.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 02, 2013  12:31am

Norman, Alinskyite personal attacks and smears on institutions that try to deliver services while maintaining the integrity of their convictions before the Lord just doesn't seem to be appropriate. What business is it of yours if these groups practice their faith in this way? Who made you the universal arbiter of theology? To ignore the simple fact that many people view contraceptives as a moral issue is foolish. It is precisely what is at issue here. You must know that our country was built in large part around religious people who fled government intrusion into their theological issues and faith practices, so it should not be a surprise that Americans put up a fight to maintain that freedom to worship as they feel led. If you are an MD, you should be well aware of the abundance of cheap birth control pills everywhere in America. You should also be aware of patient assistance programs that provide them for free to the impoverished.

Report Abuse

alex morgan

February 01, 2013  9:21pm

Thanks for the clarification. I am still baffled that our government can force any one at any time in any situation to supply contraceptives. Wow.

Report Abuse

Dr. Norman L. Martin

February 01, 2013  6:20pm

Evangelical groups including religious colleges are being disingenuous in their stand on this issue. They simply don't want to pay employee part of the premiums. Are they really against contraceptives for their employees? What about the RELIGIOUS RIGHTS OF THEIR EMPLOYEES to have such coverage which is often not simply to prevent pregnancies but to address other related women's health issues. What is wrong with offering, through a health insurance policy, an option for employees to pay for this part of the coverage for contraceptives. Many of these whinny groups including for profit groups are just against anything President Obama may attempt to do for the health of women. While Catholic and other religious groups may have a solid First Amendment stand, I doubt the honesty of purpose of the those in your article. Norman L. Martin

Report Abuse

View this article in Reader Mode