General Discussion

dawg

(10,777 posts)

57. Oh, I agree with you. I'm just pointing out that they knew when they made this ...

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 12:39 PM

Jul 2014

ruling that it was (like Bush v. Gore) not based on any sound legal reasoning that could be *logically* applied to differing circumstances.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ok wait....so Hobby Lobby didn't ban most birth control, just IUD types? [View all] cbdo2007 Jul 2014 OP

That's not the point ..... mrsadm Jul 2014 #1

Nothing in HL's conditions of employment preclude use of an IUD. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2014 #37

It is not an employer's business what their employees Skidmore Jul 2014 #62

And that is why I am sad our president didn't push harder for single payer joeglow3 Jul 2014 #64

No JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #2

Yes, I fully understand how conception works... cbdo2007 Jul 2014 #15

IUDs are also used for medical issues unrelated to pregnancy riderinthestorm Jul 2014 #21

This is true JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #34

See post #23 on this very thread... nt riderinthestorm Jul 2014 #36

Thanks - that is excellent! JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #39

It's including JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #24

I think there is an added level of *ironical hypocricy* Sheepshank Jul 2014 #25

I agree JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #33

as another person who's family building was enabled by IVF Sheepshank Jul 2014 #38

Amen Sheepshank! JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #42

Currently most insurance does NOT cover IVF so I would love to see that changed... cbdo2007 Jul 2014 #45

Yep - we've been through that JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #48

Any ban is still a ban and thats a fact. William769 Jul 2014 #3

Any ban is bad for sure. brer cat Jul 2014 #18

+1 MadrasT Jul 2014 #46

And "Plan B" Coventina Jul 2014 #4

THAT is the underlying factor that most people seem to have missed. dixiegrrrrl Jul 2014 #11

And every other form of contraception. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #13

A very good point that needs to be made clear. Coventina Jul 2014 #14

The point is, the employer chooses which birth control is acceptable and which isn't. Is that the lostincalifornia Jul 2014 #5

USA needs to get away from employer based health insurance Sheepshank Jul 2014 #28

That is the solution, but in this current environment, when do you think it will happen? lostincalifornia Jul 2014 #31

This court ruling takes us one step closer, imho Sheepshank Jul 2014 #35

Actually you are right if you read there decision, however, it will still be Congress that need to lostincalifornia Jul 2014 #40

Plan B and Ru-485 HockeyMom Jul 2014 #6

Of course they do JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #8

Nope, ruling means NO contraceptives are covered. Not a single one. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #7

my understanding is that 4 out of 20 choices will not be covered DrDan Jul 2014 #9

Your understanding is wrong. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #10

Not true WillowTree Jul 2014 #50

It might be that the company has the choice - just because something is not MANDATED karynnj Jul 2014 #52

They didn't ban anything gwheezie Jul 2014 #12

The narrowness of the ruling is similar to that of Bush v. Gore. dawg Jul 2014 #17

And if it actually worked that way, you'd have a point. jeff47 Jul 2014 #55

Oh, I agree with you. I'm just pointing out that they knew when they made this ... dawg Jul 2014 #57

You realize that those types are also used to treat non-pregnancy related female problems riderinthestorm Jul 2014 #16

I have a Mirena because it keeps the lining thin maryellen99 Jul 2014 #23

Yup. Hobby Lobby getting in between you and your doctor is wrong for any reason riderinthestorm Jul 2014 #27

Thank you maryellen99 Jul 2014 #63

I have a niece -- Hell Hath No Fury Jul 2014 #49

Do we know Hobby Lobby wouldn't pay for that? joeglow3 Jul 2014 #61

I'm sure all the other corporations will do the same thing kcr Jul 2014 #19

Nothing has been banned. DesMoinesDem Jul 2014 #20

Just like you can't be a "little bit pregnant" ... frazzled Jul 2014 #22

excellent article. nt BootinUp Jul 2014 #60

Wrong. It also banned anything it considered an abortifaciant, pnwmom Jul 2014 #26

There is no ban. Employment is not contingent upon abstaining from using "abortifaciants." Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2014 #41

There is a ban. The employees are banned from using their insurance to purchase pnwmom Jul 2014 #47

HL gets between a woman and her doctor. Period. nt Ilsa Jul 2014 #29

How? If a company offered no BC prior to the mandate (HL did but let's assume a maximal position) Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2014 #44

I said Hobby Lobby "HL", not some Ilsa Jul 2014 #54

This is much broader than which contraceptive methods HL objects to. TwilightGardener Jul 2014 #30

I think they should have ZERO input on what birth control a woman and her doctor feel is best TheKentuckian Jul 2014 #32

corporations shouldnt fund any healthcare Travis_0004 Jul 2014 #53

The court did not limit it to just plan B and IUD's. boston bean Jul 2014 #43

I think this is a case of purposeful ignorance. tammywammy Jul 2014 #58

SCOTUS banned them in their slippery slope decision. HL are just Christoassholes. valerief Jul 2014 #51

Hobby Lobby hasn't done anything yet. jeff47 Jul 2014 #56

So what's going to happen when some Christian Scientist or faith healer sort Marr Jul 2014 #59