Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Missouri Man Is First Private Business Owner to Sue HHS Over Contraception Mandate [View all]EC
(12,287 posts)16. Does the insurance
force him to have an abortion or buy birth control pills or get sterilized? So how does it even apply to him? What if all insurance policies covered those things, would he opt out of insurance for himself and his family then since it would be so offensive? These guys are making the U.S. a joke of a place to live. He can still believe whatever he wants to believe, there is nothing in this law stopping him from believing in his religion.
Things like this and their bible thumbing is exactly the reason I would never apply for a job at Hobby Lobby or Uline, never, ever.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
52 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Missouri Man Is First Private Business Owner to Sue HHS Over Contraception Mandate [View all]
hedgehog
Mar 2012
OP
ACLJ Files Suit Challenging HHS Mandate for Violating Religious Beliefs of Missouri Business Owner
rfranklin
Mar 2012
#1
The mandate says any new plan must provide contraceptive products at no cost ....
BOHICA12
Mar 2012
#27
"We will not discriminate based on anyone's belief system." There it is in a nutshell. They are not
jwirr
Mar 2012
#14
There is nothing to stop a JW employer from excluding blood transfusion coverage from
kestrel91316
Mar 2012
#15
To stop the slippery slope? The Supreme Court put limits on religious freedom. 1878 Reynolds v. US
Brettongarcia
Mar 2012
#20
That little nagging voice whispers that the last thing the administration wants to do in an election
24601
Mar 2012
#33
Yeah but, earlier legal precedents, disallowing religious exemptions, don't just include tax cases
Brettongarcia
Mar 2012
#36
All organizations accepting government funding/regulation, should obey full federal HHS law
Brettongarcia
Mar 2012
#37
I wonder if the Obama Administration didn't start this issue just for this to happen
lunatica
Mar 2012
#28
Yes I know that its under that however is it constitutional? After all our government does from time
cstanleytech
Mar 2012
#49
HEY!!! You know what? I have objections about my taxes being used for bogus wars!
KansDem
Mar 2012
#51