SCOTUS 7-2 Expansive Decision For Little Sisters of The Poor

Unless my insurance company is also my employer, that’s exactly what they’re doing.

 

Funny when liberals complain that others are arrogant and narcissistic when they dictate a moral agenda because no one in the US is more guilty of that then liberals. No one else is even close.

 

You can get insurance elsewhere. No it isn't what they are doing.

 

Incorrect, no one beats christofacists.
Followed closely by red hats.

 

your employer is provide you with options they are willing to pay for. You don’t have to have the insurance they are willing to pay for

 

so the Little Sisters of the Poor are fascist because these nuns don’t want to have to pay for birth control? wow....talk about tolerance...it’s really no wonder nuns have often been victims of violence in left wing regimes

 

Are they trying to “dictate law, marriage, adoption, housing, education, employment and purchasing ability of others”?

Insurance shouldn’t be tied to employment and the Nuns shouldn’t have been in this position to begin with.

Good try with the strawman though. You have been practicing it seems.

 

There is NO "contraception mandate" for nuns or for any one else.

A employee can choose to accept a health plan that would have an OPTION to have medical supplies that may include contraception from a EMPLOYEE who worked for and paid for insurance.

Its none of the owners GD business what the employee does with their labor.
[/QUOTE]

Huh? The exact review is what is being the issue.

Pleassse! I was born Catholic, in Catholic School and worked for them. I earned my right to slander them.

Birth control of all kinds, pregnancy, vasectomy, tied tubes are all involved with these controlled actions, and the fact that large of numbers of girls and women end up pregnant, sometimes unaware, and are used to abuse people with these issues. The Catholic Churches have used there BS to balim women who end up pregnant from priests who then sue claim to the courts there should be no child support because the women didn't take birth control to prevent the pregnancy!

There are plenty of good people in the Cathplic, but there lots of Catholic "Holy Men" from the Pope down to the bottom who invite and DESERVE slander for their selfish, cruel, and abusive behavior!

No "respect and dignity" for Catholicism until they earn it! Their hypocrisy over birth control is one of their failures, if they thought it was important to tge Church they would behave it as if it was important.

 

straw man? that’s what this case was about

i agree they shouldn’t have been obamacare was a disaster of a law.

insurance isn’t tied solely to employment

 

Huh? The exact review is what is being the issue.

Pleassse! I was born Catholic, in Catholic School and worked for them. I earned my right to slander them.

Birth control of all kinds, pregnancy, vasectomy, tied tubes are all involved with these controlled actions, and the fact that large of numbers of girls and women end up pregnant, sometimes unaware, and are used to abuse people with these issues. The Catholic Churches have used there BS to balim women who end up pregnant from priests who then sue claim to the courts there should be no child support because the women didn't take birth control to prevent the pregnancy!

There are plenty of good people in the Cathplic, but there lots of Catholic "Holy Men" from the Pope down to the bottom who invite and DESERVE slander for their selfish, cruel, and abusive behavior!

No "respect and dignity" for Catholicism until they earn it! Their hypocrisy over birth control is one of their failures, if they thought it was important to tge Church they would behave it as if it was important.[/QUOTE]

There is no constitutional restriction of 1st amendment rights.

These Sisters walk the walk and should NEVER have to bend to leftists because of their religion.

 

Yes, strawman

Yes, the program modeled off of conservative bills that had to be pushed through a Republican do nothing congress that was desperately needed as our insurance costs vs insured percentages were outrageous along with denials for preexisting conditions that was bankrupting so many was a bad deal. They should have just rammed through a public option and been done with it. Here is hoping they learned a lesson about trying to negotiate with traitors.

It almost universally is

 

it’s a straw man to discuss the case this thread is about?

obamacare has nothing to with a Conservative bill

it’s not solely and not sure why you are opposed to insurance being available in many ways

 

Thst wasn’t good enough, they already didn’t have to pay for it.

Under these accommodations, eligible organizations are not directly involved with providing any contraceptive coverage to which they object on religious grounds. Payments for these contraceptive services will be provided by an independent third party, such as an insurance company or third-party administrator (TPA), directly and free of charge.

 

maybe you should what the case was about

 

I have. Not paying for it wasn’t good enough.

 

OK, then when the employee chooses to do so, they are owed their FULL compensation. You know a lot, right? So you know all about full compensation statements where they show just how much you actually cost the company? That includes paying for that insurance, which is more than just the premiums that get taken out of your paycheck. So all that cash should go to the employee so they can buy their own insurance elsewhere. After all, it's compensation they are entitled to and you believe in people choosing for themselves, right? Also, that money should be treated as pre-tax because it is for the employers. As long as you are on board with this, your statement stands. Otherwise, you are violating your own notion of freedom of choice by allowing employers to have access to means of enticing labor that they don't have access to themselves. That's called cheating, in case you were wondering.

 

It's a free country, so if it means that much to you exercise your freedom of choice:

1) Find another job where someone else's religious views won't determine what your insurance covers, or

2) Get your own health insurance, or

3) Pay for your contraception yourself.

No one is obligated to work for the Little Sisters of the Poor and/or enroll in their HI/HC plan. Who knows, maybe Planned Parenthood is hiring?

 

Funny that all this freedom to work elsewhere wasn’t the answer when it was compulsory union membership for public employees.

 

That pesky Constitution of ours was the answer, wasn't it?

Nevertheless. even when public sector unions were allowed to rob non-union employees the freedom to work elsewhere still existed, and I presume many people exercised that freedom.

 

Well, Obama tried to mandate it even though it's not supported by statute. Just as Obama made the administrative so may Trump which is why the Court ruled 7-2 in favor of the Trumpian position.

If an employee does not want to be accountable to their employer for their labor, they are free to resign. There is no compulsory labor in this Great Nation since the Republicans defeated the Democrats in the Civil War and that banned slavery by Constitutional Amendment, settling the matter for all time.

 

No the company doesn't pay them anything for them not accepting the insurance the company offers. Further companies don't owe you insurance. You just won't have premiums deducted that's all.

if you are a special little snowflake who their insurance isn't good enough for that's a you problem.

 

Actually, the absurd thing was forcing the elderly to pay for contraceptive coverage. This has been nothing more then a wealth redistribution thing. Make the elderly, pay for coverage that they will never need, so some low income woman can get free birth control meds. I know some people need this, but if I have to pay a copayment for my diabetes and blood pressure meds, then why should women pay a copayment for their birth controls meds. Further, why should the elderly pay for abortions and gender reassignment surgery?

IMHO, no one over the age of 50 should have to pay for contraceptive coverage through their health insurance.

 

a 7-2 decision overturning roe vs wade is not far off the horizon.

 

This BS of calling people at certain ages or health isn't a "wealth redistribution thing"!

Its called HEALTH CARE! EVERY other 1st world country pays everybody from birth to death for health care! ALL of them get health care for HALF the cost the USA pays, even though the USA doesn't pay care about 20% of the USA citizen's care until dying (then the USA pays many times those costs as those people die).

But babies in the rest of the world pay for the contraceptives of over 13 yo adults use! And old people pay that same amount to the over 13yo adults use!

And middle-age and old people for babies even though they never get pregnant! School age kids get glasses paid for, oldsters get fantastic hearing aids even though 13 yo routinely NEVER need hearing aids!

And whose fault IS it some people do HAVE to pay a co-payment for blood pressure and diabetes? Whose stupid ideas SAYS people should need to pay a "co-payment"? I didn't pay those kinds of payments in my janitor job! My deductible was $50 per YEAR after a 30 day wait to see if I stayed!

These kinds of vicious cruelty policies were instituted by untold dollars of propaganda and unending bribes to our political leaders in the USA to "save money" and to "encourage health and reduce negative behaviors" to the point that now, after 60 years, the USA now spends TWICE THE MONEY for HALF the HEALTH CARE every other 1st world healthcare system does!

With 500,00 bankruptcies in the USA with all of its misery and costs vs almost NONE in all the rest of those same countries!

IMHO, along with most of the 1st world, no one CARES about whether they have to pay for contraception or insulin or how old someone is or whether a church should have to pay for contraceptive because it is not a problem for employers!

 

Let's set some perimeters before we take this conversation further. First we are addressing the Affordable Care Act (ACA), aka Obamacare. Not the merits of socialized medicines. If the Democrats had wanted the ACA to be socialized medicine, then they would have made it so.

When you make someone buy, or pay, for something that they do not need or use in order to offset the cost for someone that can not afford this item is by definition wealth redistribution. It is no different then taking money from the so-called rich and giving it to the poor. Except many of those that are having their money taken from them are not rich. Many are actually the poor that does not need the coverage.

My point was that very few, over the age of 50 has any need for contraceptive coverage. Menopause usually starts in a woman's mid 40's. By the time they are 50, they can not longer get pregnant, nor do they have that time of the month. So, contraceptives are not needed. Yet, my 80 year old mother is still required to buy Medicare Supplemental Insurance that includes contraceptive coverage. At the same time, (keep in mind we are only talking about the ACA here) women that are low income are given free contraceptives (including the pill) free of charge. Yet, many of these same women are having to pay a copayment for diabetes and blood pressure medications.

Now, if you want to debate the merits of socialized medicines against a free market approach, then start a new topic, and I will meet you there. But the SCOTUS ruling applied to the ACA only.