# SCOTUS Protects Religious Freedom/Sides with Hobby Lobby



## Belle Du Jour (Jun 30, 2014)

http://www.cnn.com/?hpt=sitenav

5-4 victory.  Employers don't have to provide contraception under ACA if it goes against their moral beliefs.


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> http://www.cnn.com/?hpt=sitenav
> 
> 5-4 victory.  Employers don't have to provide contraception under ACA if it goes against their moral beliefs.



   Praise God!  

Someone there in the Supreme Court is showing some respect towards God.  It's high time.


----------



## MizzKutieQ (Jun 30, 2014)

They just opened a hobby Lobby near me. I will continue to shop at Michaels and A.C. Moore.


----------



## Belle Du Jour (Jun 30, 2014)

MizzKutieQ said:


> They just opened a hobby Lobby near me. I will continue to shop at Michaels and A.C. Moore.



And plenty of Christians will be still supporting and shopping at Hobby Lobby   Just like Chick Fil A--their business hasn't folded yet


----------



## MizzKutieQ (Jun 30, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> And plenty of Christians will be still supporting and shopping at Hobby Lobby   Just like Chick Fil A--their business hasn't folded yet



Chick Fil A didn't really stand behind their beliefs as they apologized when they realized the impact it made to their business. Yes, there was a line of Christians standing behind them, but when the media wore off and the numbers were starting to dwindle the apology came soon after. If they were standing on their Christian supporters alone, I doubt they would have even apologized.


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

MizzKutieQ said:


> Chick Fil A didn't really stand behind their beliefs as they apologized when they realized the impact it made to their business. Yes, there was a line of Christians standing behind them, but when the media wore off and the numbers were starting to dwindle the apology came soon after. If they were standing on their Christian supporters alone, I doubt they would have even apologized.



Dan Cathy (Chick Fila) never backed down from his stance on Marriage.   His apology was sincerely to clear up the lies about what he said as well as for other Christians who stood with him, which was and still is...

Our faith regarding marriage does not exclude anyone gay or straight from respect nor from being a part of Chick Fila.   They are still hired and treated as any of the other staff as well as customers.  I can personally attest to this as well as millions of others. 

Let's get something straight.  I don't think God cares who shops at Hobby Lobby or not.   He cares more about those who honor and obey Him.   

Wrong can never be made right no matter what laws are 'enacted' which make provision for sin.   There's always a backlash effect, a consequence.   

This world cannot force God from being who/whom He is and will always be.  God still controls this world and it's elements and man has yet to out-control Him, even with their sin, brashness and foolishness.    

Hobby Lobby has every_ single and plura_l right to not provide for what displeases God and not someone else's folly.   If folks don't like it, don't work there / don't shop there.    God will still provide and increase Hobby Lobby for taking a stand for His values.  Those little coins withheld of those who oppose them will never add up to the blessings of obedience to God's laws.    

This is STILL God's earth and the fullness thereof and all and they that dwell therein.   There isn't a man-made law big nor bad enough to 'trump' God nor what He says.   He is God and no one can stop Him from being so.


----------



## MizzKutieQ (Jun 30, 2014)

They have every single right to do what they want with their company, but if they're going to bible thump go after everything. Contraceptives aren't just made for people to prevent birth. They didn't even make a stipulation for those people. Also, they're against birth control but they invest in it for the retirement plans. Please don't be blinded by their real agenda. It has nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with the fact that they don't want to fund their own investments as they would under the ACA.    Btw still love u Shimmie 

Sent from my iPhone using LHCF


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

MizzKutieQ said:


> They have every single right to do what they want with their company, but if they're going to bible thump go after everything. Contraceptives aren't just made for people to prevent birth. They didn't even make a stipulation for those people. Also, they're against birth control but they invest in it for the retirement plans. Please don't be blinded by their real agenda. It has nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with the fact that they don't want to find their own investments as they would under the ACA.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using LHCF



They're not Bible thumping; they are exercising their rights as they should be able to.  Standing upon scripture is not Bible thumping.   They have every right to not provide for birth control and abortions.   

Folks don't have to work there.  This is a family business who has the right to choose and select what they will provide for.  

I'm sure planned parenthood won't have a problem providing birth control; it's what they are about.   Hobby Lobby is not obligated to provide for such.  Why pick on them?  Especially with other corporations who are doing the same and much worse.    

There are other provisions for folks to get birth control and for free.  

Folks are just using Hobby Lobby at a scratching post and a social target for one reason only... they are Christians.


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

MizzKutieQ said:


> Btw still love u SHImme!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using LHCF


 
I still love you too and I mean this.  I'm not just saying it.  It does come from my heart.   My words are not set against you.


----------



## MizzKutieQ (Jun 30, 2014)

Shimmie said:


> I still love you too and I mean this.  I'm not just saying it.  It does come from my heart.   My words are not set against you.



No I know, that's the thing difference of opinions but the respect is still there. I can appreciate that

Sent from my iPhone using LHCF


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

MizzKutieQ said:


> No I know, that's the thing difference of opinions but the respect is still there. I can appreciate that
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using LHCF



I'm glad you see that.  Truly  

You and several others know the topics that bring me to the forefront ...  

And they are each in defense of Christians, Marriage and Family; especially those of our AA culture.


----------



## firecracker (Jun 30, 2014)

I don't care personally.  We all have choices to spend our money where we see fit.  Its all politics to me.  If I wanted Sundays off and needed a lil job I'd work at Hobby Lobby.  LOL


----------



## dicapr (Jun 30, 2014)

MizzKutieQ said:


> They have every single right to do what they want with their company, but if they're going to bible thump go after everything. Contraceptives aren't just made for people to prevent birth. They didn't even make a stipulation for those people. Also, they're against birth control but they invest in it for the retirement plans. Please don't be blinded by their real agenda. It has nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with the fact that they don't want to fund their own investments as they would under the ACA.    Btw still love u Shimmie  Sent from my iPhone using LHCF



When these companies who don't want to provide birth control for women stop paying for V.iagra I'll take them seriously. If women need to accept responsibility for paying out of pocket for medications men need to pay out of pocket also.  You can't pay for one and then cry moral objection for the other in my opinion.


----------



## Belle Du Jour (Jun 30, 2014)

dicapr said:


> When these companies who don't want to provide birth control for women stop paying for V.iagra I'll take them seriously. If women need to accept responsibility for paying out of pocket for medications men need to pay out of pocket also.  You can't pay for one and then cry moral objection for the other in my opinion.



This isn't comparable. Viagra does not prevent pregnancy or cause abortions. There is nothing morally questionable about Viagra in and of itself. Apples to oranges comparison.


----------



## CarefreeinChicago (Jun 30, 2014)

dicapr said:


> When these companies who don't want to provide birth control for women stop paying for V.iagra I'll take them seriously. If women need to accept responsibility for paying out of pocket for medications men need to pay out of pocket also.  You can't pay for one and then cry moral objection for the other in my opinion.



I agree some people take bc for other reasons.


----------



## Laela (Jun 30, 2014)

This is good to hear. Praise God!



Belle Du Jour said:


> http://www.cnn.com/?hpt=sitenav
> 
> 5-4 victory.  Employers don't have to provide contraception under ACA if it goes against their moral beliefs.


----------



## dicapr (Jun 30, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> This isn't comparable. Viagra does not prevent pregnancy or cause abortions. There is nothing morally questionable about Viagra in and of itself. Apples to oranges comparison.



The argument against birth control is really about sex being for reproduction above all else.  Providing V.iagra violates that principle. V.iagra is a lifestyle drug aimed at enhancing men's quality of life. If sex is for reproduction any interference in that area-IvF, IUI, and impotence drugs- would have to be objected to morally.


----------



## Belle Du Jour (Jun 30, 2014)

dicapr said:


> The argument against birth control is really about sex being for reproduction above all else.  Providing V.iagra violates that principle. V.iagra is a lifestyle drug aimed at enhancing men's quality of life. If sex is for reproduction any interference in that area-IvF, IUI, and impotence drugs- would have to be objected to morally.



Actually, that's wrong. Sex should be both unitive and open to life. Contraception removes both.  It also removes God from participating in the act and shuts Him out of a marriage. Contraception says, I only give you a PART of me, not all. Viagra is used to treat erectile dysfunction.  That neither destroys the unitive nature of sex or the procreative aspect. Therefore, your analogy is not correct.


----------



## Farida (Jun 30, 2014)

They have the freedom to believe that Christianity does not support b.c. Catholics also believe that. I may not agree with them but I respect their right to believe that. Contraception is not a black and white issue in the bible. In fact, did you know that virtually all churches opposed synthetic birth control until the 1930s and almost all of them didn't stop until the pill came out? Then the issue just got swept under the rug except for a few...

Plus, as far as I know Hobby Lobby did not oppose all forms of contraception but only certain forms they believe to be abortifacent.

I don't believe that Hobby Lobby was fighting the contraception mandate due to wanting to save money. If that company was all about the cash they would be open on Sundays and Thanksgiving. I cannot tell you how many times I have wanted to go to hobby lobby and then realize it is closed. Do you know how much money they loose by being closed on Sunday? I'm sure they have employees who don't mind working on Sunday.

Also, they donate half of their pretax earnings to religious ministries. You could say they are after tax breaks but who donates HALF of profits? They would not have to donate that much to get a tax break. Most people do not.

Now, if you want to turn around and say they are a bit hypocritical because they used to offer health plans that cover the b.c. they claim to oppose then I'll give you that. However, this ruling also affects other companies that did not do that. This is a necessary precedent because it is not a ruling about birth control. It is a ruling about religious freedom. People get lost in the emotion and issue being discussed and don't see the big picture.


----------



## Farida (Jun 30, 2014)

dicapr said:


> The argument against birth control is really about sex being for reproduction above all else.  Providing V.iagra violates that principle. V.iagra is a lifestyle drug aimed at enhancing men's quality of life. If sex is for reproduction any interference in that area-IvF, IUI, and impotence drugs- would have to be objected to morally.



Hobby Lobby is not against all forms of birth control. Just those that they believe cause abortions. Some people believe Plan B causes abortions and others do not. So Viagra means nothing to them because it does not cause abortions and can be used by married couples to continue having sex.

Catholics believe the above as well but they also have other issues with birth control including intimacy, reproduction and spirituality. I don't want to write a whole thesis here explaining it. I went to Catholic school so I can see their points. I may disagree but I see it. Catholics also don't support condoms - most of which are worn by men. Even if you were to hand out FREE condoms at a Catholic institution they would not support that.


----------



## CarefreeinChicago (Jun 30, 2014)

While the Supreme Court's ruling that certain types of corporations cannot be required to provide contraception coverage for their employees has largely been framed through a religious liberty lens, it may have medical consequences for women who use birth control for reasons other than pregnancy prevention.

Hobby Lobby, a Christian-owned craft supply chain store, and Conestoga Wood Specialties Store, a Mennonite-owned wood manufacturer, had challenged the mandate on the grounds that it violates their religious freedom by requiring them to cover methods of birth control they find morally objectionable, such as emergency contraception and hormonal and copper intrauterine devices.

The owners of those companies believe that those types of birth control are forms of abortion because they could prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus, despite the general scientific consensus that the contraceptives are not equivalent to abortion.

Though many Americans consider pregnancy prevention a compelling enough public health justification to cover the cost of such contraceptives, the ramifications of the Supreme Court's decision could also affect women who use birth control for other medical reasons.

In 2011, the Guttmacher Institute estimated that roughly 14 percent of birth control users rely on birth control exclusively for non-contraceptive purposes. Some 1.5 million women use birth control to help with medical issues such as ovarian cancer, ovarian cysts, endometriosis and endometrial cancer.

Guttmacher also found that more than 58 percent of all birth control users cite other medical issues in addition to pregnancy prevention, listing reasons such as reducing cramps or menstrual pain, preventing migraines and other menstruation side effects, and treating acne.

Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, for instance, affects about 5 million American women. The disorder, which entails irregular menstrual cycles that can last for months, can cause iron deficiency, anemia and infertility, and some women have found relief from contraceptive methods.

The intrauterine device, which was one of the contraceptive methods at issue in the court case, is by no means a rare form of birth control and is commonly used for medical issues. In 2012, an estimated 8.5 percent of all contraceptive users said they used an IUD. The T-shaped copper or plastic devices are considered the third-most-effective contraceptive method, after vasectomies and implants.

ALSO ON HUFFINGTON POST
Supreme Court Justices


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

Farida said:


> *They have the freedom to believe that Christianity does not support b.c. Catholics also believe that. I may not agree with them but I respect their right to believe that. Contraception is not a black and white issue in the bible. *
> 
> In fact, did you know that virtually all churches opposed synthetic birth control until the 1930s and almost all of them didn't stop until the pill came out? Then the issue just got swept under the rug except for a few...
> 
> ...


 
Farida... thank you for sharing this.   It's unbiased and very eloquently shared.


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> This isn't comparable. Viagra does not prevent pregnancy or cause abortions. There is nothing morally questionable about Viagra in and of itself. Apples to oranges comparison.





Belle Du Jour said:


> Actually, that's wrong. Sex should be both unitive and open to life. Contraception removes both. It also removes God from participating in the act and shuts Him out of a marriage. Contraception says, I only give you a PART of me, not all. Viagra is used to treat erectile dysfunction. That neither destroys the unitive nature of sex or the procreative aspect. Therefore, your analogy is not correct.



Lady Belle... thank you, for this also is shared without bias but with the facts and with eloquence.   

 It's good to know this difference.


----------



## Galadriel (Jun 30, 2014)

Yay for Hobby Lobby and religious freedom!

I guess this means the Catholic nuns of The Little Sisters of the Poor community also won't have to be penalized by the contraception mandate.


----------



## Shimmie (Jun 30, 2014)

Galadriel said:


> Yay for Hobby Lobby and religious freedom!
> 
> I guess this means the Catholic nuns of The Little Sisters of the Poor community also won't have to be penalized by the contraception mandate.



 Hey precious Galadriel... I'm happy about this victory as well; for it is about protecting our Religious Freedoms. I've had it with all of lawsuits against us for taking a stand for our Faith and convictions. 

Oh... and from now on I will show more respect to those Viagra ads/spams ) which come into my emails on a regular basis. 

Those posts from Lady Belle set me straight.    

I love my Catholic sisters.  I wouldn't take anything for you.  Wouldn't trade you for anything.   You all keep me balanced.  

And YES.... *I am Biased*... :blush3:  towards *ALL* of my Christian sisters and brothers, no matter what denomination.    I love you all.


----------



## dicapr (Jul 1, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> Actually, that's wrong. Sex should be both unitive and open to life. Contraception removes both.  It also removes God from participating in the act and shuts Him out of a marriage. Contraception says, I only give you a PART of me, not all. Viagra is used to treat erectile dysfunction.  That neither destroys the unitive nature of sex or the procreative aspect. Therefore, your analogy is not correct.





I can respect your point of view. I don't agree but I can respect it. My point is that many people who are against BC and it's ability to enhance women's reproductive quality of life are more than happy to pay to enhance a mans quality of life. I don't think V.iagra has anything to do with being open to life. It is simply to aid men in having sex. I think people overlook the fact that women should not be put in situation to justify their health care choices to their employer. No one is policing men to ensure that e.rectile dis function drugs are only being used in the confines of marriage but we think it is reasonable for a woman to have to justify her need for BC. 
They will be forced to reveal personal information about their health and then have a person make a decision about their treatment based on their religious beliefs rather than medical need. I am uncomfortable with that. Religious liberty should protect someone's ability to practice their religion    but I feel that ruling is too one sides. What's next?  If someone has a moral objection to blood transfusions should insurance not cover that or if they don't believe in anti-depressants should the mentally ill come out of pocket for their meds?


----------



## Galadriel (Jul 1, 2014)

dicapr said:


> My point is that many people who are against BC and it's ability to enhance women's reproductive quality of life are more than happy to pay to enhance a mans quality of life. I don't think V.iagra has anything to do with being open to life. It is simply to aid men in having sex.



I think it's kind of a blanket statement to make, because birth control isn't an automatic be-all enhancement of a woman's quality of life. I never used BC and I use Fertility Awareness Method (or Natural Family Planning) which I believe has added quality to both my health and my relationship (married 10 years). There are some women who can't use artificial BC because of side effects or allergic reactions. Some women also avoid BC because they wish to avoid synthetic hormones. So to make BC some medical savior of women that we ALL want or need is just not accurate.

Viagra is a drug that helps increase circulation, and has been used for that purpose besides men having the ability to have sex. I would imagine a man using Viagra would be consistent with being open to life since he would be able to engage in intercourse and ejaculation.



dicapr said:


> I think people overlook the fact that women should not be put in situation to justify their health care choices to their employer.



The employer is simply being asked to be LEFT OUT of having to PAY for a person's contraception. Take your money and go down to Target or Walmart to pick up some pills or a condom. No one is stopping you. We simply don't want to pay for it. It's ironic they yell, "Stay out of my bedroom!" but then want employers and taxpayers to pay for their contraception. Just because an employer declines to pay for contraception doesn't mean you are barred from it--go buy it yourself.

I buy my family planning items--I don't ask my boss or the taxpayers to buy my fertility monitor, test sticks, fertility mapping charts, etc. nor should they have to.



dicapr said:


> No one is policing men to ensure that e.rectile dis function drugs are only being used in the confines of marriage but we think it is reasonable for a woman to have to justify her need for BC.



No one is asking women to justify anything--we just don't want the government forcing us to pay for contraception.



dicapr said:


> If someone has a moral objection to blood transfusions should insurance not cover that or if they don't believe in anti-depressants should the mentally ill come out of pocket for their meds?



How many Jehovah's Witness employers are in this country that actually do that? And what have these hypothetical employers been doing prior to the installation of Obamacare?


----------



## dicapr (Jul 1, 2014)

Galadriel said:


> I think it's kind of a blanket statement to make, because birth control isn't an automatic be-all enhancement of a woman's quality of life. I never used BC and I use Fertility Awareness Method (or Natural Family Planning) which I believe has added quality to both my health and my relationship (married 10 years). There are some women who can't use artificial BC because of side effects or allergic reactions. Some women also avoid BC because they wish to avoid synthetic hormones. So to make BC some medical savior of women that we ALL want or need is just not accurate.  Viagra is a drug that helps increase circulation, and has been used for that purpose besides men having the ability to have sex. I would imagine a man using Viagra would be consistent with being open to life since he would be able to engage in intercourse and ejaculation.  The employer is simply being asked to be LEFT OUT of having to PAY for a person's contraception. Take your money and go down to Target or Walmart to pick up some pills or a condom. No one is stopping you. We simply don't want to pay for it. It's ironic they yell, "Stay out of my bedroom!" but then want employers and taxpayers to pay for their contraception. Just because an employer declines to pay for contraception doesn't mean you are barred from it--go buy it yourself.  I buy my family planning items--I don't ask my boss or the taxpayers to buy my fertility monitor, test sticks, fertility mapping charts, etc. nor should they have to.  No one is asking women to justify anything--we just don't want the government forcing us to pay for contraception.  How many Jehovah's Witness employers are in this country that actually do that? And what have these hypothetical employers been doing prior to the installation of Obamacare?



I agree with staying out of the bedroom so long as it applies to both sexes. If you have reproductive moral objections you should cover no one. I'm not married but when I do I will have to be on birth control. The medications I take cause birth defects and miscarriage. I already have to pay monthly for drugs to control my disease and this ruling could cost me even more money monthly to prevent bringing a child into the world with birth defects. Not to mention the fact that my marital relationship would suffer because I would constantly be worried about bring a special needs child into the world knowing it would all be my fault. 

I'm glad you have found a method that works for you and is in line with your faith. But I in good conscious can't imagine knowingly subjecting my unborn child to drugs that could cause blindness or cause a miscarriage.


----------



## Belle Du Jour (Jul 1, 2014)

dicapr said:


> *I agree with staying out of the bedroom so long as it applies to both sexes.* If you have reproductive moral objections you should cover no one. I'm not married but when I do I will have to be on birth control. The medications I take cause birth defects and miscarriage. I already have to pay monthly for drugs to control my disease and this ruling could cost me even more money monthly to prevent bringing a child into the world with birth defects. Not to mention the fact that my marital relationship would suffer because I would constantly be worried about bring a special needs child into the world knowing it would all be my fault.
> 
> I'm glad you have found a method that works for you and is in line with your faith. But I in good conscious can't imagine knowingly subjecting my unborn child to drugs that could cause blindness or cause a miscarriage.



You're still missing the point.  Women are not being shafted while men are giving preference.  Viagra has NOTHING to do with contraception.  It is simply a drug used to treat a medical condition (ED in this case).  I've seen so many asinine posts on facebook about how 5 white men are unfairly deciding what goes on with women's bodies. . .Satan is still playing women today.  The snake that tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden is still playing on women's insecurities and pride today.  

Really consider the reaction that you and others are having to this situation. This is about someone who _owns _a business and has run it successfully for years within the confines of his/her faith and the government comes along and tells him/her that they will be forced to pay for something they don't agree with on moral grounds. Why in the world should they pay???  If you want to use contraception, you pay.  Simple as that.  If your employer doesn't want to pay, find another employer.  Also simple.  No one is barring your access to contraceptives.  If you want us out of your bedroom, keep us out but don't demand we pay for your choices.


----------



## dicapr (Jul 1, 2014)

This is my last statement on this. First off, an employer does not pay for contraception. They buy into a plan that offers the participants the option of contraception. The employee then pays into the umbrella plan and then pays their copay. What women are asking for is a choice. If going out and getting health care without your employer was simple and painless we wouldn't have even discussed Obama care. God gives us choices and options everyday while leading and guiding us to what is right. Unfortunately instead of giving women the choice and opportunity to do as God leads then we will be forced to abide by our employers religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby may be the first but won't be the last. I believe we will see more of these issues pop up as more businesses are required to offer healthcare by law. And just because this ruling falls under your belief system doesn't mean that they all will.


----------



## Alta Angel (Jul 1, 2014)

^^^Completely agree with your post.

I believe that this case will have far reaching implications that we haven't even considered yet.  Blood transfusions and vaccinations violate the religious beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses.  It is disturbing to think that those health care options could potentially mean increased out of pocket costs for me if my employer morally disagrees with those practices (provided the company meets the guidelines).


----------



## firecracker (Jul 1, 2014)

kinchen said:


> I agree some people take bc for other reasons.


 Yes like Uterian Fibroids.


----------



## Belle Du Jour (Jul 1, 2014)

dicapr said:


> This is my last statement on this. *First off, an employer does not pay for contraception. *They buy into a plan that offers the participants the option of contraception. The employee then pays into the umbrella plan and then pays their copay. What women are asking for is a choice. If going out and getting health care without your employer was simple and painless we wouldn't have even discussed Obama care. God gives us choices and options everyday while leading and guiding us to what is right. Unfortunately instead of giving women the choice and opportunity to do as God leads then we will be forced to abide by our employers religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby may be the first but won't be the last. I believe we will see more of these issues pop up as more businesses are required to offer healthcare by law. And just because this ruling falls under your belief system doesn't mean that they all will.



Have you read the contraception mandate???

Women still have choice.  They have the choice to go to the doctor, get a prescription and pay for the contraception.


----------



## dicapr (Jul 1, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> Have you read the contraception mandate???  Women still have choice.  They have the choice to go to the doctor, get a prescription and pay for the contraception.



Yes. And I see that a woman who was raped would not be able to have Plan B covered under her insurance and would have to not only deal with rape but the added cost of paying emergency contraception out of pocket. And if she doesn't have the money (Hobby Lobby is a minimum wage job) she will then be faced a decision to abort or go through a unwanted pregnancy carrying her rapist child. 

Their reasoning for not paying for IUDs doesn't make sense to me either. New IUDs have a progesterone and other hormones that affect ovulation just like BC pills-which is why many women don't have periods when they have them. 

I also know that Hobby Lobby has no problem offering employees the opportunity to profit financially by including pharmaceutical companies that make birth control in their 401K portfolio. 

I'm not trying to convince anyone to change their personal beliefs. I'm just pointing out a win for one group of believers is a lose for another. And the tide will not always fall in your favor. One day you may be at the mercy of a non-Christian's moral beliefs that could make financing your health care difficult and a burden.


----------



## CarefreeinChicago (Jul 1, 2014)

Stop calling Hobby Lobby a Christian business
JONATHAN MERRITT | JUNE 17, 2014
"We're Christians," Hobby Lobby's president Steve Green proclaims, "and we run our business on Christian principles."

That is music to the ears of many conservative Christians, who rallied around Hobby Lobby when the retail chain argued at the Supreme Court that ObamaCare's contraception mandate unlawfully burdened their religious beliefs. But a closer look at Hobby Lobby's actual business practices reveals this claim to be as hollow as a flute. Turn over just about any trinket in a Hobby Lobby store and you'll find a gold oval stamped with "Made in China," a country that is one of the worst offenders of human dignity, unborn infant life, and economic justice anywhere in the world.

As such, those shiny stickers littering every Hobby Lobby from sea to shining sea are more than a statement about a product's geographical origin; they are also a stinging indictment against the way the retailer has sought to label itself.

Imagine for a moment a nation with nightmarish labor conditions, inadequate workplace regulation, and rampant child labor. You've just imagined 21st century China. Seventy thousand Chinese employees die every year in workplace accidents — that's roughly 200 humans snuffed out of existence every day.

Some provinces in China are raising their minimum wage standards. But don't rush to praise them. Starting this year in Shanghai, minimum wage is rising to only $293 per month — a paltry figure that is still the highest amount paid in all of mainland China. That's about $9.77 per day. If you were wondering how Hobby Lobby can sell wicker baskets for next to nothing, now you know.

The Bible is replete with calls for economic justice. Can you call yourself a "Christian business" when you leverage your profits to support an economic system that blatantly perpetuates injustice? 

China is also the 20th worst in the world for child labor. Can you call yourself a "Christian business" when you support underage labor? Jesus, after all, taught that taking one's own life is preferable to harming a child.

And what of China's one-child policy, which disincentivizes having daughters to the point that it fuels an underground abortion industry? Data shows that 13 million abortions are performed in the country each year. About 35,000 infant lives are terminated in China every day, and 336 million abortions have taken place there over the last four decades. According to Steven Mosher of Population Research Institute, "most of those abortions have the character of a rape. That is, they were performed on women who were ordered, or even physically forced, to submit to the knife."

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised, then, that China accounts for 19 percent of the global population, but 56 percent of the world's female suicides. Approximately 500 women take their own lives in China every day.

Though China somewhat relaxed its controversial 35-year-old policy recently, Max Fisher of The Washington Post has noted that the policy still leads to forced abortions — in addition to sterilizations and infanticide — and always will.

Now, of course, a huge number of American companies outsource labor to China, and thus help prop up this shameful status quo. But very few of these American companies simultaneously trumpet themselves as "Christian businesses," arguing in court that providing employees with health insurance covering contraceptives violates their religious beliefs. How can this ObamaCare mandate be so foul to Hobby Lobby executives, while they say very little about Chinese policies forcing women to have abortions against their wills? Is abortion wrong only when the terminated life is American?

The most glaring inconsistency between Hobby Lobby's ethical proclamations and its business decisions concerns the matter of religious liberty. The craft store chain is hailed by conservatives as standing up to Uncle Sam and fighting for religious freedom. Yet Hobby Lobby imports billions of dollars worth of bric-a-brac from a nation that denies 1.35 billion citizens freedom of worship.

If Hobby Lobby was concerned with religious freedoms — not just those of conservative American Christians — it would quit doing business in China.

Hobby Lobby reminds us why for-profit businesses should resist calling themselves "Christian." The free market is messy and complicated and riddled with hypocrisy. Conducting business in today's complex global economy almost ensures one will engage in behavior that is at least morally suspect from a Biblical standpoint.

If you want to call your business "Christian," by all means, go right ahead. But those who live by the label must die by it as well. You cannot call your business "Christian" when arguing before the Supreme Court, and then set aside Christian values when you're placing a bulk order for cheap wind chimes.

Every time you buy a decorative platter from Hobby Lobby with a Bible verse stamped across it, you have funded the company's fight against the HHS contraception mandate. But you're also sending a chunk of change to a country that forces people to abort their children, flouts basic standards of workplace dignity, and denies more than a billion people the right to worship.


----------



## Belle Du Jour (Jul 1, 2014)

^ Typical media smoke and mirrors.  Quite sad, actually.


----------



## Shimmie (Jul 1, 2014)

Belle Du Jour said:


> ^ Typical media smoke and mirrors. Quite sad, actually.


 
  I agree, typical 'smoke and mirrors'.  

Here's a factor about these reports and those who write / quote / post them.   None of them could care less about those in China.  They can 'drag' Hobby Lobby and/or other Christians into the 'smear', yet they are not putting forth neither a nickel nor a dime, let alone a copper wire, to help the poor citizens of these countries to be set free or to have a better life. 

If it really means that much, then they too, must tow the line that they have drawn for Hobby Lobby, for they too are without validation. If they care so much about China, then let go of their cell phones, computers, ipads, tablets, cable networks, just to name a few.   

Just about everything we use and own and consume is 'made in China', made in Japan, made in India, and the list goes on.   It is far beyond any doubt the writers of these articles 'dragging' Hobby Lobby are the highest consumers.  

Just saying.   Just saying.   _Why retort with the report and yet not yield support? _  Just saying.  

All of this fuss about birth control, you'd think Hobby Lobby is the only job source in this country.    Get over it.   It's high time our Faith has won it's day in court and it is a fair win.   I praise God for more victories in this sinful society, for we have been made more than Conquerors through Jesus Christ our Lord.  

It's high time that the courts show respect for our Faith...period.   It's not okay to redefine how a Christian worships and honors God.


----------



## Farida (Jul 2, 2014)

The hobby lobby case was actually decided on the grounds of whether or not the dept of HHS via Obamacare can pass a law that appears to violate the restoration of religious freedom act (RFRA). I am tired of people acting as if the supreme court was simply trying to decide whether or not women should get employer-sponsored birth control.

There is a standard to how courts interpret one law versus another and that was what was applied here.


----------



## Blackpearl1993 (Jul 2, 2014)

Shimmie said:


> I agree, typical 'smoke and mirrors'.
> 
> Here's a factor about these reports and those who write / quote / post them.   *None of them could care less about those in China*.  They can 'drag' Hobby Lobby and/or other Christians into the 'smear', yet they are not putting forth neither a nickel nor a dime, let alone a copper wire, to help the poor citizens of these countries to be set free or to have a better life.
> 
> ...




Amen! I couldn't have said it any better. I had no idea that the vast majority of our American population was employed by Hobby Lobby....come on now...no one is forced to work there! The family that owns/runs Hobby Lobby should have the freedom to stand on God's Word, just like other American citizens have the freedom to do what they wish with their bodies (although there are consequences for our choices and we will all answer to God for them). There are women who utilize birth control for reasons other than contraception, but that is not the vast majority. The vast majority use it to cover the sin of fornication or cut off the fruit that God desires to give within the covenant of marriage. And...despite what scientists would try to have us believe, if any thing interferes with the environment of the womb thereby preventing the implantation of an embryo (no form of birth control is 100% effective), then it most certainly is an abortifacient. It amazes me how people are so quick to believe almost any scientific report, yet not believe the Word of God. The inerrant Word of God!!! The Word of the same God who raised Jesus from the dead, parted the Red Sea, blessed Sarah in her elder years to become pregnant and give birth to a healthy baby, and who produced Jesus via a virgin birth. In fact, the very fact that Jesus came to spend time here on Earth via coming through the womb should make it extremely clear just how important babies, birth, and the womb is to God.


----------



## Blackpearl1993 (Jul 2, 2014)

dicapr said:


> I can respect your point of view. I don't agree but I can respect it. My point is that many people who are against BC and it's ability to enhance women's reproductive quality of life are more than happy to pay to enhance a mans quality of life. I don't think V.iagra has anything to do with being open to life. It is simply to aid men in having sex. *I think people overlook the fact that women should not be put in situation to justify their health care choices to their employer. *No one is policing men to ensure that e.rectile dis function drugs are only being used in the confines of marriage but we think it is reasonable for a woman to have to justify her need for BC.
> *They will be forced to reveal personal information about their health and then have a person make a decision about their treatment* based on their religious beliefs rather than medical need. I am uncomfortable with that. Religious liberty should protect someone's ability to practice their religion    but I feel that ruling is too one sides. What's next?  If someone has a moral objection to blood transfusions should insurance not cover that or if they don't believe in anti-depressants should the mentally ill come out of pocket for their meds?



Ummm...there are many, many people who have to do this with Insurance Companies every day when their claims for various treatments are denied. So that issue is certainly not confined solely to companies that don't want to be forced to pay for medications that go against their Biblical beliefs.


----------



## Shimmie (Jul 2, 2014)

Blackpearl1993 said:


> Amen! I couldn't have said it any better. I had no idea that the vast majority of our American population was employed by Hobby Lobby....come on now...no one is forced to work there! The family that owns/runs Hobby Lobby should have the freedom to stand on God's Word, just like other American citizens have the freedom to do what they wish with their bodies (although there are consequences for our choices and we will all answer to God for them).
> 
> There are women who utilize birth control for reasons other than contraception, but that is not the vast majority.
> 
> ...



God says "I AM that I AM" ... 

He's not changing just because of those who do not like it.


----------

