Discussion: Religious Nonprofits Tip Their Hands On Real Goal In Birth Control Fight

TPM Article Topics
21

Well, now. This should make it easy for SCOTUS to get it right this time.

22

Religious organizations affecting public policy is not inherently a bad thing. Many religious groups protested the Vietnam war on moral grounds, for instance.

But religious groups using government to impose their arbitrary doctrines on everyone else - THAT’s objectionable. When they want to deny freedom of religion to the rest of us, then they’ve gone too far.

10 Likes
23

The churches are meddling in politics.

Tax the goddamned churches.

19 Likes
24

I have oft wondered why a group of female lawmakers don’t band together to write a bill making the “spilling of seed” a criminal offense punishable by jail time and a hefty fine. Simply to make a statement.

5 Likes
25

How quickly the nation forgets. When Kennedy was running for President the talk was about the Catholic church controlling the government. Well this is not direct control but it sure is messing with how the nation is governed. The whole thing about abortion was really about birth control and the religious right will stop till the end of birth control has taken place. Apparently there is evidence that a group of Catholic Bishops masterminded the Hobby Lobby suite and this will not end well for the separation of church and state or for American Democracy.

5 Likes
26

Can it still be sacred if spread across a bed sheet or stomach of a willing partner?

27

Remember the Supreme Court is dominated by conservative Catholic men–true believers one and all.

4 Likes
28

You cannot “accomodate” people who suffer from collective mental illness.

7 Likes
29

Ave Maria, a fake Florida real estate development or fake Florida university, was created to blur Caesar and God while shamelessly hiding behind the name of the mother of Jesus. What else did you expect?

4 Likes
30

As long as it’s not on the ground it’s OK with Yahweh.

3 Likes
31

A couple “Our Fathers” and a few “Hail Marys” will make it alright.

3 Likes
32

According to most interpretations of the Bible by Christian and Catholic priests, women are not allowed to say ‘no’ to their husband when he demands sex, and even if she does, he is well within his rights to take what he wants from her. It was not until fairly recently that spousal rape was even prosecuted, and even today, it can be hard to get a man charged with it.

6 Likes
33

“…will keep fighting for a complete exemption so that they can block off insurance coverage for contraceptives, which they view as sin, for their women employees.”

“…The “effect” that it wants to avoid is to take part in any process that ends with their employees receiving insurance coverage for contraceptives like the morning-after pill or an IUD.”

OK, so my question is this: can these employers require their employees NOT to use birth control they disapprove of as a condition of employment? I would certainly hope not. If not, how can they object to insurance covering it when the employer is not charges for that element of coverage? It really comes down to placing a financial burden on employees who get medical treatment these employers disagree with. So whose rights are being taken away? Does an employer’s so-called “religious freedom” trump their employees’?

This is really outrageous. Unfortunately the Cataholics on the Supreme Court have only their religious bias to guide them. Constitution? Schmonstitution! I really hope they will get off the bench soon, in whatever way – I’m not picky.

4 Likes
34

At which point the Administration would be remiss if it did not force every church and religious organization out there to not cover viagra and anything else that helps men maintain or obtain an erection. After all, in doing so, they risk men wasting their sperm, and as we all know “every sperm is sacred.”

4 Likes
35

Then fuck it, let’s take employers out of the health insurance equation altogether and give us all Medicare for life.

Then, these right-wing busybody ‘employers’ can all go suck a fat one. Who the fuck do they think they are anyway?

16 Likes
36

That also brings into question the church’s sanctioned “rhythm method” - it is intentional and designed specifically to avoid procreation.

9 Likes
37

If “… filling out a form to opt out of paying for contraceptives would still make (religious corporations) complicit in sin.” then so would paying employees with money. Money, after all, can be freely used to buy abortions.

6 Likes
38

So, let me get this straight…you are comparing female employees who work for compensation, (which includes medical insurance) to a homeless person living for free in someone’s basement?

This is fun! Does the homeowner get out of paying taxes like churches? Do you think that female employees should get to live for free in the workplace, and stop doing whatever it was they were hired to do in the first place? If the “charitable” homeowner is a Muslim, in your scenario, could the require the hapless basement-dweller to wear a burqa?

I could keep the rebuttal to your comment going, but it actually isn’t that much fun anymore.

1 Like
39

Religious institutions are violating their employees First Amendment rights by imposing their corporate religious beliefs upon un-like minded employees. And before you right-wing trolls start in with the “quit your job if you don’t like it” load of manure, read my statement again.

7 Likes
40

Isn’t there anyone with standing to represent the religious freedom of the employees of these organizations? Is the principle here that employers have a right to use economic coercion to force employees to conform to their employer’s religious beliefs? Hobby Lobby and these non-profits aren’t allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion in hiring – but they are allowed to force people to abandon their own religious beliefs when hired? Or to create an unequal burden on them for doing so?

Doesn’t that, in fact, make a mockery of religious freedom?

10 Likes