Comments about ‘Hobby Lobby finds way to avoid daily $1.3 million fines’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 15 2013 9:30 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
American Fork, UT

"Hobby Lobby discovered a way to shift the plan year for its employee health insurance, thus postponing the effective date of the mandate for several months." its really not a loop-hole, its just delaying the inevitable.

Richard Larson
Galt, CA

So, what was/is the loop-hole??????

Tooele, UT

Re: ". . . delaying the inevitable."

You mean delaying the inevitable attempt at unconstitutional infringement of religion by this lawless regime?

Yeah, that's inevitable. In fact, the Obama regime will probably try to use some illegal executive order to skirt the Judicial Branch, as it has with the Legislative.

But is it inevitable that the Third Branch will go along?

Not at all.

And, when it doesn't, the question will become, does Congress have the guts to impeach and remove from office a guy who has done more to destroy America than any other President since Franklin Roosevelt?

We'll see.

Castle Rock, CO

I for one will no longer shop at Hobby Lobby. Healthcare is a private and individual matter. Why should an employer have a right to decide what kind of treatment you take? Shouldn't that be up to you and your doctor? And for all those who think Hobby Lobby is in the right, would you be o.k. if your employer decided, for religious reasons, not to pay for the blood transfusions you need? Or maybe they oppose psychiatric treatments or psychotropic medicines? Or maybe they don't believe in vaccines, so they refuse to pay for that. It's a slippery slope when your employer starts putting their nose in your business.

Poplar Grove, UT

If the court says is constitutional, it is. Even if you don't like it.

Salt Lake City, UT

Vern, I'm sure procurador has an airtight reason why the employee has no right to contest the employers beliefs as being more important than his/her own. Why healthcare is tied up with employment at all, is a mystery of history without application today. Similarly I am sure that pro would be happy to accept national health care as a reasonable solution to this "religious" dilemma foisted on us all by this "lawless regime". Finally, ask yourself if pro would object if someone came between the patient and their doctor (say perhaps...the government)? He would scream for relief from oppression, but not if an employer came between doctor and patient. Hope he gets a job with a Christian Scientist for a boss and is told to "pray for a cure" instead of seeing a doctor.

Layton, UT


Obama was elected democratically and won both the electoral and popular vote by substantial margin. The contemporary interpretation of regime does not apply to the Obama administration, you may not agree with their politics but they won a fair election. Also, the Supreme Court has upheld that Obama Care does not infringe on Religious Freedoms, again you can disagree, but so far the Federal Court System has upheld the controversial parts of Obama Care (aka Romney Care)as not infringing on religious freedoms.

American Fork, UT

I used to buy my art supplies from hobby lobby, but stopped after I found out that they don't value our nation's efforts to make sure everyone has healthcare, and our initiatives to make sure women's medical needs are covered.

Tooele, UT

Re: "If the court says is constitutional, it is. Even if you don't like it."

And, if the Supreme Court says it's not, I'm sure you'll acquiesce in the same respectful manner?

And, since we have so much respect for the Courts, can we also agree that an executive order by the President that skirts the Third Branch is also unconstitutional?

And, if skirting the Third Branch is unconstitutional, how about agreeing that an executive order that replaces Congress by legislating from the Oval Office is also illegal?

. . . .

Hey, what kind of liberal are you, anyway?

American Fork, UT

They should just cover contraception for their staff, and trust them as adults to make the choices they need to for themselves without the moralizing from on high.

Plano, TX

When a company offers employment, they choose what salary they offer for what positions. They may or may not choose to offer extra benefits, like healthcare coverage. NOWHERE in the constitution does it say the federal government can impose the terms of an employment contract. The federal government has no business in this business. Yes, the Supreme Court has ruled this constitutional---and all kinds of reprehensible things have previously been deemed constitutional that were wrong.

Over-reaching by the federal government will not stop until citizens are courageous enough to fight back. We should be thankful to Hobby Lobby for having the courage to stand up for their rights---and ours. We will all be better off if Hobby Lobby wins because it will be one less kid cowering to the federal bully!

Midwest Mom
Soldiers Grove, WI

Hobby Lobby's claim is not legitimate. It is the equivalent of an atheist employer telling their religious employees that they could not make donations to their churches, because it violated the employer's belief. A benefit, once earned, is the property of the employee. By imposing their religious convictions on their employees, Hobby Lobby is doing the very thing that they accuse the Obama administration of doing; violating the religious rights of others.

That's the funny thing about Constitutional rights; if we believe in them, then we must protect those freedoms for everyone, especially those with whom we disagree.

Salt Lake City, UT

Thank you vern. I wish more people understood the issue in that way. Religious rights are fundamental, but ones religious rights do not trump the personal rights of others. Should an employer withhold compensation because they think an employee will use it in a way that runs counter to the employers religious sensitivities? Absolutely not! They can't fire a person for being gay, having an abortion, or committing adultery, why should they be able to withhold my insurance because I MAY use it for something they don't like?

Saint George, UT

My insurance doesn't cover dental so I have to buy a separate dental insurance policy. Why can't someone buy separate birth control insurance? I am sure if enough people want it, someone will make money providing it.
I love how Liberals want the everyone to stay out of their bedroom (ie. gay rights, abortion etc.), until someone actually does stay out (ie. Hobby Lobby leaving contraception, abortion, etc up to the individual).

Midwest Mom
Soldiers Grove, WI

The problem with "the moral issue of abortion," is that it is not so black and white, as people would like it to be.

An hydatidiform pregnancy, which occurs one in 1,000, can become cancerous and will never result in a living child. Without termination, the mother could die. Without effective contraception for 2 years afterward, the mother's life could also be threatened.

A rape victim should have the option of termination, especially given the right to access to "morning after" care. Some of these victims are children themselves.

Other health issues make it imperative that women not become pregnant. It is outrageous that Hobby Lobby should be making decisions for their employees about their personal relationships. Many are married. Effectively, Hobby Lobby is attempting to decide how and when they can share intimacy with their spouses.

Hobby Lobby's employees are not well paid. For some of them, access to these services is a matter of life or death. In my book, that's a moral issue.

Plano, TX

The employees of Hobby Lobby can do whatever they want! Hobby Lobby is NOT prohibiting anyone from doing anything. They are just not offering to pay for certain things as benefits of employment with their company. There is nothing immoral about only offering certain benefits.
This attitude is the ultimate of lazy, entitled thinking. "Oh poor me. I can only do what someone else will pay for. I shouldn't improve myself to earn what I want, I should demand that the people who have already worked hard enough to be independent in their choices HAVE TO PAY FOR MINE."

Not supported anywhere in the constitution!

Stansbury Park, Ut

I too try not to support companies that refuse to treat their employees with respect. If I need a blood transfusion can my employer deny it. If I want a vasectomy can my employer deny it.

If any sort of reproductive services are supported, shouldn't all reproductive services be supported. Perhaps my employer supports zero population growth, so he wants to prohibit maternity care. These are all possibilities that can come up due to different religious beliefs.

My employer should have no control over my health benefits. I don't want employer mandated death panels. I want my employer to give me a paycheck for hours worked and I want him/her to keep his blasted nose out of my personal business. If he provides some form of health insurance, it should be fairly standardized across the board.

Scranton, PA

If what any court declares "constitutional" - even the Supreme Court of the United States - goes against biblical principles, then Hobby Lobby, or any other Christian-owned business, or any Christian individual, is honor-bound to obey the Higher Law of God. If the Supreme court declared child abuse to be a constitutional right, it would still be wrong. Our court systems are only as good, moral, and ethical as the men and women who make up the judgeship, and it's readily apparent that more and more of our courts are becoming liberal, activist courts with their own agenda, thereby sacrificing real justice and law.

Tooele, UT

Re: ". . . you may not agree with their politics but they won a fair election."

So did the National Socialists.

Pittsburgh, PA

Indeed, healthcare is a private matter. Why do employers even provide health insurance at all? Why not just give employees a base salary, and let the employees purchase their own individual coverage, with or without birth control coverage (or no coverage at all, and pay the ObamaCare fine) as they see fit?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments