Comments about ‘U.S. legislators come to Hobby Lobby's defense in contraception lawsuit’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 20 2013 7:55 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
LoBo4Justice
Coalville, UT

The first false premise is that corporations are entitled to the same Constitutional rights as "we the people" are. Corporations don’t die, go to jail, give birth or any number of other characteristics deining human life. Because they are not people, corporations should not be entitled to inherent rights under the Constitution. Instead they should be granted privileges to operate, which can be rescinded should the corporation engage in criminal behavior or wrongdoing.

The second false premise is that a business can be a religion. If profit-making is at the core of the organization, it is a business--not a religion. A person can be both religious and in business, but it is the person who has inherent rights, not the business. Businesses selling religious stuff have no more rights than a business selling any other kind of goods or service.

Hypocrisy level: High. If Viagra is covered, contraceptives should be covered, especially if one is opposed to abortion.

No surprise a white man has brought this suit. Poor guy feels oppressed by his government. We who are regularly oppressed by our government and our religion--women, people of color, youth, LGBTs, etc.--welcome you to our ranks.

padgett95
Columbus, OH

Many use no contraception. Some because they remain sexually inactive in an act of service and obedience to their God. Some because they believe in sexual responsibility. Others because they believe it is a joy to raise children. It is a personal choice.

Employers have never had an obligation to financially participate in the sex lives of their employees. The law requiring them to do so belies our culture's perverse over-emphasis on sexuality and the abuse of government to intrude into the personal lives of citizens, their sex lives and their health care. These should remain the private choice and responsibility of individual citizens as they have always been in the USA.

Obama was wrong. Who better to indicate the intentions of the Religious Freedom law than the framers of it? Their voice is unmistakable on this matter. Obama's overreach will be denined.

webb_golf
yukon, OK

Interesting point about the blood transfusions. However, I think this all points to a more important question. Should the US government be able to dictate how a company is run and what benefits are offered. I understand the government's responsibility to ensure safe working environments and fair labor standards, but when did health insurance become an employer's responsibility. People have a right to choose where they work. Hobby Lobby offers great pay and benefits on top of that. Perhaps they should not offer health insurance and instead give an allowance that employees may choose to use to buy health insurance. Then, it wouldn't violate the Green's beliefs and the onus would be on the employee....oh wait, the government mandates employers over a certain size offer insurance and places requirements on what that insurance must cover under ACA. ACA is a gross overreach of the fed, however good it's intentions were.

to comment

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