Comments about ‘Join the discussion: How can religion and business work together?’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, July 2 2014 7:25 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

They have coexisted for generations and generations... I see no reason why it would stop being able to coexist now.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Does anyone really think that business is "owned" and "operated" by government? Many people are telling us government has the right to tell employers how much to pay employees, how much to pay for benefits in lieu of wages. The fact is that people are paid for the value of their service to a company. When the government decrees that employers have to "match" Social Security taxes, the employer simply that tax in lieu of wages. When companies are required to furnish health insurance, the business pays that TAX in lieu of wages.

No employer provides free prescriptions. Those "free" prescriptions are paid for in lieu of wages.

Every woman can pay for her own birth control. There is no law that restricts a woman from doing that.

There is no FREE birth control.

The outrage should be focused where it belongs - on government mandating benefits in lieu of wages. We are not infants. We have the right to receive a full paycheck and then to decide for ourselves how we will spend it.

Mister J
Salt Lake City, UT

I am looking fwd to seeing comments from the theological, pro free market, right wingers who feel that government is the only evil but only when there is a "socialist" occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

Psssst, Um -- don't look now, but ---

Many Religions ARE just businesses...
visa versa...

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

the idea that women do not have access to contraceptives because their boss isn't paying for them is ludicrous.

they carry protest signs saying "keep my boss out of my bedroom!" That is just what the recent SCOTUS ruling did. Forcing your boss to buy your contraceptives is forcing him INTO your bedroom.

c'mon libs, You can disagree with the ruling, but at least be honest in your arguments. Or is honesty too much to ask from liberals?

Hank Pym

to Mike Richards

If its a privately owned company the Gov't should have minimal interaction. Then, only if legal issues (civil rights violations or criminal hijinx) occur.

However, a publicly traded company is a different story. Interaction w/ the IRS & SEC for example.

use the noodle
Casa Grande, AZ

These businesses just beg to completely cut the ties between health insurance and employers. So I appreciate the work they are doing towards a national health care system like Canada's.

San Diego, CA

If we could only detach health insurance from the workplace. My employer doesn't provide my car insurance. My employer doesn't provide my LTHC insurance. My employer doesn't provide my homeowner's insurance. If, as Mike Richards points out, employers are simply reducing my wages because they provide health insurance, then why not provide me with a raise instead and let me buy my own health insurance in the marketplace?

Salt Lake City, UT

Re: Mike Richards "The fact is that people are paid for the value of their service to a company. When the government decrees that employers have to "match" Social Security taxes, the employer simply that tax in lieu of wages. When companies are required to furnish health insurance, the business pays that TAX in lieu of wages. "

Most of what you say here is true. Most liberals won't understand, but as a socialist I do. However, I do differ with you on your first statement. It should say "People are paid for the value of their service to the company, but not completely." The value for which they are not compensated is surplus value - the source of profit. In capitalism, capital is always in control. That's why in spite of liberalism, the concentration of wealth at the top 1% continues to grow.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@marxist – “The value for which they are not compensated is surplus value - the source of profit.”

So there’s no value (or compensation to be paid) for both those who have saved up their own money and are now investing it in the business, or those with the entrepreneurial skills needed to run a business?

Also, in a free market wouldn’t we expect that if some firms are underpaying their employees, other firms would offer a better wage thereby attracting the better employees who would produce better products which consumers would want more than the inferior ones (why we drive Hondas and not Yugos)?

This (labor) theory of value seems to be missing some crucial factors…

Salt Lake City, UT

Re: Tyler D "So there’s no value ...[f]or those with the entrepreneurial skills needed to run a business?"

If the owner is "paid" for their managerial talent (nobody says they shouldn't be) that is a wage. Anything above that is profit, which comes out of the hide of labor. No business hires somebody unless they can make money off of the person hired. The person hired is never compensated completely for the value he adds. Otherwise, why would he be hired?

Salt Lake City, UT

And regrading profit, ever since John Calvin, making profits is a sign of a capitalist's elect status in the hereafter.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

The majority of religions ARE businesses.
Take a look at how they make money and what they're doing with it.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Religion is a business. Aside from its gospel and the favored treatment demanded from government, it operates in exactly the same way as any other business operation. It has a product to sell, salesmen, and people who benefit from its existence.

As the owner of other business operations churches and religious individuals act like a holding company. And given that they have economic power over employee, they can have an unfair influence over the employee. Unfair only if you accept the notion that individuals can have freedom of religion.

Wally West

I am getting cheaper Insurance on my own than what was coming out of my paycheck.

Being frugal as well taking care of myself and not relying on a large bureaucratic entity aren't that hard it just takes effort.... Ironically I'm not a 21st century conservative either.

USS Enterprise, UT

Why can't religion co-exist with business?

Hasn't anybody ever had a "Hebrew National" hot dog?

Has anybody ever gone to Deseret Book?

What about companies like SodaStream that hire muslim clerics to lead their workers in their religious prayers?

What about Chick-Fillet that close on Sunday's to allow their employees to attend religious services?

There are many businesses out there that mix business and religion all the time with no adverse problems because of it.

To "Marxist" you do realize that when liberals are in charge the division in wealth increases the most, and the closer we get to your ideal socialist/Marxist/liberal ideal the greater the income disparity. Just look at Cuba and North Korea, they have the super elite 1% and the 99% that are dirt poor. Is that really what you want here in the US?

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

OK 2 bits,
Since you’ve gone after everyone here without ONE proposal,
And have pointed out endless problems without a single solution.

You have the podium.

Please state:
1. Your plan.
2. How it operates without fail.
3. How you intend to PAY for it.

Rules: As a conservative, you will not be allowed increase either the size or scope of Government, or be allowed to raise any taxes – especially on the rich.

You will be allowed to use the NSA facility in Draper – since your side put it there and it will create jobs.

For the rest of us, you will be required to stay within the realms of reality,
It must not defy the laws of the physical universe, use magic, or imaginary Sci-Fi or comic Book super-powers [i.e., teleportation, seeing through walls, mind reading, etc.]

Your move.


Problem is my money goes to all sorts of things I disagree with. Even some things I think are abhorrent. I give up, here is some money, please build a bomb and drop it on some kids in the middle east. Am I right folks?

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY


So why would a business hire someone if there is no profit in it for the company?

Paying anyone who works for the company (from base laborer to CEO) is a wage. But then there are the investors. Are they due nothing? Is there no compensation for the time value of their money or the risk of loss they take?

Traditionally, that has been the role of corporate profits without which they cease to exist (and there is no employment of anyone).

Just curious.

USS Enterprise, UT

To "Open Minded Mormon" why is it all or nothing with you. You complain about Conservatives believing in a good/evil view of the world yet you exhibit the very mentality that you say you hate.

Anyway, that is just a side not. Conservatives have never said that Congress cannot add scope to their duties. We just ask that they act according to the Constitution. If Congress wants to form a national healthcare system, let them do what the Constitution says. Follow the requirements of Article 5. We only ask that they follow the Constitution.

Next, why should politicians offer the solution? Typically when government "fixes" something, they end up causing more problems than they actually fixed. Just look at healthcare. They wanted to "fix" it and make it cheaper. Instead they made insurance more expensive and added the bonus problem of making insurance cover less than it did before.

Liberals do not live in the reamls of reality. They think that if they just make government a bit bigger or make a program cover just one more thing, or throw more money at a problem it will be fixed. History teaches us that liberal solutions will end in failure.

to comment

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