Employers' beliefs in comparison to employees' beliefs

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    Feb. 27, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    If you want a theocracy, don't let the door hit you on the way out. There absolutely NO WAY to allow all theologies to be included in a constitutional LAW.

    But I understand, you just want YOUR religion codified in the law not everyone's. A soon as a Muslim wants something made into law you'll be shouting, "SHARIA LAW!!!" again.

    Your Sharia Law is no better than anyone else's.

  • Turtles Run Missouri City, TX
    Feb. 25, 2013 10:36 p.m.


    We must all pay for things that do not always conform to our moral beliefs. I think the death penalty and unneeded wars are morally reprehensible yet I still must pay taxes to support these activities. If Hobby Lobby wants to participate in the open market then they must follow the same laws as everyone else. Their religious beliefs do not supersede the health needs of their employees.

    Your argument is a perfect example as to why employers need to be removed from the entire health care equation and a single-payer system become implemented in this nation.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 4:19 p.m.

    "When did we decide that enslaving employers was the right and constitutional thing to do?" Well, Copy Cat, a long time ago actually. Sorry you don't know your history very well. And it is not enslavement, it is called regulation.

    "Getting the stuff earned by someone else's forced labor makes you a slaveholder." This comment is absolute nonsense. Forced labor. Please. Ridiculous.

    Oh, wait, maybe you don't understand what forced labor is. Yeah, that must be it. Well, what we are talking about is not forced labor.

    Ayn Rand's philosophy is very flawed, sorry. Man, conservatives are a sad lot.

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 4:13 p.m.

    KJB1, any body who wants contraceptives can buy their own, They don't need to be subsidized by others who do not want to be forced to subsidize them.. You are the one dictating his/her beliefs on others.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 3:00 p.m.

    If your work sponsored insurance plan does not cover contraceptive, abortofacient drugs, or sterilization (or your counselor or twelve step programs, etc); no-one is stopping you from getting them yourself or buying supplemental insurance to do so.
    If I work for an orthodox Jew I may not be able to make money on Saturday either – does that make me a victim?

    The idea that you are oppressed because someone else will not pay for your free stuff is completely ludicrous: Those forcing others to pay for things against their will are the perpetrators – not the victims.

    This is why the hard left has so little credibility: They talk “choice’ but, have NO tolerance for anyone who actually makes a different “choice”

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Feb. 25, 2013 10:02 a.m.

    Tyler D, I'll have to go look up the name again. It was one of Bush's speech writers. His name was something like Greco. I've save it.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 9:27 a.m.

    Copy Cat.

    In the absence of Jesus, the best thing we have come up with for the escape from the jungle is a concept called civilization. Civilization is where a group of people come together to form a society for the purpose of doing things that individuals can not do by themselves.

    Membership and participation in the society, whether voluntary or involuntary, requires acceptance and adherence established rules and policies of the society. We regard the goodness of a society according to the welfare and equality of the members.

    Business is the prerogative of the society. Business operations are allowed according to the needs of the society. Thus the primary and essential purpose of a business operation is to serve the society wherein it exists. That service consists of distributing and redistributing the products, services and money to allow maximum synergy to happen within the society.

    When business starts to fail it’s obligation to the society it is time to change the rules.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Feb. 25, 2013 9:00 a.m.

    pragmatistferlife - "one of the Republicans own gave a great macro assessment last week when he said, The Repbulicans have all the right answers..they are just for a world that doesn't exsist anymore."

    Great quote! Who gave the speech?

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Feb. 25, 2013 8:11 a.m.

    Maverick, Grover, and others fill in the details well..but one of the Republicans own gave a great macro assessment last week when he said, The Repbulicans have all the right answers..they are just for a world that doesn't exsist anymore.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Feb. 25, 2013 8:02 a.m.

    'His plan is not just to prevent conception from occurring but to destroy the unborn whenever the "mother" desires, even at the point of birth with late-term abortions.'..."His plan"..where in the world do you come up with this stuff? Also if you personally believe that a fertilized egg is a human baby fine, believe what you will, but Mr. constitutionalist you have no standing to trump your belief as fact in public policy discussions and dismiss the beliefs and even the facts and constitutional rights of others..because it isn't a fact it's a belief.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 7:19 a.m.

    Where did FDR get Constitutional authority to dictate wages and benefits to business? Which Article? Which Section? Which Clause? Which Court ignored the Supreme Law of the Land when it allowed those illegal policies and practices? Why does the Left demand that we continue to respect law breakers and law breaking?

    Where is the Court regarding due process and equality, both issues guaranteed by the Constitution, when it applies to 55,000,000 Americans destroyed in the womb by government policies and judges who pretend that no law governs their decisions?

    Where is the Court now when the Federal government is dictating to establishments of religion that they must fund practices that violate their religious doctrine?

    How carefully the Left has led this nation to the brink of moral destruction!

    How lazy the people are who reject their responsibility to speak out against a government that is trampling the Constitution!

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 8:02 p.m.

    Whoa, the right wing is still talking about abortion?

    Folks, the 1970s called, they want their supreme court case back.

    Repubs, abortion came and went. Time to get over it. Stop living in the past and join the rest of us in the year 2013.

    It's no wonder why the GOP has become such a regressive and oppressive group completely out of touch with modern day America. What can you expect when you're living 40-50 years in the past?

    Russia is no longer public enemy #1, we've cracked the human genome (sorry folks, Darwin was right), abortion has been passed and there's no turning back, America actually honors and respects immigrants, minorities, and women now, and your economic policies of giving the rich handouts have failed.

    Wake up repubs!

  • Copy Cat Murray, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 7:27 p.m.

    Ultra Bob

    Employees are slaves?? Seriously?? If you are being treated like a slave, quit and go work somewhere else.

    Hate speech against business owners will have a specific audience, but it is not the employees who are being forced, unless it is by unions, who require them to pay dues to even have a job.

    "Voluntary slavery is when a person agrees to put his freedom aside and become a temporary slave for a time."

    Voluntary slavery is an oxymoron. Perhaps indentured servant, but not slavery.

    "...flooding the labor market with low paid workers."

    Uh, that would be the democrats who want all the currently illegal immigrants, aka a flood of low paid workers, to stay here permanently and gain citizenship so the democrats can reap the votes. Republicans are for a fence, e-verify, and appropriate prosecution to protect American jobs.

    But I can see from your rhetoric, that you feel entitled to regulate the employers and taxpayers into being your slaves. This can end in one of 2 ways, you drive all businesses under and everyone is hungry and poor, or the taxpayers wise up and revolt to correct the injustice of their enslavement.

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 6:49 p.m.

    There is a religion that belives that psychology is the result of demonic type forces. It's called Scientology. Yes, they are a recognized religion, and have all of the protections any Christian church has.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 6:13 p.m.

    Roe vs. Wade has been the law of the land for 40 years now by decision of the Supreme Court. I believe that the answer to most of JT questions are the same as this one, the U.S. Constitution gave the people the right and by election we gave the government the right. The Constitution specifies how Justices are to be put on the Court. Forty years...let's see that would mean 4 for Obama, 8 for GWB, 8 for Clinton, 4 for GHWB, 8 for Reagan, 4 for Carter, and 4 for Nixon. In summary, that would be 24 years with a Republican in the White House, and 16 for Democrats. During that time there have been considerable periods where one party held both Houses of Congress and the White House and no legislation has arisen to reverse Roe vs. Wade.

    The answer then to JT question: "Who gave the government the right to" would be answered by the US Constitution, the vote of the Supreme Court AND the majority vote (or not) of the United States Congress. Questions?

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 4:01 p.m.

    Who gave government the right to control wages, Grover? Nobody!. The government took that right for themselves. Who gave government the right to tell us that we can destroy a human being, as long as that human being somehow remains the "property" of the mother. No one! The government took that "right" to themselves. Who gave the government the right to dictate to employers who they can hire and what benefits those employers must "give" to their employees? No one! The government took that "right" to themselves.

    Who gave one segment of the population the right to demand that another segment of the population pay for their healthcare, their food, their clothing, their housing and any other thing that they want? No one! Obama is trying to make us believe that he has that right and that part of the citizens in America have that right. The right to be safe and secure in our possessions is guaranteed in the Constitution, but those who attack the messenger don't much believe in the Constitution.

    Who gave the government the right to decree that an employer has to pay to destroy the unborn?

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 3:40 p.m.

    Slavery still exists in America. Only now they call it by a different name. Slaves are now called employees.

    While there may be some old slavery in America, the new slavery called “employment” is most prevalent. The main difference between the old and the new seems to be in the word voluntary. Voluntary slavery is when a person agrees to put his freedom aside and become a temporary slave for a time.

    Today’s slave owner, know as a businessman, is much like the old slave owner and has the assumed right to be very specific about when and how the employee comes and goes, what he does and how he does it, and even tries to control the employee’s life beyond the times specified for the slave status.

    The greatest problem for the employee is the businessman’s constant and seemingly effective efforts to make the voluntary part of employment involuntary. The businessman does this by improper influence over government, touting individualism to prevent group or union formation and flooding the labor market with low paid workers. And blaming the employees if the business fails.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 3:40 p.m.

    Employers paying for healthcare for their employees was a result of wage and price controls during WWII. As such they have no rational reason to exist today. End employer paid health care and two things will happen:

    1. Employers will rejoice to be rid of the obligation. Employees will be the only ones to decide what they choose for healthcare.

    2. Healthcare will become so expensive that only the wealthy can afford it. That will cause (I hope) a real discussion of how to curb health insurance costs in this country instead of endlessly talking about repealing Obamacare.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Feb. 24, 2013 3:32 p.m.

    @Mike Richards and Copy Cat (Mountanman too)

    Thank you for demonstrating why it is increasingly difficult to take the Right seriously in any rational discussion.

    The constant parroting of right wing media exaggeration has reached such hyperbolic levels that it makes the boy who cried wolf look like a stoic.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 3:32 p.m.

    I can always tell when someone has written a great letter. The repubs come out of the woodwork and put forth lazy arguments like, "Maybe slavery is what liberals really want." and "Obama won the election and government now controls your ability to live according to the dictates of your conscience."

    Thanks for the laughs!

    I cannot think of a better case for a single payer system than the complaints repubs have made against our current system. Why not go to a single payer system and let religious employers be free from health care? Why should religions decide which treatments or services they will provide? Get them out of the health care business altogether!

    With a single payer system members of any religious denomination can make the personal choices and not have their employers make it for them.

    After Adam and Eve were created the Lord gave them instructions and choice. He did not take away choice, as repubs desire.

    "Employees are free to choose who they work for."

    Where? In your GOP fantasy? Certainly not in the real world. Less choice and complete economic stagnation. The results of your failed economic policies feeding the rich while punishing the others.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 3:13 p.m.

    Tekakaromatagi says "A solution to this dilemma is not to have the government not get involved in running people's lives".

    Actually, the far simpler solution is to eliminate employer-provided health care plans. If employers aren't providing that insurance, then companies are not involved in running people's lives.

    Employer-provided health insurance began as a way for a company to have a competitive edge in hiring workers. What was once a good thing is now turning to evil. Let's elimitate it.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 2:38 p.m.

    Maud you are wasting your breath on MR. He posts the same tired arguments no matter what the discussion. He blames Obama for abortion when the President was 11 years old when the Supreme Court declared abortion legal under certain circumstances in the USA.

    Health Insurance furnished by your employer was a product of wage and price controls during WWII. It has long ago outlived its usefulness as this discussion shows in spades. Employers want out so get rid of it and this conversation goes away with health insurance as we know it since individual healthcare would be too expensive for all but the top ten percent or so to afford. Then lets renew the conversation about healthcare.

  • Copy Cat Murray, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 1:51 p.m.


    "What if the employers are Christian Scientists who believe that the treatment for medical ailments is prayer--not medicine?"


    "Employees are not bound."

    Employees are free to choose who they work for.

    The real question is:

    When did we decide that enslaving employers was the right and constitutional thing to do? The are being forced to work for the insurance companies, for health care providers, and especially the drug and medical equipment providers, and their well paid lobbyists, in many cases against their will. Doesn't that violate the 13th amendment?

    And when did the right to choose to consume something absolve a person from the need to pay for what they consume? If you force someone else to pay for what you consume, you are enslaving the person who pays.

    I don't know why liberals don't get this concept. Earning and buying your own stuff is freedom. Being forced to work for someone else's stuff is slavery. Getting the stuff earned by someone else's forced labor makes you a slaveholder.

    Oh, wait.

    Maybe slavery is what liberals really want.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Feb. 24, 2013 12:32 p.m.


    Obama wants companies to do more than stop conception. His plan is not just to prevent conception from occurring but to destroy the unborn whenever the "mother" desires, even at the point of birth with late-term abortions. Is he going to pay for those services? Of course not. He wants the "rich guy" to pay for it. In this case, that "rich guy" is anyone who employees anyone else.

    Can't you see his plan? Isn't it clear?

    We are here on earth to learn how to control our appetites and our passions. One of those appetites is sex. Are we so unable to control thoughts and desires that we let our hormones dictate our actions? Does anyone "need" a pill to prevent pregnancy, or do they want the pill so that they don't have to learn self-control?

    Children are NOT a curse. They are a blessing. Destroying them after conception is unthinkable. Preventing them from coming is almost as unthinkable.

    Some think that life is just "party play time". Our creator had the idea that we needed mortal life to learn to grow up and to be responsible and to control our bodies.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 11:54 a.m.

    @ Mike Richards: Contraception, including the morning after pill and the 5 day after pill prevent pregnancies from occurring by preventing ovulation. Once fertilization has occurred, these pills are ineffective.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 11:35 a.m.

    MM, you've come up with some awfully outlandish comments, but this one takes the cake. Thank you for letting us "liberals" (and even moderate conservatives) understand what we're up against.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    Feb. 24, 2013 11:36 a.m.

    Tekakaromatagi, one of my relatives belongs to a Christian sect that believes that physical ills are the result of violations of basic biblical principles. I don't know how they feel about health insurance or medical care, but they definitely believe that you can cure yourself by aligning your behavior with God's teachings. Plus I know that many Jehovah's Witnesses will die before they will let someone give them a blood transfusions.

    I think that mixing employer's religious beliefs with health insurance renders reasonable healthcare reform unworkable!

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 24, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    Good points.

    What if the employers are Christian Scientists who believe that the treatment for medical ailments is prayer--not medicine?

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Feb. 24, 2013 9:27 a.m.


    And this is why if religious organizations (or individual believers) want to engage in business or any other civic enterprise, the need to obey the laws of the land just like everyone else.

    As none other than Antonin Scalia said in deciding a similar SC case:

    "To permit this (religious belief trumping law) would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the laws of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself".

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Feb. 24, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    Contraception is a matter of life and death for the unborn. The government is not forcing anyone to take contraceptives - yet -, but they are forcing every company to pay for contraceptives. They're forcing companies to provide funding to prevent contraception and to pay for the destruction of the unborn if an employee decides that having a baby after having had sex was not the "ideal situation".

    Why would anyone equate respecting life with mental illness? Is that the newest tactic being tweeted from the Oval Office?

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Feb. 24, 2013 9:06 a.m.

    Great letter. Why do so many people who go on about getting the government out of people's lives have no problem with using their religion to dictate how others live?

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 8:48 a.m.

    A recent study found that women who were given access to contraceptives at no cost had abortion rates that were reduced by two-thirds compared to the general population. Abortion rates have already fallen by 30% over the last thirty years. A further two-thirds reduction would give us an abortion rate 76% lower than it was in 1980.

    Those who are concerned about abortion should welcome this development.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    The only person's religious beliefs that matter to a conservative are his own.

  • KDave Moab, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 8:43 a.m.

    Employees are not bound.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 8:41 a.m.

    Nicely put, David. We should not be bound by the religious belief of our employer, or one another for that matter.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 7:56 a.m.

    If I have religious beliefs that limit families to two children, can I, as an employer, refuse to provide insurance for more than those two children (including anything associated with the conception or pregnancy of any children beyond the first two)?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 24, 2013 7:16 a.m.

    Personal sacred beliefs no longer apply. Obama won the election and government now controls your ability to live according to the dictates of your conscience.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Feb. 24, 2013 6:57 a.m.

    That is in an interesting example. I wonder if anyone can cite any religions that have that as their doctrine?

    So should we get rid of the Bill of Rights because someone can think of a hypothetical example where it is inconvenient? A couple of solutios to this dilemma is not to have the government not get involved in running people's lives. A second possible solution is to allow for conscientious objectors. They did when there was a draft. Certain religions, such as the Quakers, believed that killing, even in wartime was immoral. Draft boards would evaluate requests for applicants seeking to get a conscientous objector status. We could do the same.

    It beats revoking the Bill of Rights.