The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 4 of 58 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 1148
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2012
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HighFlyinBey++ View Post
    The callous disregard for the lives of fellow human beings in society today has reached a level that I can scarcely comprehend.
    Whatever.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2012
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by clanter View Post
    don't worry, as there is a proposal by Obama on the table to tax the employee for the employer's contribution for paying the employee's health care which was pretax dollars will now become post tax dollars... supposed to raise about $150B from the workers
    LOL.....the party for the middle class......SUCKERS


    1 members found this post helpful.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2012
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HighFlyinBey++ View Post
    Contraception is sound fiscal policy for employers. Contraceptives add NOTHING to the cost of a policy.
    That's not for you to decide, unless you ARE an employer. But something tells me you aren't.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Sep. 20, 2005
    Posts
    3,504

    Default

    caballero, you are a colossal asshat.

    See, no red thumb required.

    Moving on...

    Hobby Lobby is a corporation, not a religious organization. As such, they are required to obey federal law. Pretty simple.

    I do find it endlessly amusing that the people who are all about "personal responsibility" are also all about violation of federal law. We live in a democratic republic - laws are created by an elected body. Sorry that sometimes you don't like it, but thankfully for the rest of us, you are not king of the world.

    These are the same people, of course, who during the Bush years were shouting "If you don't like it, you can get out!" (said in my best redneck accent). Hypocrisy at its very finest.
    "Are you yawning? You don't ride well enough to yawn. I can yawn, because I ride better than you. Meredith Michael Beerbaum can yawn. But you? Not so much..."
    -George Morris


    22 members found this post helpful.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA and New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaturdayNightLive View Post
    Hobby Lobby is a corporation, not a religious organization. As such, they are required to obey federal law. Pretty simple.
    Totally agree, with one addition. They are required to obey federal laws, but if HL believes a law is unconstitutional, they have the right to have that issue addressed in the courts. Once the courts have determined that the law in question is constitutional, yes, they are 100% obligated to comply.
    Riding a horse is not a gentle hobby, to be picked up and laid down like a game of solitaire. It is a grand passion.... ~ Emerson


    6 members found this post helpful.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,767

    Default

    In recent court rulings, it appears that corporations have the same rights as individuals. I agree with that. Profit motive does not invalidate the individual rights of the people that make up the corporation...stockholders, employees, corporate officers, board members...a corporation is a group of people voluntarily working together for mutual gain. (Not unlike labor unions except membership in a union is often not voluntary thanks to some state labor laws). I see no reason why a corporation should lose their freedoms and be compelled to support something contrary to their beliefs. Isn't that the mantra from the left? That corporations are evil because they have no morals? Well it would seem the same folks are telling HL to forget their morals. Of course, the left only cares about their beliefs, not other people's.


    The solution is easy. A huge issue in the AC Act is that the government has defined a Cadillac plan and holds all to that standard, driving up cost considerably. Why not set a lower bar that allows for options that omit contraceptive care (and Viagra!). contraceptive care should be responsibility of the individual anyway and their are already multiple gov programs that provide family planning care for the poor.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Sep. 20, 2005
    Posts
    3,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jr View Post
    The solution is easy. A huge issue in the AC Act is that the government has defined a Cadillac plan and holds all to that standard, driving up cost considerably. Why not set a lower bar that allows for options that omit contraceptive care (and Viagra!). contraceptive care should be responsibility of the individual anyway and their are already multiple gov programs that provide family planning care for the poor.
    I can get behind this.

    For the most part though, it's women's health issues that the religious right takes issue with, not the aforementioned Viagra. Makes one wonder what the true motive is.
    "Are you yawning? You don't ride well enough to yawn. I can yawn, because I ride better than you. Meredith Michael Beerbaum can yawn. But you? Not so much..."
    -George Morris


    4 members found this post helpful.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun. 20, 2000
    Location
    Full time in Delhi, NY!
    Posts
    6,397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LMH View Post
    Take it a step farther. *I* do not believe in abortion. I won't get involved in someone else's choice BUT I would be ill at the thought of having my money go to funding it.

    Does that make it simply enough?
    No, not really. Substitute *I* do not believe in [war, food stamps, road use taxes] for abortion. Your taxes go to the government we all elected to distribute as they see fit. You don't want your money spent on abortions. Well, I don't want it spent on war costs that in the end will get us nothing. So, my money gets spent on birth control, yours get spent on something you agree with.
    ~Kryswyn~ Always look on the bright side of life, de doo, de doo de doo de doo
    Check out my Kryswyn JRTs on Facebook

    "Life is merrier with a terrier!"


    8 members found this post helpful.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb. 1, 2001
    Location
    Finally...back in civilization, more or less
    Posts
    11,480

    Default

    Interesting points made so far.

    I try to respect other people's religious convictions, even when I do not share them. But the prospect of a single individual or family or even BOD determining the scope of health benefits afforded to their employees troubles me.

    I work in healthcare, so I do have a dog in this fight/have a bias, although it's not the one that is common to most of my colleagues.

    In the case of limiting contraceptive options, what troubles me most is the notion that an employer is trying to limit access to a legal medical drug/service for those employees that do not share that employer's views (presumably the employees who do share those views would not avail themselves of the drug/service whether paid for or not.)

    To me, that is a very slippery slope to head down. What's next? There are a lot of medical services that employers could pick and choose among based on their personal beliefs, after all. Would that be a good thing? Personally, I would not be comfortable with that, believing as I do that medical decisions should be made by the patient and the medical professionals caring for that patient - not by employers, the government, nor (or maybe particularly) by the administrative bean counters at the insurance companies as they are presently structured.

    I believe that access to quality health care is both a right and a larger public good. There are any number of countries who have better systems than the one(s) used currently in the US, and they reap both public health and financial benefits from those systems. It's very unfortunate, IMO, that our system is driven primarily by the power of the payer lobbies, but I do not see that changing in my lifetime; that being the case, I see legislation regarding coverage requirements to be a reasonable approach.
    **********
    We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
    -PaulaEdwina


    14 members found this post helpful.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Nov. 2, 2001
    Location
    Packing my bags
    Posts
    31,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaturdayNightLive View Post
    I can get behind this.

    For the most part though, it's women's health issues that the religious right takes issue with, not the aforementioned Viagra. Makes one wonder what the true motive is.
    keep chained to the hearth, barefoot....
    Quote Originally Posted by Mozart View Post
    Personally, I think the moderate use of shock collars in training humans should be allowed.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb. 28, 2001
    Posts
    15,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TarheelJD View Post
    Once again, HL is not refusing coverage on all contraceptives. Indeed, almost all contraceptives would be covered. They are only objecting to contraceptive methods that involve the interference with the progression of a pregnancy post- conception.

    I personally have no problem with those post-conception methods, but apparently HL does.
    So let's call it what it is then-abortion...instead of trying to color it as birth control.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA and New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaturdayNightLive View Post
    I can get behind this.

    For the most part though, it's women's health issues that the religious right takes issue with, not the aforementioned Viagra. Makes one wonder what the true motive is.
    Exactly.

    As someone who grew up as a Republican, the way the religious right has been allowed to take over the party's agenda makes me want to vomit. I am an Independent, because neither party does it for me these days.
    Riding a horse is not a gentle hobby, to be picked up and laid down like a game of solitaire. It is a grand passion.... ~ Emerson


    9 members found this post helpful.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jr View Post
    In recent court rulings, it appears that corporations have the same rights as individuals. I agree with that. Profit motive does not invalidate the individual rights of the people that make up the corporation...stockholders, employees, corporate officers, board members...a corporation is a group of people voluntarily working together for mutual gain. (Not unlike labor unions except membership in a union is often not voluntary thanks to some state labor laws). I see no reason why a corporation should lose their freedoms and be compelled to support something contrary to their beliefs. Isn't that the mantra from the left? That corporations are evil because they have no morals? Well it would seem the same folks are telling HL to forget their morals. Of course, the left only cares about their beliefs, not other people's.


    The solution is easy. A huge issue in the AC Act is that the government has defined a Cadillac plan and holds all to that standard, driving up cost considerably. Why not set a lower bar that allows for options that omit contraceptive care (and Viagra!). contraceptive care should be responsibility of the individual anyway and their are already multiple gov programs that provide family planning care for the poor.
    Why should MY tax dollars pay for corporate employees BC ? Why should my tax dollars help create more profit for a corporation ?

    Birth control is quite often used for women's health issues and corporations need to pay for it with their medical insurance plans. Really this is not a religious rights issue it is corporate greed dressed up in religious rights clothing.

    What if a corporation did not want to pay for weight loss, or injuries playing sports, do corporations have the right to limit coverage ?

    I say a big resounding NO !


    8 members found this post helpful.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA and New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LMH View Post
    So let's call it what it is then-abortion...instead of trying to color it as birth control.
    That is entirely dependent on your personal belief about when life begins - and that is an entirely different popcorn and wine generating thread!
    Riding a horse is not a gentle hobby, to be picked up and laid down like a game of solitaire. It is a grand passion.... ~ Emerson


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2004
    Location
    Piedmont Triad, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,306

    Default

    First ... HL has not said they won't support contraceptives. They draw the line at abortion drugs. 2nd. Seems like owners of HL are willing to suffer the consequence of the belief. (Christians in the arena and all...) Too bad if the court rulings go against them thousands of jobs will be lost.

    Add: HL is not restricting access to anything for anybody. They won't pay for something they don't want. It's a basic choice that everybody has. Blue cross will not pay for all drugs. They list the ones they'll pay for. You want something else, you pay for it. HL is doing they same thing. It's gov't requirements that are forcing it.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Nov. 5, 2012
    Posts
    70

    Default

    When did an employer become responsible for providing health care at all? There was a time it was just a way to attract employees. Now, we feel we are entitled to it, and it is the job of an employer. Now it is mandated by federal law. How did we get here in the first place?. I am self employed, I have to buy my own anyway. I would rather get paid more, and be responsible for my own health care, thank you very much....The quote in the post above comes to mind: "Be a force of nature instead of a feverish selfish little clod of ailments and grievances complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.” ~George Bernard Shaw


    10 members found this post helpful.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA and New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Why should MY tax dollars pay for corporate employees BC ? Why should my tax dollars help create more profit for a corporation ?

    Birth control is quite often used for women's health issues and corporations need to pay for it with their medical insurance plans. Really this is not a religious rights issue it is corporate greed dressed up in religious rights clothing.

    What if a corporation did not want to pay for weight loss, or injuries playing sports, do corporations have the right to limit coverage ?

    I say a big resounding NO !
    Actually, the majority of policies exclude weight loss (mine does, and I have what would be considered a "Cadillac Plan"). And I believe some policies exclude injuries sustained from certain high-risk activities, but I am not positive about that.
    Riding a horse is not a gentle hobby, to be picked up and laid down like a game of solitaire. It is a grand passion.... ~ Emerson


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #78

    Default

    What if the exclusion they sought were for something other than contraception? Such as, no insurance for blood transfusions? Some faiths oppose them. Would that be okay? Or, say, no medicines that were tested on live animals? Some faiths oppose this. Or no transplanted organs. Or no male physicians treating female patients?

    I think that standing under the umbrella of religious freedom on this one is unworkable. I think it is tantamount to imposing one's religious beliefs on others. As an employer, I pay for lots of things that I don't like or approve of. But it's called democracy, and in a democracy I have to follow the law, not just my personal preferences.


    18 members found this post helpful.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Feb. 28, 2001
    Posts
    15,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horsehand View Post
    When did an employer become responsible for providing health care at all? There was a time it was just a way to attract employees. Now, we feel we are entitled to it, and it is the job of an employer. Now it is mandated by federal law. How did we get here in the first place?. I am self employed, I have to buy my own anyway. I would rather get paid more, and be responsible for my own health care, thank you very much....The quote in the post above comes to mind: "Be a force of nature instead of a feverish selfish little clod of ailments and grievances complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.” ~George Bernard Shaw

    ^THIS^


    2 members found this post helpful.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Sep. 20, 2005
    Posts
    3,504

    Default

    The morning after pill is not an abortion drug and won't become one no matter how many times you keep repeating that it is.

    As for my sig line, I don't think it means what you think it means.
    "Are you yawning? You don't ride well enough to yawn. I can yawn, because I ride better than you. Meredith Michael Beerbaum can yawn. But you? Not so much..."
    -George Morris


    12 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Fall flowers 80% off at Hobby Lobby!
    By NaniLio in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 17, 2012, 12:17 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: Oct. 25, 2011, 02:26 PM
  3. Obamacare And Horseowners
    By Frank B in forum Off Course
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: Sep. 26, 2010, 07:08 PM
  4. Replies: 30
    Last Post: Oct. 7, 2009, 10:05 AM
  5. Spinoff- how do you support your dressage hobby?
    By CatOnLap in forum Dressage
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: Jun. 13, 2008, 11:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness