Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

Posted 687 day(s) ago by SoonerSnook17970 Views 1135 Replies
Results 151 to 200 of 1136
Page 4 of 23 2 3 4 5 6 14
  1. #151
    i don't understand the position that the govt decides the provisions of what constitutes "health care"...and how they decided abortion pills and birth control are mandatory for a person's "health"...
    2 users like 87sooner's post: OU Sam, oucub23


  2. #152
    Tundra's Avatar
    Posts
    2,669
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Indian Territory

    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    i don't understand the position that the govt decides the provisions of what constitutes "health care"...and how they decided abortion pills and birth control are mandatory for a person's "health"...
    Agree.

  3. #153
    Sancho's Avatar
    Posts
    4,795
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Land of milk and honey

    Originally Posted by OnlyOneOklahoma View Post
    Religious rights of an employer are not protected in the work place. That is q dangerous place to go if you think Christians who happen to own businesses can dictate the health care options of their employees.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    No business in America can stop its employees from seeking whatever healthcare options they wish. Stop the ridiculous fear-mongering.

  4. #154
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    No business in America can stop its employees from seeking whatever healthcare options they wish. Stop the ridiculous fear-mongering.
    Can their employees refuse coverage and seek benefits in the exchange?

  5. #155
    brokebacksooner's Avatar
    Posts
    1,918
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    2500
    Location
    Miami, FL

    Originally Posted by OnlyOneOklahoma View Post
    Religious rights of an employer are not protected in the work place. That is q dangerous place to go if you think Christians who happen to own businesses can dictate the health care options of their employees.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    Why not? They aren't the government. As long as their religious beliefs don't supercede a person's constitutional rights. If religious rights aren't protected then the government should force my local deli to carry pork and should force Hobby Lobby and Chik-a-filet to open on Sundays.

  6. #156
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by brokebacksooner View Post
    Why not? They aren't the government. As long as their religious beliefs don't supercede a person's constitutional rights. If religious rights aren't protected then the government should force my local deli to carry pork and should force Hobby Lobby and Chik-a-filet to open on Sundays.
    Really?

    Should businesses be able to ignore other legislation as well that isn't in the constitution? Refuse to hire gays, blacks, disabled, pay them pennies, ignore overtime regulations, refuse contributions to unemployment insurance?

    I don't think you've thought out your position very well.
    The following users like this post: OnlyOneOklahoma


  7. #157
    brokebacksooner's Avatar
    Posts
    1,918
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    2500
    Location
    Miami, FL

    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    Really?

    Should businesses be able to ignore other legislation as well that isn't in the constitution? Refuse to hire gays, blacks, disabled, pay them pennies, ignore overtime regulations, refuse contributions to unemployment insurance?

    I don't think you've thought out your position very well.
    Not sure if the Constitutionality of minimium wage legislation has been tested in courts; however discrimination has.

  8. #158

    Re: Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by brokebacksooner View Post
    Why not? They aren't the government. As long as their religious beliefs don't supercede a person's constitutional rights. If religious rights aren't protected then the government should force my local deli to carry pork and should force Hobby Lobby and Chik-a-filet to open on Sundays.
    Spanky beat me to it. My religion does not like gay people so I only hire straight people. My religion doesn't think women should work so I only hire men. My religion does not like black people, so I only hire white people.

    Your position of religious protection is weak.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  9. #159
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by brokebacksooner View Post
    Not sure if the Constitutionality of minimium wage legislation has been tested in courts; however discrimination has.
    As has the healthcare bill...but I digress.

  10. #160
    brokebacksooner's Avatar
    Posts
    1,918
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    2500
    Location
    Miami, FL

    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    As has the healthcare bill...but I digress.
    The constitutionality of all aspects will continue to be challenged until all options are exhausted. I'm not sure the 4 or 5 times the morning after pill might be paid for by Hobby Lobby is worth the fight.

  11. #161
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by brokebacksooner View Post
    The constitutionality of all aspects will continue to be challenged until all options are exhausted. I'm not sure the 4 or 5 times the morning after pill might be paid for by Hobby Lobby is worth the fight.
    They won't be paying for it either way.

  12. #162

    Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by OnlyOneOklahoma View Post
    Spanky beat me to it. My religion does not like gay people so I only hire straight people. My religion doesn't think women should work so I only hire men. My religion does not like black people, so I only hire white people.

    Your position of religious protection is weak.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    You're being silly.

  13. #163
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    You're being silly.
    What's good for the goose...

    The thing is Plan B's intended use is contraception...period. Just because it may cause an un intended abortion is not legal grounds to not offer it. Pretty sure you can still buy hanger wire at Hobby Lobby...even though it could cause an abortion.

  14. #164

    Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    What's good for the goose...

    The thing is Plan B's intended use is contraception...period. Just because it may cause an un intended abortion is not legal grounds to not offer it. Pretty sure you can still buy hanger wire at Hobby Lobby...even though it could cause an abortion.
    Terrible analogy. Baseball bats can cause abortions too--that's not their intended purpose though. And you are making several statements as facts that are clearly opinion.

  15. #165
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Terrible analogy. Baseball bats can cause abortions too--that's not their intended purpose though. And you are making several statements as facts that are clearly opinion.
    From the manufacturer:
    Plan B® (Levonorgestrel) Tablets, 0.75 mg Rx only for women age 17 and younger
    For women age 17 and younger, Plan B  is a prescription–only emergency contraceptive. Plan B® is intended to prevent pregnancy after known or suspected contraceptive failure or unprotected intercourse. Emergency contraceptive pills (like all oral contraceptives) do not protect against infection with HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) and other sexually transmitted diseases.
    DESCRIPTION
    Emergency contraceptive tablet. Each Plan B® tablet contains 0.75 mg of a single active steroid ingredient, levonorgestrel [18,19-Dinorpregn-4-en-20-yn-3-one-13-ethyl-17-hydroxy-, (17α)- (-)-], a totally synthetic progestogen. The inactive ingredients present are colloidal silicon dioxide, potato starch, gelatin, magnesium stearate, talc, corn starch, and lactose monohydrate. Levonorgestrel has a molecular weight of 312.45, and the following structural and molecular formulas:
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
    Emergency contraceptives are not effective if the woman is already pregnant. Plan B® is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive principally by preventing ovulation or fertilization (by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or ova). In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium). It is not effective once the process of implantation has begun.
    Not opinion.

    Not at all.

  16. #166
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    From the manufacturer:


    Not opinion.

    Not at all.
    Your opinion was that it's not legal grounds. We'll find that out in the coming months I assume.

  17. #167
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Your opinion was that it's not legal grounds. We'll find that out in the coming months I assume.
    If it is legal grounds, then the coat hanger analogy carries water. Plan B was not created for, was not tested as, and is not legally allowed to be prescribed as an abortant.

  18. #168
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    If it is legal grounds, then the coat hanger analogy carries water. Plan B was not created for, was not tested as, and is not legally allowed to be prescribed as an abortant.
    Regardless of the legal grounds, the coat hanger analogy was poor.

  19. #169
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Regardless of the legal grounds, the coat hanger analogy was poor.
    I disagree. Both are thought to be used in abortions, and neither was created for that purpose.
    The following users like this post: OnlyOneOklahoma


  20. #170

    Re: Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    You're being silly.
    How so? BBS said that religious rights of the "corporation" must be protected. There are plenty of religious people who don't like women in the work place or women at all. Are their religious right being violated when they are told that sex is protected with regards to hiring?

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  21. #171

    Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Equality is foundational to the country. Birth control is not. You're making the very slippery slope argument you scoff at others for--and the slope isn't even remotely likely in your example.
    The following users like this post: brokebacksooner


  22. #172
    SoonerBounce Guest
    SoonerBounce's Avatar
    Posts
    n/a
    vCash
    i freakin hate walking into a hobby lobby b/c of the clutter,etc but I hope they continue to fight this and that people show up in support.

    it's just my opinion that the owners of a company should be able to decide if they want to cover healthcare products that aren't necessary for health. I don't few contraceptives or abortion pills as a necessity. it's a luxury. it's not like HL is not wanting to cover diabetes medicine or something like that

  23. #173

    Re: Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Equality is foundational to the country. Birth control is not. You're making the very slippery slope argument you scoff at others for--and the slope isn't even remotely likely in your example.
    His argument was the government should protect religion. Well, my religion says women belong at home and not in the work place. Who wins?

    There is a clear distinction between religious based institutions (which do not have to provide contraceptives) and a corporation run by a guy who happens to go to church.

    To top it off, plan b is not an abortion pill. So Hobby Lobby can suck it.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

  24. #174
    Dexa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,076
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1476
    Location
    Moore

    Not saying Hobby Lobby shouldn't fight for what they believe in.

    I do find it interesting at the selective lines the "Extremely Faithful" draw, and their justifications for such.

  25. #175
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by SoonerBounce View Post
    i freakin hate walking into a hobby lobby b/c of the clutter,etc but I hope they continue to fight this and that people show up in support.

    it's just my opinion that the owners of a company should be able to decide if they want to cover healthcare products that aren't necessary for health. I don't few contraceptives or abortion pills as a necessity. it's a luxury. it's not like HL is not wanting to cover diabetes medicine or something like that
    They aren't covering them...the plan is.

  26. #176
    SoonerBounce Guest
    SoonerBounce's Avatar
    Posts
    n/a
    vCash
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    They aren't covering them...the plan is.

  27. #177
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by SoonerBounce View Post
    It seems you have very little understanding of the situation. It's ok. Let me explain it to you:

    Basically every company in the United States that offers health insurance does so as a third party (the exception largely being certain government employees, and direct employees of health companies) the rest of them, like Hobby Lobby, pay a fee to an outside company to provide this service. Hobby lobby, in no way, is religiously on the hook for any hysterectomies, or people whose ailing deepen dents die while in the hospital from Morphine assisted respiratory depression while ending a life of cancer.

    Does Hobby Lobby have a right to maintain a business without running water because the suppliers of it use fluoride in the treatment process? No. They are bound, BY LAW, to provide a proper restroom for their employees, even if they have a religious problem with fluoride or toilets, they simply are not allowed to press their employees into fitting their own mold.

  28. #178
    SoonerBounce Guest
    SoonerBounce's Avatar
    Posts
    n/a
    vCash
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    It seems you have very little understanding of the situation. It's ok. Let me explain it to you:

    Basically every company in the United States that offers health insurance does so as a third party (the exception largely being certain government employees, and direct employees of health companies) the rest of them, like Hobby Lobby, pay a fee to an outside company to provide this service. Hobby lobby, in no way, is religiously on the hook for any hysterectomies, or people whose ailing deepen dents die while in the hospital from Morphine assisted respiratory depression while ending a life of cancer.

    Does Hobby Lobby have a right to maintain a business without running water because the suppliers of it use fluoride in the treatment process? No. They are bound, BY LAW, to provide a proper restroom for their employees, even if they have a religious problem with fluoride or toilets, they simply are not allowed to press their employees into fitting their own mold.
    The straw is great with this one....

    I assume that HL is like most companies where they choose the plans and pay a percentage of the premiums. Hence, they don't want to pay for something that goes against their beliefs. it's simple really

  29. #179
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by SoonerBounce View Post
    The straw is great with this one....

    I assume that HL is like most companies where they choose the plans and pay a percentage of the premiums. Hence, they don't want to pay for something that goes against their beliefs. it's simple really
    Are they then paying for tubal ligations, or assisted deaths already? Most companies do not personally cater their plans either, most of them go through a broker that will present them with some plans to choose from.

    Thankfully, we are probably to a point where there will be no drug benefit that omits such coverage, making the point moot.

  30. #180
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,227
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    i don't understand the position that the govt decides the provisions of what constitutes "health care"...and how they decided abortion pills and birth control are mandatory for a person's "health"...
    This was a cost issue and not a health issue...

    My problem is with trying to supply everything in the healthcare plan...it should be a basic plan to cover catastrophic issues...to keep from being bankrupted due to injury or illness and the associated healthcare costs...

  31. #181
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    Can their employees refuse coverage and seek benefits in the exchange?
    I am not sure if I understand this point, expound on this will ya?

  32. #182
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    This was a cost issue and not a health issue...

    My problem is with trying to supply everything in the healthcare plan...it should be a basic plan to cover catastrophic issues...to keep from being bankrupted due to injury or illness and the associated healthcare costs...
    This is true 1000%
    Hobby Lobby only went with the religious angle because they thought it would carry weight with the courts. The reality is they didn't want to pay for the plan regardless of what it covers. Believe me, if the Plan B pill had been excluded from the formulary, HL would not hav been hunky dory with the legislation.

    Here's a solution, HL can get a plan that doesn't cover the pill if they add pay a penalty for that stance, and the Feds can make it available to such employees free of charge. Then HL can have a clean conscience.

  33. #183
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by URNotserious View Post
    I am not sure if I understand this point, expound on this will ya?
    If the employee has right of refusal of the plan due to the restriction and the freedom to move to the govt exchange (resulting in a penalty to the employer I believe) then I have no problem with employers being able to tailor their plans.
    The following users like this post: URNotserious


  34. #184
    OUMallen's Avatar
    Posts
    7,328
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1500
    Location
    City of Nompton

    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    This was a cost issue and not a health issue...

    My problem is with trying to supply everything in the healthcare plan...it should be a basic plan to cover catastrophic issues...to keep from being bankrupted due to injury or illness and the associated healthcare costs...
    Preventative care is a major consideration in keeping people from needing to use the most expensive treatments, thereby keeping the overall amount needing to be spent healthcare down.

  35. #185
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,227
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    Preventative care is a major consideration in keeping people from needing to use the most expensive treatments, thereby keeping the overall amount needing to be spent healthcare down.
    In some cases, possibly many, preventative actually cost more...there are a lot of studies showing that not all preventative care actually saves money....

    I know this sounds gruesome but if we fail to pick up on someone with early stage, curable cancer, they will live longer and will in the long run cost even more money....instead of dying they live long enough to develop Alzheimer disease...

  36. #186
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,227
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    http://healthinsurance.about.com/gi/...full/358/7/661

    New England Journal of Medicine

    Sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching. Studies have concluded that preventing illness can in some cases save money but in other cases can add to health care costs.3 For example, screening costs will exceed the savings from avoided treatment in cases in which only a very small fraction of the population would have become ill in the absence of preventive measures. Preventive measures that do not save money may or may not represent cost-effective care (i.e., good value for the resources expended). Whether any preventive measure saves money or is a reasonable investment despite adding to costs depends entirely on the particular intervention and the specific population in question. For example, drugs used to treat high cholesterol yield much greater value for the money if the targeted population is at high risk for coronary heart disease, and the efficiency of cancer screening can depend heavily on both the frequency of the screening and the level of cancer risk in the screened population.4

    The focus on prevention as a key source of cost savings in health care also sidesteps the question of whether such measures are generally more promising and efficient than the treatment of existing conditions. Researchers have found that although high-technology treatments for existing conditions can be expensive, such measures may, in certain circumstances, also represent an efficient use of resources.5 It is important to analyze the costs and benefits of specific interventions.

    A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness literature sheds light on these issues. We analyzed the contents of the Tufts–New England Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (www.tufts-nemc.org/cearegistry), which consists of detailed abstracted information on published cost-effectiveness studies through 2005. Each registry article estimates the cost-effectiveness of one or more interventions as the incremental costs (converted here to 2006 U.S. dollars) divided by the incremental health benefits quantified in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Low cost-effectiveness ratios are “favorable” because they indicate that incremental QALYs can be accrued inexpensively. An intervention is “cost-saving” if it reduces costs while improving health. Poorly performing interventions can both increase costs and worsen health.

    Our findings suggest that the broad generalizations made by many presidential candidates can be misleading. These statements convey the message that substantial resources can be saved through prevention. Although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not.

  37. #187
    OUMallen's Avatar
    Posts
    7,328
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1500
    Location
    City of Nompton

    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    In some cases, possibly many, preventative actually cost more...there are a lot of studies showing that not all preventative care actually saves money....

    I know this sounds gruesome but if we fail to pick up on someone with early stage, curable cancer, they will live longer and will in the long run cost even more money....instead of dying they live long enough to develop Alzheimer disease...
    Good points here and below. I'll qualify my statement above: preventative birth control treatment will keep the overall amount needing to be spent down.

  38. #188
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,227
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    Good points here and below. I'll qualify my statement above: preventative birth control treatment will keep the overall amount needing to be spent down.
    I can go along with that statement...my concern is that the relative low cost of the pill in most cases shouldn't cause people from not buying it on their own...if it has a $20 deductible I am fine with it being mandated....but once the claim is filed the cost of the pill just doubled...

    Catastrophic and co pays

  39. #189
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    Good points here and below. I'll qualify my statement above: preventative birth control treatment will keep the overall amount needing to be spent down.
    This is true, another measure of savings comes with many illnesses being treated in offices instead of ERs. As more covered persons utilize the ER for emergencies only, it will reduce costs to everyone...this applies to hospitalization a in general.

  40. #190
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,227
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    This is true, another measure of savings comes with many illnesses being treated in offices instead of ERs. As more covered persons utilize the ER for emergencies only, it will reduce costs to everyone...this applies to hospitalization a in general.
    A key point

  41. #191
    nocalsooner's Avatar
    Posts
    1,727
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Northern California

    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    i don't understand the position that the govt decides the provisions of what constitutes "health care"...and how they decided abortion pills and birth control are mandatory for a person's "health"...
    My understanding is a morning-after pill is not an abortion pill.

  42. #192
    brokebacksooner's Avatar
    Posts
    1,918
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    2500
    Location
    Miami, FL

    Originally Posted by OnlyOneOklahoma View Post
    His argument was the government should protect religion. Well, my religion says women belong at home and not in the work place. Who wins?

    There is a clear distinction between religious based institutions (which do not have to provide contraceptives) and a corporation run by a guy who happens to go to church.

    To top it off, plan b is not an abortion pill. So Hobby Lobby can suck it.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    We are protected from discrimination in the workplace. "Your religion" discriminates so the protection from trumps your religion. Not allowing this pill doesn't discriminate against a protected class.

  43. #193
    SoonerBounce Guest
    SoonerBounce's Avatar
    Posts
    n/a
    vCash

    Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    Most companies do not personally cater their plans either, most of them go through a broker that will present them with some plans to choose from..
    Well yeah. Do you think the company has no input or doesn't review what the company presents them with?

  44. #194
    Originally Posted by SoonerBounce View Post
    Well yeah. Do you think the company has no input or doesn't review what the company presents them with?
    he's trying to say the greens are off the hook with God because they are not responsible for the sins of the govt....or their employees...
    so they shouldn't be concerned...

  45. #195
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    he's trying to say the greens are off the hook with God because they are not responsible for the sins of the govt....or their employees...
    so they shouldn't be concerned...
    Correct.
    In fact, they are probably doing wrong by God by spiting the law.

  46. #196
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Originally Posted by SoonerBounce View Post
    Well yeah. Do you think the company has no input or doesn't review what the company presents them with?
    Do you think this was ever about plan B?

  47. #197
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    Correct.
    In fact, they are probably doing wrong by God by spiting the law.
    prolly not

  48. #198
    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    Do you think this was ever about plan B?
    why are you certain it is not?

  49. #199
    SoonerBounce Guest
    SoonerBounce's Avatar
    Posts
    n/a
    vCash

    Hobby Lobby against "Preventative Services" Mandate

    Originally Posted by SpankyNek View Post
    Do you think this was ever about plan B?
    Absolutely

  50. #200
    SpankyNek's Avatar
    Posts
    12,388
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    vCash
    5250
    Location
    Houston (Cypress)

    Because, if so, it is an asinine position as plan B is not marketed as an abortant. Seriously, it is basically progesterone, taken by millions of Americans every day.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 63
    Last Post: July 21st, 2014, 11:04 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 30th, 2013, 03:04 PM
  3. Hobby Lobby
    By SG1 in forum ThunderDome
    Replies: 154
    Last Post: October 11th, 2013, 02:45 AM
  4. Replies: 106
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2013, 05:21 PM