General Discussion

Lurker Deluxe

(1,036 posts)

6. In this case

Wed Jul 2, 2014, 01:45 PM

Jul 2014

In Hobby Lobby's case, being self insured, they do in fact pay for the services insured. Comparing that to SS co payment is not really a good comparison in this case as HL simply does not pay for a service, they provide that service. In my understanding it is also above average coverage.

They are not forcing their employees to do anything, and they are preventing them from doing anything ... they are simply refusing to pay for it. They are also not disqualifying any form of birth control, just the 4. The court ruling has said they could, but there has been no news which has stated they will.

As I have stated before I think the court had an out here that would have made other companies take on more burden to impose these types of restriction. Simply, self insured along with the close control. Making the bar to climb to be able to allow the restriction very high. As it stands I do not agree with the ruling, but it will be some time before this will be challenged and in HL's case they could offer another case to disallow on the grounds of self insured.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

30 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Nothing Stops Hobby Lobby From Saying No Portion Of Salary Can Be used For Birth Control.... [View all] The Magistrate Jul 2014 OP

There may indeed be fanatics who would wish to impose such a restriction tularetom Jul 2014 #1

The Question, Sir, Is Whether The Door Has Been Opened To Attempt It The Magistrate Jul 2014 #2

The door has definitely been at least cracked a bit tularetom Jul 2014 #3

Yep. Aerows Jul 2014 #14

You are so right, Sir. nt Hekate Jul 2014 #18

With these folks, ANY crack, even the tiniest, WILL be exploited. calimary Jul 2014 #24

True, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2014 #25

it can be part of the terms of employment nt geek tragedy Jul 2014 #19

I wonder if an atheist CEO could forbid tithing. jeff47 Jul 2014 #4

You always side with the weak instead of the powerful. BootinUp Jul 2014 #5

In this case Lurker Deluxe Jul 2014 #6

Even In 'Self-Insurance', Sir, The Analysis Remains Unchanged The Magistrate Jul 2014 #8

Why not Hobby Lobby Gift Cards in lieu of wages? leftstreet Jul 2014 #7

You can't eat foam crosses. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #9

Totally false. former9thward Jul 2014 #10

Under This Decision, Sir, The Door Is Certainly Open For Just That The Magistrate Jul 2014 #11

While I think that wouldn't happen without sharp countersuits Aerows Jul 2014 #13

And That Is My Point, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2014 #17

So they could dictate how their employees Aerows Jul 2014 #12

If a religious objection Is claimed, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2014 #15

The five buttheads that opened the gate on this Aerows Jul 2014 #16

If you receive wages as a debit card, you already are leftstreet Jul 2014 #20

True, Sir --- And Without Even The Fig-Leaf Of Religious Devotion To Usury Being Claimed.... The Magistrate Jul 2014 #21

Well, Magistrate, if offered the position on SCOTUS truedelphi Jul 2014 #22

Thoughtful and timely analysis, sir, as always. mac56 Jul 2014 #23

Thank You, Sir The Magistrate Jul 2014 #29

Excellent point. nt valerief Jul 2014 #26

I said that HockeyMom Jul 2014 #27

I Claim No Particular Originality For The Thought, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2014 #28

Exactly. GeorgeGist Jul 2014 #30