Hobby Lobby
 

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...-supreme-court

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfi...bby-arguments/

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/seg...c90a465000062e

http://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell...e-206208579522

Should for-profits/corporations have a "freedom of religion" that allows them to instill certain viewpoints on their employees (including but not limited to regulations under The Affordable Care Act)?

What say you, GC?


---
This thread isn't only about Hobby Lobby but this is the company that has been in the news over the past year. NPR had a wonderful discussion this afternoon. I can't find a link for today's NPR show but the main listener comments that struck were: (1) a man called asking if Hobby Lobby gets what they are requesting, can this be a slippery slope for other companies to do the same; and then for these companies to purchase other companies and basically lead to employees at various companies being subjected to such control; (2) a woman who is Catholic said she agrees with Hobby Lobby and when asked how she would feel if a company tried to impose their religious views on her as an employee she said "if I didn't like it, I would find another job" (:rolleyes: if only that was so easy for most employees)

No, I don't think companies should be able to do this. Can you imagine if Hobby Lobby's owners belonged to a non-Christian religion and were imposing their viewpoints on their employees? The townspeople would be sharpening the pitchforks and lighting the torches.

NO

in answer to your question: should corporations have "freedom of religion"?

OTOH - no one is being held hostage in that corporation. Vote with your feet. LEAVE.

I don't like HL b/c their fabric is crappy. That's my opinion. If I'm going to spend hours and hours and hours making a quilt, damn it, I'm going to spend $$$ on the fabric, thread, etc, so the damn thing is an heirloom. And yes I'm in a grumpy mood, not that anyone notices or cares.

What about a government that's able to force its views on its citizens? That sees more ominous than any employer doing that.

This is exactly how I feel about it. We have freedom to work wherever we are able to get a job (legally) right? So if you don't like it...don't work there.

I get where you're going with this (and I agree with the spirit of what you're saying), but we do have these things called "laws" that were put into place by our government...

You put AZTheta's two separate thoughts together and left out her "on the other hand," which indicates that she sees two different sides to the issue.

If you're going to quote someone, quote with accuracy.

1. I agree that people would be going crazy if nonChristians who run a company claimed freedom of religion in this regard.

2. The "leave" thing sounds entitled and as though it is coming from people who can leave a company so easily. As I said in the OP, not everyone can or should leave their employer so easily.

Thanks for your condescending comment. Today's newest polling data shows that 26% of Americans support the ACA. There have been plenty of laws in our country's past that were wrong, discriminatory, etc. Just because something is a law doesn't mean it isn't oppressive.

thank you. Nothing pisses me off quite like being misquoted, or having people put words in my mouth that I didn't say (or type).

The only thing that pisses me off more is the use of ellipses in place of correct punctuation or concise writing. There's one poster on GC who does it constantly. It's way worse than those smilies.

(waits for DrPhil to snipe at me, b/c I deserve it)

You missed the capital "T" in Thank you, dear ... :)

Exactly why religion deserves it's own protected niche not mixed in with secular life. Free to exercise, free from imposition, but not free to implement.

Oh, I'm sincerely sorry! I didn't mean to misquote or leave part out...was just stating/bolding/supporting how I felt about it?

Again, wasn't trying to be condescending...I don't fully support the ACA either. But I do try to support the government where possible.

And I wasn't fully quoted either (which was the part where I said I agreed with the spirit of what you said?), but nobody jumped on IP?

Both very fair points. In my mind, I was thinking more of a hourly employee that could probably walk across the street to Michaels and get a job fairly easily. It definitely is much deeper than that.

eek.... Sorry.... :o :)

I won't let you hijack this thread. LOL. :p

Hobby Lobby and Michaels employees tend to fit a certain demographic to typically match the customers. But, you're right it is more complex than that. The availability of good paying and long term employment varies based on a number of factors including demographics.

Allowing companies to do what Hobby Lobby is attempting to do places yet another restriction on the average American who doesn't have employment options and money saved for a rainy day. This would also disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minority women. These companies might as well put their socio-politico-religious ideologies on the job application and tell potential applicants that there will be restrictions. Of course, that would be discriminatory and EEOC worthy. Then again, as far as I'm concerned so is this---they are just using a different avenue to discriminate.