Quote:
Originally Posted by southbymidwest
Yes, Hobby Lobby might be only talking about certain types of BC, but if the SC rules in favor of them, what is to stop them from changing their policy to exclude BC because they can? Heck, Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in receiving blood transfusions-could a Jehovah's Witness business owner exclude covering blood transfusions?
I read an interesting comment elsewhere regarding Hobby Lobby- in essence the commenter said that she found it disturbing that Hobby Lobby buys products made in China-a country with government provided abortions, and heavily restricted religious freedoms. Sooooo... they really don't have a problem with religious freedom when it comes to their bottom line.
|
Boom.
Why not require male employees to be circumcised? Why not refuse coverage for vasectomies? Why not decide to stop paying for diabetes medication because you can totally pray that away...if you want it enough.
This who thing is beyond infuriating to me. Which set of religious rules are we going to follow? The CEO? The Board Pres? The store manager? The franchise owner? Which rules of the religion are we going to follow- because let's be real, it is next to impossible to follow each and every one?
And are we going to have to follow a new set of religious guidelines each and every time the religious figurehead changes? "Hey guys, I know we were following the Southern Baptist guidelines, but we've got a new CEO, so here's his new religious guidelines. So no more hormonal birth control, and no blood transfusions. Oh, and someone needs to scrub the bathroom."
What kind of notice will I be given as an applicant when I am job hunting?
"Hi Phoenix NewHire, just so you know, we're Pastafarians, so you can't have this procedure, this procedure, or that medication."
Signs on the door? Posters in the breakroom a'la federal employment law posters?
I don't normally go here on a public forum...but think about the traditional structure of a corporation. Who is at the top? Rich (typically white) men. To me, this feels like protecting privilege, and further subjugation of women, women who are mothers, and poor people. To me, it's perpetuating the "we're at the top, we know what's best, you are always going to be under us, so don't worry about a thing, we know best" *paternal head pat*.