Hobby Lobby invests in abortion pills

[fskimospy]

The only moral thing Hobby Lobby can do here is either divest from all funds that contain companies that produce abortion drugs or eliminate their 401(k) plan altogether.

I know that their sincerely held religious beliefs tell them that they are funding murder and I know they don't want any part of that. Right?

 

[Paratus]

Well apparently I believe they didn't know what forms of birth control were being covered in their insurance until Obama pointed it out to them...

So again, please list every company you hold in your 401k along with EVERY PRODUCT that company makes.

Besides which. Claiming that not investing in Pharmaceutical companies would prevent abortion only makes sense if you buy into supply side economics

I already know all the companies I'm invested in. I had to go thorough that recently for financial disclosure reasons. I don't know every product they make because I do not have a deeply held religious belief that will drive me to SCOTUS to give more rights to legal entities.

 

[glenn1]

Well now that HL does indeed know what their benefits are being used on (health and 401k) the only morally consistent thing to do is discontinue providing both to their employees since they might be used on something that offends their religious beliefs. Oh, and if they provide daycare reimbursement, they should cancel that as well since some people might use it on daycare facilities that don't teach their religion.

So to progressives, it's preferable that Hobby Lobby drop the entire health plan than rather rethink the birth control mandate. Sacrificing about $3-10k in fringe benefits to preserve a $50 "freebie" sounds like exactly the type of business savvy that Democrats are known for. That will really show the Hobby Lobby bigwigs who is boss if they reduce their payroll costs by four figures per employee. Please B'rer Fox don't throw me in 'dat briar patch.

 

[WackyDan]

Quick, give me a list of all companies held by mutual funds in your 401k...

He can't/won't. That would take a lot of work for a list that is ever changing. A fund that has a stake today in a company that also has a birth control product could sell that stake tomorrow for a gain, or to prevent a loss...and that same fund could add it again months later.

 

[fskimospy]

He can't/won't. That would take a lot of work for a list that is ever changing. A fund that has a stake today in a company that also has a birth control product could sell that stake tomorrow for a gain, or to prevent a loss...and that same fund could add it again months later.

Sounds like a tremendous moral hazard then, huh? Probably better to get rid of the plan completely.

 

[cyclohexane]

Btw, neither plan B "Ella" nor copper IUDs are "abortion pills."

They work by thickening the vaginal epithelium and preventing implantation.
Conservatives on ATPN don't know how science works.

 

[fskimospy]

So to progressives, it's preferable that Hobby Lobby drop the entire health plan than rather rethink the birth control mandate. Sacrificing about $3-10k in fringe benefits to preserve a $50 "freebie" sounds like exactly the type of business savvy that Democrats are known for. That will really show the Hobby Lobby bigwigs who is boss if they reduce their payroll costs by four figures per employee. Please B'rer Fox don't throw me in 'dat briar patch.

Is this really that hard to understand? It is about the inconsistencies in their moral stands, not about the merits of the plans from a business sense.

 

[nehalem256]

Sounds like a tremendous moral hazard then, huh? Probably better to get rid of the plan completely.

Only if you believe in supply side economics

Clearly, Hobby Lobby is practicing demand side economics. Liberals should applaud them :awe:

Btw, neither plan B "Ella" nor copper IUDs are "abortion pills."

They work by thickening the vaginal epithelium and preventing implantation.
Conservatives on ATPN don't know how science works.

Which is exactly why Hobby Lobby objects to it.

 

[nehalem256]

So to progressives, it's preferable that Hobby Lobby drop the entire health plan than rather rethink the birth control mandate. Sacrificing about $3-10k in fringe benefits to preserve a $50 "freebie" sounds like exactly the type of business savvy that Democrats are known for. That will really show the Hobby Lobby bigwigs who is boss if they reduce their payroll costs by four figures per employee. Please B'rer Fox don't throw me in 'dat briar patch.

It makes a lot more sense when you realize the liberal obsession on the BC mandate isn't driven by health concerns, but social engineering.

 

[justoh]

So to progressives, it's consistent that Hobby Lobby drop the entire health plan than rather rethink the birth control mandate.[rest irrelevant].

I think i got that right.

 

[cyclohexane]

Only if you believe in supply side economics

Clearly, Hobby Lobby is practicing demand side economics. Liberals should applaud them :awe:



Which is exactly why Hobby Lobby objects to it.

All hormonal contraception pills work the same way. By that logic, women around the world have been taking "abortion pills" for 40+ years.

These nutbags don't understand science, but try to legislate it anyway.
A preimplantation embryo is not a person (no sane Ob/gyn will dispute this). We had a panel discussion a while back with a conservative catholic priest and an advocate for embryonic stem cell research and it was hilarious - the priest guy would not respond to logical arguments.

 

[nehalem256]

All hormonal contraception pills work the same way. By that logic, women around the world have been taking "abortion pills" for 40+ years.

Wrong, many work by preventing ovulation.

These nutbags don't understand science, but try to legislate it anyway.
A preimplantation embryo is not a person (no sane Ob/gyn will dispute this). We had a panel discussion a while back with a conservative catholic priest and an advocate for embryonic stem cell research and it was hilarious - the priest guy would not respond to logical arguments.

How is the preimplantation embyro any different that the immediate post implantation embryo?

If life begins at conception than how is it not an abortion?

 

[bradly1101]

The Title of this thread is TOTAL Bull SHIT!

There is a Huge Difference in the employees investing their money into a 401K plan and the company matching a percentage and the government forcing them to pay for abortions etc.

The article from the Mother Jone rag makes it sound like the company is invested in these 401K Plans but it is a misrepresentation of the facts. Their employees are investing their own money and are reaping the benefits not the company.

I have yet to see a 401K plan that did not have some Pharma Companies in the blend.

Their employees also have a right to purchase their birth control with their own money also... I do not see the issue.

It's a "company sponsored" plan with matching funds. Are you sure the family that owns Hobby Lobby isn't benefiting? They're able to attract more employees with the investment account that they chose. They at least benefit there.

 

[bradly1101]

Btw, neither plan B "Ella" nor copper IUDs are "abortion pills."

They work by thickening the vaginal epithelium and preventing implantation.
Conservatives on ATPN don't know how science works.

I agree that they are not 'abortion pills', but I used that moniker because it's the most common used here.

 

[Bitek]

It's a "company sponsored" plan with matching funds. Are you sure the family that owns Hobby Lobby isn't benefiting? They're able to attract more employees with the investment account that they chose. They at least benefit there.

The Title of this thread is TOTAL Bull SHIT!

There is a Huge Difference in the employees investing their money into a 401K plan and the company matching a percentage and the government forcing them to pay for abortions etc.

The article from the Mother Jone rag makes it sound like the company is invested in these 401K Plans but it is a misrepresentation of the facts. Their employees are investing their own money and are reaping the benefits not the company.

I have yet to see a 401K plan that did not have some Pharma Companies in the blend.

Their employees also have a right to purchase their birth control with their own money also... I do not see the issue.

1. employers get a tax deduction for their contributions (matching funds) to the 401k plan
2. there are vesting rules, the matching funds remain with the employer until those are met
3. the employer defines the 401k program and investment options

 

[1prophet]

Is this really that hard to understand? It is about the inconsistencies in their moral stands, not about the merits of the plans from a business sense.

No more than Democrats who pretend to be for unions and the American worker while signing off on free trade agreements and the phony liberals who cry raise the minimum wage and want more business regulations while buying their Chinese junk at your local walmart because they are too cheap to buy American.

 

[fskimospy]

No more than Democrats who pretend to be for unions and the American worker while signing off on free trade agreements and the phony liberals who cry raise the minimum wage and want more business regulations while buying their Chinese junk at your local walmart because they are too cheap to buy American.

I'm for unions, American workers, and free trade. They are not inconsistent.

 

[Pens1566]

So to progressives, it's preferable that Hobby Lobby drop the entire health plan than rather rethink the birth control mandate. Sacrificing about $3-10k in fringe benefits to preserve a $50 "freebie" sounds like exactly the type of business savvy that Democrats are known for. That will really show the Hobby Lobby bigwigs who is boss if they reduce their payroll costs by four figures per employee. Please B'rer Fox don't throw me in 'dat briar patch.

Excellent strawman. No one has suggested that's what they prefer. IF, and its a big IF, HL was to be morally consistent in their righteous indignation at how their employees might use a small percentage of the benefits that HL provides they should be consistent in how they prevent that. I don't believe for one second that they do, so no, I don't prefer that they cut anything. They should provide what the regulations require they do (if they choose to keep providing HC under ACA) and mind their own goddamn business about what other human beings do with the compensation for their labor.

 

[kia75]

Is there a reason why we need 3 Hobby Lobby birth control 401k threads?

Can't we keep everything to one thread instead of multiples?

I swear, a Hobby Lobby thread is posted, Hobby Lobby is descredited, and then the next day a completely new thread is posted with all the same discredited points from the previous day.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Is there a reason why we need 3 Hobby Lobby birth control 401k threads?

Can't we keep everything to one thread instead of multiples?

I swear, a Hobby Lobby thread is posted, Hobby Lobby is descredited, and then the next day a completely new thread is posted with all the same discredited points from the previous day.

It's the only way Hobby Lobby can compete with anti-cop threads

 

[bradly1101]

Is there a reason why we need 3 Hobby Lobby birth control 401k threads?

Can't we keep everything to one thread instead of multiples?

I swear, a Hobby Lobby thread is posted, Hobby Lobby is descredited, and then the next day a completely new thread is posted with all the same discredited points from the previous day.

I didn't see the other thread, but even if I had I would have thought this revelation of hypocrisy deserved its own.

 

[glenn1]

Excellent strawman. No one has suggested that's what they prefer. IF, and its a big IF, HL was to be morally consistent in their righteous indignation at how their employees might use a small percentage of the benefits that HL provides they should be consistent in how they prevent that. I don't believe for one second that they do, so no, I don't prefer that they cut anything. They should provide what the regulations require they do (if they choose to keep providing HC under ACA) and mind their own goddamn business about what other human beings do with the compensation for their labor.

You're missing the point. Democrats inserted the birth control provision into ACA knowing it would be a poison pill for some (admittedly ridiculous) stakeholders such as Hobby Lobby. Even without considering its merits as a policy (and I think it's monumentally stupid, akin to mandating auto insurance cover the purchase cost of gun racks for rednecks' pickup trucks) that's political malpractice. You don't risk blowing up the entire law for table scraps like "free" birth control, the benefit simply isn't worth either the blowback or the larger risk.

 

[Pens1566]

You're missing the point. Democrats inserted the birth control provision into ACA knowing it would be a poison pill for some (admittedly ridiculous) stakeholders such as Hobby Lobby. Even without considering its merits as a policy (and I think it's monumentally stupid, akin to mandating auto insurance cover the purchase cost of gun racks for rednecks' pickup trucks) that's political malpractice. You don't risk blowing up the entire law for table scraps like "free" birth control, the benefit simply isn't worth either the blowback or the larger risk.

I'm not missing a point because it isn't there to miss in the first place. Like it or not, BC actually serves a valid medical purpose besides preventing pregnancy. That's the cold hard fact of it all.

As far as missing points, I do see that you failed to address our original disagreement and my subsequent posts on said disagreement. Conceding?

 

[nehalem256]

You're missing the point. Democrats inserted the birth control provision into ACA knowing it would be a poison pill for some (admittedly ridiculous) stakeholders such as Hobby Lobby. Even without considering its merits as a policy (and I think it's monumentally stupid, akin to mandating auto insurance cover the purchase cost of gun racks for rednecks' pickup trucks) that's political malpractice. You don't risk blowing up the entire law for table scraps like "free" birth control, the benefit simply isn't worth either the blowback or the larger risk.

The problem is you are falsely assuming that Democrats view "free" BC as table scraps.

One of the important accomplishments of Obamacare, bragged about on Obama's campaign website, is getting men to subsidize health care for women. If women have to pay out of pocket for their BC this naturally undermines this key accomplishment.

 

[nehalem256]

I'm not missing a point because it isn't there to miss in the first place. Like it or not, BC actually serves a valid medical purpose besides preventing pregnancy. That's the cold hard fact of it all.

As far as missing points, I do see that you failed to address our original disagreement and my subsequent posts on said disagreement. Conceding?

So what valid medical purpose beyond preventing pregnancy do IUDs and Plan B have?:whiste:

EDIT: And you really think that Democrats made the BC mandate so that women could free acne treatment?