Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63
I don't think this is a freedom of speech case. It's a religious freedom case. The court ruled baking a cake is not religious conduct and certainly that is correct. However putting on a uniform and carrying a gun certainly isn't religious conduct and yet this country has long recognized conscientious objectors on religious grounds.
|
Again, the military is a state job, and baking a cake is the private marketplace. The military has separate rules about anti-discrimination.
Quote:
|
Again imagine if your argument of feelings were turned the other way around and I said, "if being denied a rainbow filled wedding cake is too much for their gay feelings to handle they have every right not to marry and go on living together instead."
|
This doesn't make any sense, as one doesn't make money off of being married. (insert gold-digger joke here) Read the link I posted.
Quote:
The employer not the employee decides compensation including healthcare.
The employee and not the employer decide where and for who said employee works.
However, if male employees are offered covered vasectomies and condoms under their plan, it would be discriminatory for females to be denied the same coverage.
|
The reason that men's contraception options are not mandated under the ACA is because only women can get pregnant. Pregnancy is a MEDICAL CONDITION, and one that can lead to a whole host of other, really unpleasant medical conditions. Trust me, those of us who have been through it can tell you it takes over your body- an acquaintance of mine died a few years ago delivering twins. The ACA legislation is set up to make it possible for women to choose whether or not they wish to take on this particular medical condition. The moment men can become pregnant, the ACA will cover any methods necessary for men to avoid pregnancy. Just as the moment women develop prostates, I'm sure the ACA will cover prostate exams for them.
For what it's worth, over-the-counter contraceptives are covered if a doctor writes a prescription for them.
To make it stupider, Hobby Lobby only objects to the Pill and IUDs because Hobby Lobby claims that they stop a fertilized egg from implanting and that's the same as abortion- despite the fact that there is no actual proof that this even happens, and that, even if it did, the WHO defines "conception" as the moment the egg implants into the uterine wall. So Hobby Lobby wants an exemption based on them making up what a word means, and ignoring science because shut up, that's why.
As this article points out, if Hobby Lobby is so opposed to abortion, they need to look at the products they sell:
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/20...tting-needles/