Thursday, November 22, 2012

Hobby Lobby files appeal in battle against ObamaCare contraception provisions

Hobby Lobby Stores has appealed a federal judge’s decision denying the craft supply chain’s request to not provide employees with insurance that covers morning-after and week-after birth control pills, as mandated by the ObamaCare law.
The Christian-owned company asked for relief in the face of fines they say could reach $1 million a day for not providing the coverage.
The appeal was filed Tuesday in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals after a federal judge in Oklahoma on Monday denied the owners’ request for a temporary injunction against the provisions of the Obama administration's health law.
The chain's appeal states in part that Chief Executive Officer David Green his family in less than six weeks “must either violate their faith by covering abortion-causing drugs or be exposed to severe penalties -- including fines of up to $1.3 million per day, annual penalties of about $26 million and exposure to private suits.”
The Oklahoma City-based company and a sister company, Mardel, sued the government in September, claiming the mandate violates the owners' religious beliefs. The owners contend the morning-after and week-after birth control pills are tantamount to abortion because they can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's womb. They also object to providing coverage for certain kinds of intrauterine devices.
The decision was made by U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton, in a 28-page ruling.
At a hearing earlier this month, a government lawyer said the drugs do not cause abortions and that the U.S. has a compelling interest in mandating insurance coverage for them.
In his ruling, Heaton said churches and other religious organizations have been granted constitutional protection from the birth-control provisions, but Hobby Lobby and Mardel “are not religious organizations."
"Plaintiffs have not cited, and the court has not found, any case concluding that secular, for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion," the ruling also stated.
Kyle Duncan, general counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said before the appeal: "Every American, including family business owners like the Greens, should be free to live and do business according to their religious beliefs."
Hobby Lobby is the largest business to file a lawsuit against the mandate.
The company calls itself a "biblically founded business" and is closed on Sundays. Founded in 1972, the company now operates more than 500 stores in 41 states and employs more than 13,000 full-time employees who are eligible for health insurance coverage. The company, which is self-insured, has said it will face a daily $1.3 million fine beginning Jan. 1 if it ignores the law.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/21/hobby-lobby-files-appeal-in-obamacare-morning-after-pill-case/?test=latestnews#ixzz2CxvaBw5O

7 comments:

  1. So if I claim consciensous objection to our wars, do I get to not pay for them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, but you probably wouldn't be forced to kill anyone either.....

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  2. Your freedom to make choices about health care is over. We lose more freedoms in the future. People who were capable and willing to make their own decisions are the only ones who will notice a difference. We will all be brought down to the level of those who are happy being dependent on government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct, we are being drug down to the lowest common denominator of society. Quite sad.

      Delete
  3. Everyone needs to get use to it.
    The election was about 2 completely different views of America. The view that won is the view that government should run healthcare, determine what should be covered.

    Hobby Lobby can take the high road and tell their employees that they will not provide healthcare after 2013 as it requires including items they do not support. If it's required this year, compromise and pay for it this year.

    Only when business decides to take a stand will the people that supported the re-elected president that work at the business finally understand what they voted for.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lou, if all businesses "took a stand" and dropped health care and people had to find health care on their own, our national discussion on health care would get honest real quick. Your second sentence has an agenda of supporting the makers vs takers outlook that is all the rage these days.

      People are bothered by the fact that 40 million people do not have health care. Being bothered by that fact is not de facto support or a desire to have the government run health care. The attitude that has "won" in the market place is that workers make too much money and have too many benefits. Business, IMO, does not want to pay for health care and decide what should and shouldn't be covered. But, for the average person who is hourly, paying for health care outright is very expensive.

      So what do we do? Insurance companies want only the best risks for their pool which means tax payers get to pay for the rest. We are fighting to the death to defend this set up even though it is brutally inefficient. You guys here are fixating on an anti Obama argument while blissfully ignoring what I feel is the more important issue, which is that we have millions and millions of people without health care and we aren't willing to openly say, "You die if you can't afford it". You, Lou, have expressed a reasonable view on a bare bones plan with higher co pays, but if these plans do not include a balanced risk pool, who is going to run it if not government?

      Delete