Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why the Hobby Lobby Decision is good for the Left Wing

Comments Filter:
  • have to actually be ethical and live by the ethics of the entrepreneurs who created them.

    Nice optimism. As soon as it's convenient to separate the corporation from its owners (eg, when it gets sued) suddenly the soul's responsibility for the corporation's actions will evaporate again.

    Also, I'm not entirely thrilled with Alito leaving open the government to decide what beliefs are "sincerely held".

    • "Sincere" == willing to go to the mat for them.
      • by Qzukk (229616)

        Smart quips and Burma Shave aside, I feel that neither you nor I are qualified for this particular Judgeship.

        • Judge the tree by the fruit, if judge you must.
  • Now that companies are free to choose a la carte, what happens if no insurance companies want to offer a plan that does that? Will hobby lobby then sue the insurance companies to force them to offer a plan consistent with their interpretation of a particular book of mythology? If they want the government to stay out of the process I think they went about it the wrong way.
    • by Qzukk (229616)

      what happens if no insurance companies want to offer a plan that does that?

      The solution that Alito cited that was in place for religious non-profit and church organizations was for the insurance company to be required to pay for the drugs out of their own pockets and establish a separate pool of money for doing so, that the religious institutions would not pay into. The government considered this to be acceptable because the drugs are cheaper than pregnancy care so the insurance company would save money.

      • what happens if no insurance companies want to offer a plan that does that?

        The solution that Alito cited that was in place for religious non-profit and church organizations was for the insurance company to be required to pay for the drugs out of their own pockets and establish a separate pool of money for doing so, that the religious institutions would not pay into. The government considered this to be acceptable because the drugs are cheaper than pregnancy care so the insurance company would save money.

        I would think that the insurance companies would object to that as it interferes with their right to unlimited profit. Forcing insurance companies to pay for something is clearly "Un-American" as we have learned since 2001 (and possibly earlier). Even if it comes under the guise of helping the insurance companies to "save money" they could save even more money by not paying for it at all and forcing the customers to pay for it instead.

        However I would think that the insurance companies would even more

Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth. -- Nero Wolfe

Working...