home
RSS
January 11th, 2013
03:40 PM ET

Hobby Lobby finds way around $1.3-million-a-day Obamacare hit - for now

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Editor

Washington (CNN) - By Friday, Hobby Lobby would have racked up $14.3 million in fines from the Internal Revenue Service for bucking Obamacare. But in keeping with the great American tax tradition, they may have found a loophole.

The company is facing $1.3 million a day in fines for each day it chooses not to comply with a piece of the Affordable Care Act that was set to trigger for them on January 1. The craft store chain announced in December that, because of religious objections, they would face the fines for not providing certain types of birth control through their company health insurance.

The penalty was set to go into effect on the day the company's new health care plan went into effect for the year.

Peter M. Dobelbower, general counsel for Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. said in a statement released through the Becket Fund that, "Hobby Lobby discovered a way to shift the plan year for its employee health insurance, thus postponing the effective date of the mandate for several months."

The statement continued that "Hobby Lobby does not provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs in its health care plan. Hobby Lobby will continue to vigorously defend its religious liberty and oppose the mandate and any penalties."

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

Last month Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor rejected the company's appeal for a temporary relief from the steep fines while their case made its way through the lower courts.

Hobby Lobby announced a day after the ruling that it "will continue to provide health insurance to all qualified employees. To remain true to their faith, it is not their intention, as a company, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs."

In September, Hobby Lobby and affiliate Mardel, a Christian bookstore chain, sued the federal government for violating their owners' religious freedom and ability to freely exercise their religion.

The lawsuit says the companies' religious beliefs prohibit them from providing insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs. As of August 2012, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, dubbed Obamacare, requires employer-provided health care plans to provide "all Food and Drug Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity," according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Churches and houses of worship are exempt from the regulation and a narrow exemption was added for nonprofit religious employers whose employees "primarily share its religious tenets" and who "primarily serve persons who share its religious tenets."

The Internal Revenue Service regulations now say that a group health care plan that "fails to comply" with the Affordable Care Act is subject to an "excise tax" of "$100 per day per individual for each day the plan does not comply with the requirement." It remains unclear how the IRS would implement and collect the excise tax.

A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment on the high court's move last month.

White House officials have long said they believe they have struck an appropriate compromise between religious exemptions and women's health. The White House has not commented specifically on the Hobby Lobby case.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

The Oklahoma City-based Hobby Lobby chain has more than 500 stores that employ 13,000 employees across 42 states, and takes in $2.6 billion in sales. It is still privately held by CEO and founder David Green and members of his family.

"The foundation of our business has been, and will continue to be strong values, and honoring the Lord in a manner consistent with biblical principles," a statement on the Hobby Lobby website reads, adding that one outgrowth of that is the store is closed on Sundays to give its employees a day of rest.

MORE BACKGROUND: Hobby Lobby faces millions in fines for bucking Obamacare

The Hobby Lobby case is just one of many before the courts over the religious exemption aspects of the law. The case represents by far the biggest for-profit group challenging the health care mandate.

Part of the reason Sotomayor rejected their appeal to the Supreme Court she wrote was because their case is still pending in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.

A spokesperson for the Becket Fund said on Friday a date has yet to be set for the case to be heard in the 10th Circuit.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Belief • Church and state • Courts • Faith Now

soundoff (4,609 Responses)
  1. NRAareNAZIS

    I hope the company will suffer, when it comes to the next earnings report.

    January 14, 2013 at 3:01 am |
  2. z

    http://www.gofundme.com/1uastc

    January 14, 2013 at 1:56 am |
  3. JadedEmperor

    This is just another example of people equating the protection of their right to religious freedom with a right or an obligation to control the decisions of others. It's not for Hobby Lobby to decide if an employee makes the choice, but they think they should have a say so which is nonsense. And when it comes to abortion or contraception, it's usually men trying to decide what choices women get to have, which is also nonsense.

    January 14, 2013 at 1:16 am |
    • That's what the Supreme Court gets

      The Supreme Court ruled that corporations are people and now corporations are exercising the rights as if they were people. The Supreme Court has no one to blame but themselves.

      January 14, 2013 at 1:59 am |
    • Greg

      Wrong.
      No one is preventing anyone from obtaining or using contraceptives. Hobby Lobby is simply saying they should not be forced to pay for contraceptives – which are a luxury item – as part of their health insurance plan. The employees can still purchase contraceptives with their own money, or obtain a health insurance plan from some other source.

      January 14, 2013 at 3:21 am |
    • JerryC

      The government is not telling "Hobby Lobby" that they must act against its religious beliefs because "Hobby Lobby" does not have moral convictions or religious beliefs. "Hobby Lobby" is a legal corporation with the sole purpose to make a profit selling hobby supplies and nicnacks to people in its stores. In this case, one family has maintained ownership and control instead of allowing the public to buy shares. Nobody is saying this family has to pay for anything – in fact, that's why they incorporated the business, so any cost of doing business or money owed can only come from business revenue and their own fortunes remain untouched. Get past the lies to understand this is not a family business like a kosher delli. This is a huge corporation that happens to be owned by one family. If the family doesn't want to obey the regulations that every other huge store chain must follow, they can unincorporate and risk their own personal fortunes, the same risk true family businesses take every day.

      January 14, 2013 at 7:00 am |
  4. Tim Hunter

    Dear christians,

    What about all the babies God let drown to death when he supposedly flooded the earth? How about Passover? Ya know...when if the parents didn't slather the door with blood and angel of death killed their kids? Just two of several examples why teh baby Jesus isn't nearly so pro life as you make him out to be.

    January 14, 2013 at 12:48 am |
    • Damocles

      But, but, but.... you are taking that out of context, or he had a good reason, or his ways aren't our ways.

      January 14, 2013 at 12:54 am |
  5. jbazingo

    pink rainbow: I really have nothing but compassion for the vast majority of women that have gone down this path. Not just compassion, but forgiveness too. I don't wish these women ANY ill will. My gut tells me there are some bad ladies out there that give absolutely no thought to this, but I like to think for most, this is a terrible choice. I suspect it haunts them for the rest of their lives and for them my heart truly goes out. Who, feeling remorse, regret, shame, or who convicts themselves over and over, will not be shown mercy? It is the baby killing factories and their greedy and/or political advocates that I stand in opposition to. I have no problem telling baby killing docs the are a murderous lot.

    January 14, 2013 at 12:20 am |
    • Damocles

      If you meet a deity are you going to question its reasoning for allowing so many fetuses to die through no fault or choice of the mother? Are you going to question its thought process on allowing so many potential humans to be wasted in an impotent man?

      January 14, 2013 at 12:28 am |
    • jbazingo

      Doesn't everyone want to ask God why, why, why? 1/2 of America at least, doesn't even believe in God. There are so many things I don't understand and yes, I want answers. A supreme being, wouldn't owe me any answers, but I would like to know. Don't you want to know why we kill 1.2 million babies per year in America? Doesn't anyone want to know?

      January 14, 2013 at 1:06 am |
    • Damocles

      So if you are willing to call doctors murderers, are you going to extend that same courtesy to a deity?

      January 14, 2013 at 1:10 am |
    • jbazingo

      So, unlike doctors, I believe God can restore life. He says he will resurect the righteous and the unrighteousness. And, it was his life to begin with. But, he says he will restore life to everyone sand eventually sort this all out and reconcile people to him, not the other way around. If you can find me a doc with the same claims / powers, I cut them all the slack in the world. If, however, these "doctors" end life and cannot bring the dead back, yeah, I think they have met the definition of murderers.

      January 14, 2013 at 1:27 am |
    • Damocles

      Ahhh so you know of no doctor that has healed the sick, brought back those that were dead for a short period of time? I've asked this question before and haven't received an answer to it, maybe you could provide one: how do you know that all these abortions is not just your deity moving in its 'mysterious ways'?

      January 14, 2013 at 1:34 am |
    • jbazingo

      Noah spent 40 years at Gid's behest inviting people to join him. Lott also if he could fund even a few righteous people would have seen God spare Sodem. Repeatedly the prophets warned disobediant people to return and be blessed by God. God offers blessings not just to those that serve him, but to many generations of the children of the faithful. Christians, be definition are supposed to follow Christ. Tell me again the part in the Bible where Jesus killed babies. I am having trouble finding that.

      So back to your argument that God is bad and so man can be bad. It falls apart on two counts. One god is love not evil. Two no else's bad behavior (for those that believe god is bad) is an excuse for us to be bad.

      January 14, 2013 at 8:29 am |
  6. jbazingo

    lenojames: We are getting somewhere. I think you have a well formed and thoughtful response. I don't know how that gives you the right to kill babies, but I can connect the dots in your logic. God, you're mean, so I can be mean. Basically, if I am following you. I think God will take self-proclaimed "Christians" to task that do really bad things and act poorly for giving him a bad rap. And I especially think pastors and priests that lie about the nature of God and/or do really bad things that give God a bad rap will have a lot to answer for. 1.2 million babies were aborted in the US in 2011. That's a lot of baby killing. I personally don't believe in hell. I don't believe that God, who is supposed to be just, would punish someone for even a million years for all of the crap they might have pulled in 70 years much less infinity. I am really down on organized religion and I am down on how people professing to live a Godly life, Christian or otherwise, can do to other people the things we see on TV everyday.

    Personally, I don't subscribe to the your mean, so I can be mean response. I saw Jack Reacher last night. Good movie. The prisoner has a similar response of f everyone because of what has happened to me.

    1.2 million in the US alone. Collectively, America was wounded in Newtown. Keeping multiplying that over and over and over to get to the death and destruction caused by Plan Parenthood. It is a big enough number for me to come out and tangle with pro-death advocates.

    I hope you all will reconsider your views. I hope you can all find a reason to value life with a higher multiplier than you have tonight.

    January 14, 2013 at 12:11 am |
    • Kyle

      70% of conceptions are aborted before birth through no deliberate act by doctor or mother. That makes god the biggest abortionist on the planet. As for this article, maybe you can explain the moral difference between giving money to an insurance company that employees MAY use in order to receive contraception, and the company giving money to the employee that they in turn use to get contraception or an abortion?

      January 14, 2013 at 3:15 am |
  7. Reality

    Condoms are available over the counter and cost almost less than 50 cents/ea. Make the Pill (type dependent on doctor’s evaluation) available over the counter and there will be no more debate. Planned Parenthood can offer deep discounts for those who say they cannot afford said protection.

    Or better yet, put a pack of condoms and a box of Pills in cereal boxes. Unfortunately, that would not ensure the condoms and/or Pills would be used. Based on Guttmacher Insti-tute data, said condoms and/or Pills are currently not being used as they should. (one million abortions/yr and 19 million cases of S-TDs/yr because either the daily Pill was not taken or a condom stayed in the pocket.)

    Maybe selling Pill-enriched sodas??? Hmmm?

    Condom-fitted briefs for men?? Hmmm?

    The door is open for other ideas!!!

    January 14, 2013 at 12:03 am |
    • Reality

      Oops, drop the "almost" in the first sentence.

      January 14, 2013 at 12:06 am |
  8. Owner of private company can do what he wants

    Why can't the owner of a private company object? It's no different than the people who wouldn't go to Vietnam to fight a war.

    January 13, 2013 at 11:42 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      Because companies and individuals have to follow the laws written by congress. duh

      January 13, 2013 at 11:45 pm |
    • Circles.

      Good point . . . they were criminals, and many went to jail, as Muhammad Ali did. Some got amnesty later, and some got conscientious objector status.

      But this is business law, there is nothing conscientious to object to, and there ain't gonna be no amnesty.

      Terrible analogy, bud.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:45 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Owner of private company can do what he wants

      You said, "Why can't the owner of a private company object?"
      They can object. They can, as Hobby Lobby did, go to court if they think they have a case.

      You said, "It's no different than the people who wouldn't go to Vietnam to fight a war."
      Hardly. It's more like a company not wanting to pay minimum wage, or provide restrooms for their employees, or demand their female employees cover their heads.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:46 pm |
    • Reality

      Some nitty-gritty:

      "Twenty-one states offer exemptions from contraceptive coverage, usually for religious reasons, for insurers or employers in their policies: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan (administrative rule), Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas and West Virginia."

      http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/insurance-coverage-for-contraception-state-laws.aspx

      January 14, 2013 at 12:05 am |
  9. Panties

    I have a huge supply of Viagra and I need to find a young woman who wants to be pregnant.

    January 13, 2013 at 11:40 pm |
    • Panties

      Don't be bashful, ladies. Let me hear from you.

      January 14, 2013 at 12:08 am |
  10. nomad2003

    it just amazes me, there is a law that tax dollars can not pay for abortions, yet the government can make a law forcing others to pay for abortions...

    January 13, 2013 at 11:30 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      No one is doing any such thing.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:32 pm |
    • LinCA

      @nomad2003

      You said, "it just amazes me, there is a law that tax dollars can not pay for abortions"
      Well, let's fix that. I propose we implement universal healthcare immediately and include full abortion coverage.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:38 pm |
  11. jbazingo

    Can even ONE of you pro-death advocates provide a "recommended" response to use IF there is a God, and IF someday said God stands you up and asks you, "Why are you killing my babies and who gave you that right?"

    God can instantly restore the 10 of millions of babies that have been "aborted". You will be stuttering and crying and begging. I actually believe he is a kind and caring and forgiving being, and I don't believe in hell, but for some heinous criminals, like baby killers, I wish there was. I know love your enemy. Forgive one another. It's that baby killers just really cause me outrage.

    Don't worry guys, I have to go to work. I won't keep pressing you to defend your baby killing beliefs. I know you don't have an answer today, and I know you won't have an answer on judgement day. Maybe someday I will be able to pray that you can be forgiven. I know that a forgiven people should be the first to forgive.

    The thing is you baby killers never ask for forgiveness. You only want more baby killing. I wish that wasn't the case.

    You know what would have been nice? If your mothers that aborted you. Problem solved.

    January 13, 2013 at 11:14 pm |
    • Name

      Yea yea, dead babies. What about all the dead people who were killed because of wars which are supported by the same people who scream and cry about the dead babies?

      January 13, 2013 at 11:25 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      So you DO approve of choice! Good to know–although I see you only approve of abortion and only if you get to make the decision for someone else.

      Thanks for playing, bean-brain.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:26 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      Imagine how much bawling and squawking we'd hear about "persecution" and "hate" if an atheist had said that it would have been "nice" if their mother had aborted them? WWJD, amiright?

      January 13, 2013 at 11:29 pm |
    • jbazingo

      Terrible !!! I don't support wars or the death penalty. I take you don't have defense either. You pro-death baby killers sound like my two kids when I give one a chore, the first thing they always say is what about (sib's name). How come I have to do it? Such a childish response from adults though. I ask for a useful defense and I get what about this other problem, or you can't spell. It's just a question. How would you answer to God for this, IF there is a God, and IF he holds us accountable for our actions (especially if they are heinous)? What is Plan-B?

      January 13, 2013 at 11:32 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      What's your problem? You're the one who said that I should have been aborted. Obviously, you DO approve of abortion, just as long as YOU get to decide who gets aborted and when.

      Sounds like you're the one who'll have to answer to your god on "judgement" day, dearie.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:37 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      If your god asked me any questions about my morality I'd tell him to svck my fat c0ck. What an azzhole he his murdering a whole planet's worth of people in the flood and torturing people for all eternity in a pit of fire!! Should we all take about a week or two to imagine a character more disgusting and evil than that? Good luck trying.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:38 pm |
    • lenojames

      I have the perfect response to god in this case...

      "Because you were not just unclear in the rules you made. You directly disobeyed your own rules yourself. And aside from the angry rantings from your followers, you provided no reason for me to think that you ever existed at all! You can punish me for not believing in you, but you certainly can't BLAME me for not believing in you!"

      January 13, 2013 at 11:41 pm |
    • Circles.

      @jbazingo – Honestly, if God is the cruel vengeful judgemental being the bible and his followers make him out to be, and if all the biblical rules apply as Jesus says they do, then you need to worry too. Of course, God himself has a lot of explaining to do for his many sins and cruelties, so hopefully God is an atheist who never meets his angry creator either.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:42 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      I am having more fun watching Moby and leno rip jbaz to shreds than I've had all day. Thanks to both of you. Nobody could have deserved it more.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:43 pm |
    • pink rainbow

      It is wrong to judge another unless you have stood in their shoes.
      You have NO idea what goes through ones mind when they make such a decision unless you have been their yourself. You just assume that such a decision is made in carelessness, haste, selfishness and lack of respect for life. You are sorely wrong my friend. You say "baby killers" should ask for forgiveness yet you can't seem to forgive yourself? Do you really think you will find heaven your way to heaven that way?

      January 13, 2013 at 11:52 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Well, Bazinga? Got any brilliant retorts? No? Good.

      January 14, 2013 at 12:08 am |
    • Damocles

      @tom

      Nooooo... don't use bazinga for this person. I like that word! :)

      January 14, 2013 at 12:20 am |
    • Larry L

      @jbazingo

      Can even ONE of you pro-death advocates provide a "recommended" response to use IF there is a God, and IF someday said God stands you up and asks you, "Why are you killing my babies and who gave you that right?"
      ===================================================================================================
      I'd say who the hell are you and why do you look like Willie Nelson? What gives you the right to claim them as "your babies" when you, old Omnipotent One, haven't shown your face for over two thousand years! We could used some help here! We've had millions of children dying from starvation, war, pestilence, and neglect the whole time and what did you do to help? Don't give us that crap about "choice". You ostensibly stuck us here and you created our environment. Was it just a big game to you? Like a kid with an ant farm? So when I can't feed anymore mouths because you caused a drought, or wouldn't stop a senseless war, or you were just too busy guiding some football through the uprights don't give me your self-righteous "voice of God". It's the voice of an absentee father who is all about fear and pain – not love and mercy. If you wanted the fetus saved you should have done something. Open the skies and say "hey" you with the coat hanger... put that thing down or I'll smite the living crap outta you. That would work! Otherwise this whole thing looks like a bunch of fearful, sanctimonious, over-zealous Jesus freaks making up stuff as they go along.

      How's that?

      January 14, 2013 at 12:27 am |
    • small 'c' christian

      You're a guy, right? Ever notice how the most strident voices against "baby-killers" are the ones who will never, ever have to deal with being assaulted?

      Just like the heads of many fundamentalist organizations, men making decisions for women. Just like the ones who chose which books to include in the Bible they are so fond of quoting.

      Odd, isn't it?

      January 14, 2013 at 4:22 am |
  12. JRD

    If this is a health decision, how do drugs like the morning after pill improve ones health or address health issues? From what I have read these are the types of drugs they are refusing to cover, not regular contraception.

    January 13, 2013 at 10:58 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      It is contraception, and it prevents pregnancy when a woman has been r aped or when other birth control has failed.

      Would you rather the woman just get an abortion later?

      January 13, 2013 at 11:01 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      Irrelevant. The company, not being an individual, has no "religious rights" and must follow the laws set forth by congress. Health care decisions are between a patient and his doctor.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:01 pm |
    • lenojames

      @Moby, Remember, this is the time of Citizens United. A corportation is a person, so a corporation can choose a religion.

      Of course, Texas STILL hasn't executed a corporation yet, but that's not withstanding.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:06 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      I'm not a lawyer, but I'm betting that a company claiming to be "christian scientist" could not beg off obeying the laws because of religious exemption.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:23 pm |
  13. jbazingo

    I guess Tom, Tom, The Piper's Son cannot come up with a winning defense for destroying babies to use when standing before God. Real nice. Never consider the consequences and never figure out who will pay the piper's bill when it comes due. Perfect display of an an#s that can speak. Further proof that all things are possible.

    January 13, 2013 at 10:56 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Says the dink who can't figure out the difference between "here" and "hear" or between the morning-after pill and abortion.

      I can only hope you don't have any children. That would be a real crime.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:59 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      By the way, poe, you're not very good at hiding your identi ty. You make a really lousy troll.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:03 pm |
    • lenojames

      "Destroying babies?"
      "Standing before god?"

      If any of that was based in reality, there would be no issue.

      Hobby Lobby's "religious freedom" is just a desire to use their religion to control someone else's freedom.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:03 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      God's existence is irrelevant since he can't be verified by any measurement. If the space ship parked in my garage is invisible and undetectable, then it really doesn't matter if it's actually there. Same thing with god. He probably doesn't exist, but if he does, he certainly wants us to believe he doesn't.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:03 pm |
  14. Edwin

    As a liberal, I think it is ridiculous to levy fines before their court appeals are exhausted. They have a legitimate grievance, which I think will ultimately go AGAINST them. But while the case is under appeals, they should be able to continue as they have been going.

    The fact that they found a tax loophole is not surprising, and it actually makes the whole court process more reasonable. Until the highest court pushes down a verdict, they should be allowed to avoid paying fines.

    January 13, 2013 at 10:46 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      What's legitimate about their claim? They're not a religious organization. They don't have a leg to stand on.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:47 pm |
  15. JRD

    I dont think this is really about contraception like many posting want to believe. This is about drugs like the moring after pill, in their terms "abortion inducing drugs"
    From the article
    The lawsuit says the companies' religious beliefs prohibit them from providing insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs. As of August 2012, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, dubbed Obamacare, requires employer-provided health care plans to provide "all Food and Drug Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity," according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    January 13, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
    • Joseph Schmoe

      No, this isn't about any of that. It's about so-called "Christians" who can't stand the fact that there's a liberal black man in the White House. So anything they can do to try to thwart his policies, they'll do.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:35 pm |
    • JRD

      So your disagreement with them is not based on any principle, only on the fact that they disagree with the president?

      January 13, 2013 at 10:50 pm |
    • richierichinrstlouis

      Joseph Schmoe and any other hacks who mindlessly accuse those who disagree with Obama's policies as being against them due to "his race", need to grow up.

      They are a pathetic excuse for citizenry. They, like their hero, would rather preside over a hollow, divided country rather than accept that anyone else's views could be respected.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:08 pm |
  16. jbazingo

    What are you baby killers going to tell God when he asks you to defend you actions?

    RvW?
    My Body?
    I didn't think you really cared?
    I'm really don't believe in you?
    It is a fetus, not a life?

    January 13, 2013 at 10:31 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Funny, didn't your god kill babies, women, and fetuses? Seems to me you're the one who needs an education before you start lecturing others, dink.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:33 pm |
    • Joseph Schmoe

      See, you're making the incorrect assumption that everybody shares your religious beliefs, and we don't. It's just that simple. I don't have a uterus, and I've never had an abortion. So what does that have to do with business? Religion is fine, but it has no place in business. Period.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:34 pm |
    • jbazingo

      Whether you believe or not or whether you have a uterus or not? If God exists, and you stand before him in judgement. What are you going to say? Zoinks? Dink? Plead the 5th? If any of your mouthy pro-death advocates can't come up with something better than a Nuremberg defense, well, I guess that's going to be a problem ... assuming there really is a God that is. If there is however, you might want to spend a few nights in mock trial coming up with something better than "dink". Hah-hah. That, your God and and you killed people, I don't think is going to do very well. Fail. Dink.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:38 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      I HAVE a uterus, and I've never had nor sought an abortion, but I know damn well and good that HL is breaking the law. I don't need to answer to your god for a thing, bazingus, so stick that up your fundament.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:40 pm |
    • jbazingo

      I am hoping Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son, can educate me and in doing so, develop a winning defense that all pro-death baby killers can use on judgement day.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:41 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      "I'm really don't believe in you"?

      What are you, Swedish?

      You're a dink, bazingus.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:42 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Educate you? I'd be more successful educating a fvcking slug and would have more fun doing so.

      Get a clue, dink, not everyone believes your idea of god is the end-all and be-all, and I doubt any god worth a damn would have the time of day for a bozo like you.

      And unless you're a Brit or Canadian, it's "judgment."

      January 13, 2013 at 10:45 pm |
    • jbazingo

      I think you might think of how you advocated for murder of innocent babies and will drop to your knees and beg for mercy. I think baby killers are breaking God's law. There is a higher court than SOCTUS. God is not going to defer to SCOTUS for for an opinion on when life begins. He knit each one of us in our mother's womb. He knew exactly what our faces would look like and what our laughter would sound like before we were born. For the most vociferous advocates, and for the baby killing doctors and their assistants, I think there will be a harsh day of reckoning. God can easlly restore each one of the lives, 10 of millions, that have been destroyed and thrown into garbage cans by the pro-death baby killers. Then he will make you stand up, and deliver your defense.

      Let's here it. Nuremberg. Just remember that. I hope you sleep real good tonight.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:48 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You imbecile, nobody is killing any babies. You're daft as the rest of the thumpers. This is about preventing pregnancy, and if any of you pompous, sanctimonious blowhards would learn to read, you'd figure that out.

      Honestly, you deserve more epithets, but I'm tired and you're not even worthy of the effort or the bandwidth, you brain-dead idiot.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:51 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      It's "hear," you fvcking numbskull.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:52 pm |
    • Dave

      Women expel hundreds of unfertilized eggs throughout their lifetime, and yet you're not crying about how god designed women to deny life. And most conservatives are only pro-life up to the point of birth. After that, it's fair game. War? Death is just part of life. Sickness? If you can't afford insurance, that's too bloody bad. You have to pull yourself up by your bootstraps. Seems I see a lot of people just tugging on their shoelaces. And abortion? Nope, you have to take care of that baby. My god gave you the gift of life, you have to deal with it until they die from sickness or they can fight in a war.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:54 pm |
    • jbazingo

      At any point, you can stop attacking me and just give us your retarded defense. What is it? I happen to be opposed to war and the death penalty. I and I saw that I had typed here instead of hear just after I hit enter, but the bottom line is you don't have a f-ing defense. You are the f-ing idiot. Sleep well. You are setting yourself up for a really bad (judgement) day. Good luck.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:01 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Yawn. Your proxy threats are useless, honey. I don't believe in your version of god or hell or heaven, so you can knock of the dull repartee. As for sleeping well, I will certainly do so, knowing idiots like you abound and will always resort to threats because you're completely impotent without them.

      I don't need a defense; I haven't done anything wrong unless tearing you a new one is a sin. If it is, I'll have plenty of company, as you've been handed your ass about a dozen times on these blogs. You're so embarrassed about it you have to change your name every day you come here.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:07 pm |
    • richierichinrstlouis

      What Joseph Schmoe really means is that should you disagree with me on moral/ethical grounds you have no right to hold that view. Furthermore, if folks like him, through the cowardice of hiding behind our public servants, say that you should be forced to go against your principles, that you should just deal with it. Who is the intolerant one here Mr. Schmoe? I notice that you aren't actually using a name.

      The government in the first place should not have the right to force anyone to buy insurance and force businesses to pay for it. Furthermore, should you own a company, you should not be forced to, through means of owning your own company to violate your core moral/ethical principles. They aren't failing to hire/promote based on race, religion, or gender–which are considered unfair due to permanence or core values. Nor are they refusing to sell based on those, so you need to get over forcing your values on others.

      If I company wants (or doesn't want) to cover indirectly through insurance for optional lifestyle choices, that is their prerogative, NOT YOURS.

      I'm Rich Shepard and I am willing to debate without hiding behind a phony name.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:20 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Blow it out your ass.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:27 pm |
  17. Joseph Schmoe

    Bully for them. I can always vote with my wallet – which is one reason I've never stepped foot into a Hobby Lobby, and I'm not about to start now. Just because the company is run by "Christians" (note quotes), that doesn't mean all their employees share their religious convictions. Business is business; religion is religion.

    January 13, 2013 at 10:30 pm |
    • richierichinrstlouis

      That's fine, but you have no right to tell them how to run their business, just as they have no right to tell you what you can or cannot do in your personal life.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:21 pm |
    • small 'c' christian

      Exactly, so what gives them the right to discriminate against a group of employees simply because they do not follow the same belief system as the owners? Why is that legal?

      January 14, 2013 at 4:11 am |
  18. tannim

    Until one of their buildings grows legs and goes to church, it doesn't have religious beliefs and religious freedoms. It is an organization and a business, not an individual, and as such it lacks the sentience and consciousness required to have beliefs.

    Because of that, Hobby Lobby's suit is simply frivolous.

    If they want the religious exemption, they can reincorporate as a non-profit church.

    January 13, 2013 at 10:25 pm |
    • Joseph Schmoe

      Egggggggg-zactly. Any business that has to advertise its religiosity doesn't want my business very much. I don't care if it's "Christian", Buddhist, or shamanistic, you don't need to advertise your religion to try to get my business. And if you do, you can count on *not* getting any of my business. Religion is a deeply personal thing, and it has *no* place in the business world.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
    • richierichinrstlouis

      You have no right to tell them how to run their business, just as they have no right to tell you what are acceptable lifestyle choices. If they as a business, owned by people do not want their money used in such a way that contradicts their moral/ethical principal, they should not be forced to.

      What are you going to do next force kids running the lemonade stand at the neighbor's house to supply your lifestyle choice needs if they let you help them? Yes, I can already here the complaint–comparing apples and oranges. No, in each case, they are their to make a profit and in each case they are owned by individuals, directly or indirectly.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:26 pm |
  19. gloria P

    I stand behind Hobby Lobby 100%. They close their stores on one of the biggest sale days of the week to promote the family, and to keep holy their day. They are a privately held company, no stock holders to please. They put their money where their mouth is. If an employee has an problem with this they can find employment elsewhere, Kind of a no brainer!

    January 13, 2013 at 10:25 pm |
    • Ellen Barks

      I agree with you Gloria...Hobby Lobby is not telling their employees they can’t use birth control (ie pills, surgeries or abortion)..they are only refusing to become complicit in it by paying for those services. The employees can do as they wish privately but should not expect Hobby Lobby to go against their beliefs to pay for it. All other health care is provided for their employees.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:40 pm |
    • DougNJ

      And a company owned and run by a church of christ scientist will have an insurance plan containing NO coverage on account they do not believe in doctors interfering with god's will.

      January 13, 2013 at 10:57 pm |
    • richierichinrstlouis

      DougNJ, that is exactly the point. It is not your or the government's prerogative to tell whom should or should not provide healthcare in the first place. Why not have companies be required to provide transportation to people after all, everyone needs transportation? Why not have companies provide a place for people to live, after all, everyone needs a place to live. Same thing with clothes and food.

      I hesitate to even suggest that because "fellow travelers" probably would agree that failing the government running all sectors of the economy/country, businesses should be a tool by which the government should take care of its people.

      January 13, 2013 at 11:32 pm |
  20. maria

    I'm on your side Hobby Lobby!

    January 13, 2013 at 10:20 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke and Eric Marrapodi with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team.