Hobby Lobby HYPOCRITES exposed by Mother Jones!

Well I know this family personally and  they are not "unscrupulous" and are far more rooted in their religious beliefs that the hypocrite who posted this tripe.  Contenduh, you claim to be a Chrisitian and involved in your church, but for the life of me I do not understand your exhibiton of your beliefs at all.  Exactly what kind of church is it that you are supposed to be affiliated with?.  This family is not trying to avoid providing for their employees.  Their only complaint was that three of the meds the AHA mandates is contrary to their religious beliefs and they do not want to provide them.  The employees are not complaining, they are happy with the perks they get and the other 20 BC methods that are being provided.  Liberal scoundrels like yourself and women libbers are trying to force the government to mandate certain forms of BC that may be considered controversial to some in an effort to further cloud the waters in later court decisions, and these people should not be forced to provide the funds for them.

This case is about much more than simple contraceptive access, but nincom****s such as yourself cannot see the forest for the Liberal rainbow colored trees.  You ought to be on your knees asking God to forgive you for being such a social azz and forget about what this family is doing. Perhaps if you are lucky you can spend some time in eternity with them.

Hi Teyates,

You ask, "Contenduh, you claim to be a Christian and involved in your church -- but for the life of me I do not understand your exihibiton of your beliefs at all.   Exactly what kind of church is it that you are supposed to be affiliated with?"

I have been asking that question for eons, "Contendah, what church are you affiliated with, where do you worship God?"    And, the silence has been deafening!    That is, except from a few of my "Friends" -- who castigate me for even asking.

Personally, I have no problem telling folks where I worship, nor even the churches in which I dabbled for many years before becoming a Christian believer.   But, poor old Contendah's mouth is clamped tighter than a bear trap.

But, maybe Contendah himself has provided us a solution.  He tells us in his post above that the source of his earth shattering exposé on the Hobby Lobby family is from:  "the nation's finest source of  investigative journalism--the incomparable MOTHER JONES Magazine!"

Do you think we could get them to do an exposé on Contendah and his church affiliation?

As I have written in my newest discussion titled "Dialogue With A Preterist Amillennial Forum Friend" and posted last night:

I say that he appears to hold the belief of Preterism and Amillennialism -- because he will not tell us where he worships or exactly what theology that church teaches.  But, from his past comments on the Religion Forum he does seem to lean in that direction.  I do know that he is strongly in the camp of "separation of church and state" and believes that all government should be totally secular.

Yet, I do not believe even Mother Jones could get Contendah to fess up about the church he attends; he is too embarrassed to tell.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

I don't read mother jones, contendah. Did they expose the HYPOCRITE leland yew, or even mention his name?? I was waiting for all your threads denouncing him, but I guess you were too busy digging up dirt on hobby lobby to worry about a state senator running guns. Let me stir up the fire ants here-how about this-they might try finding a man, a real man to sleep with that would be willing to provide it. Seems to me if they think she's worth sleeping with she should be worth the cost of a condom. "Stay out of our bedrooms" they all yell. Hey, I'd love to, that's the last place I want to be, so stop trying to drag us in there. If your insurance doesn't pay for it, buy your own darn bc.

___

If you personally know this family, then you should tell them that they need to move with the speed of summer lightning and divest that retirement fund of any investments that support firms manufacturing the devices and nostrums that they claim to object to.

If that family can claim exemption from providing insurance that offers established, conventional birth control methods, some of which they object to, then how long will it be before some Jehovah's Witness-run company insists that its religious principles also must be respected and that they should not be required to offer employees health insurance that pays for blood transfusions? This is not wild speculation; precedents like this one are threatening.  

Hobby Lobby needs to pay better attention to what it is investing in and thereby avoid getting caught in such a glaring inconsistency as Mother Jones has now exposed.

_______________

can someone tell me how it's not hypocritical to PERSONALLY INVEST in stock of the MANUFACTURES of these 'abortion pills'?

Contendah pulled a "bill" and ignored this part of teyates post.

Their only complaint was that three of the meds the AHA mandates is contrary to their religious beliefs and they do not want to provide them.  The employees are not complaining, they are happy with the perks they get and the other 20 BC methods that are being provided.  Liberal scoundrels like yourself and women libbers are trying to force the government to mandate certain forms of BC that may be considered controversial to some in an effort to further cloud the waters in later court decisions, and these people should not be forced to provide the funds for them.

my question still stands.. after the report from bizarro world.

From the article:

"These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella. Other holdings in the mutual funds selected by Hobby Lobby include Pfizer, the maker ofCytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions; Bayer, which manufactures the hormonal IUDs Skyla andpc:ggl:brbrd:2844&mkwid=sgIYOuuD2">Mirena; AstraZeneca, which has an Indian subsidiary that manufactures Prostodin, Cerviprime, and Partocin, three drugs commonly used in abortions; and Forest Laboratories, which makes Cervidil, a drug used to induce abortions. Several funds in the Hobby Lobby retirement plan also invested in Aetna and Humana, two health insurance companies that cover surgical abortions, abortion drugs, and emergency contraception in many of the health care policies they sell.

In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, the Greens object to covering Plan B, Ella, and IUDs because they claim that these products can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's uterus—a process the Greens consider abortion. But researchers reject the notionthat emergency contraceptive pills prevent implantation the implantation of a fertilized egg. Instead, they work by delaying ovulation or making it harder for sperm to swim to the egg. (Copper IUDs, which are also a form of birth control, can prevent implantation.) The Green's contention that the pills cause abortions is a central pillar of their argument for gutting the contraception mandate. Yet, for years, Hobby Lobby's health insurance plans did cover Plan B and Ella. It was only in 2012, when the Greens considered filing a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act, that they dropped these drugs from the plan."

Anyone that doesn't see the hypocrisy of this is blind or a Republican. Come on! This has nothing to do with their religious beliefs. This is all about their opposition to the ACA. 

_____________

Apparently both you and Teyates completely ignored the facts and are trying to divert this discussion away from said facts.

Can't argue with you Crash. 

i also have a retirement plan similar to this. We define the areas that we want to invest in and the management company picks the stocks to buy. For example if I choose real estate, the management company will then identify stock options that will garner the best results.

There is a lesson here for me.  For example, my management company may be investing in a flipping Wal Mart development.........arrrrrrghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!

thanks Ubu.. nice to see you around!

I did not read every word of the long winded posts.  Apparently there is 23 types of birth control and Hobby Lobby is against 3 of them.  In simple language would someone please tell me what the 3 is and what the 20 is

First off, if you own ANY mutual funds you probably don't know every comapny in that fund, and second I don't take the liberal rag of Mother Jones to heart when I am looking for information.  Like I said previously this is not about not providing access to BC, they are providing it.  Three of the 23 drugs listed in the AHA requirements are drugs which are typically used to prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum.  If you believe as they do that life begins at conception then this drug is considered to be an abortifacient, regardless of its categorical delineation.  Why do you think that the people picking these meds insisted that these three be put on the formulary?  They could have easily made those three drugs elective on the formulary and avoided the whole ordeal, but they have a point to prove.  Fortunately the Greens have the lawyers and money to fight it and bring it a decision to show whether the SCOTUS is actually going to uphold the right of religious freedom for ALL.

that's right.. ignore the facts.. and stick with the talking points that support your religion/politics. if you took the time to read the facts.. you'd see how this has nothing to do with religion. as usual, put your head in the sand and criticize the AHA. it's the conservative way.

IF ANYBODY is putting their heads in the sand it is the idiots who supported and continue to support this bill.  There is no reason that the bill should mandate the type of BC that is required.  Why not just say "some form or method of BC must be included in the forumalry" instead of spcifically identifying three drugs that were known to be offensive to certain groups? Huh Crash?  Why specifically include these three when 20 others are already there? Why not omit these three drugs instead of spending millions to defend a suit  to prove a point?

why 'have an issue now'? why not the past 20  years they've been paying for it? why open a store in a state that mandates healthcare, including said BC? they may have you fooled, but not the rest of the country. you can keep playing the hypocrite.. we'll keep laughing.

Here’s hoping you heatherns don’t run off hobby lobby. Most of my stuff I buy there.

I didn't realize they sold tampons.............

incvi, the total sum of what you realize can be expressed by dividing what a jackazz knows about algebra by the speed of light in a vacuum.

___

The content of a formulary is established in anticipation that there will be a multiplicity of insured person with a diversity of needs and preferences.  ALL of the drugs and devices in the insurance formularies are LEGAL and are FDA-approved and in common use in medical practices.  Whether or not the "bill" to which you refer mandates inclusion of these birth control materials, it is highly probable that insurance companies participating in the ACA would include them anyway.  If Hobby Lobby employees agree with the beliefs of the Green family, then they will exercise their personal freedom of religion and make their own personal choices in the matter.will reject such birth control medications and devices that are contrary to those beliefs and choose other options. But they do not need their personal freedom of religion choices dictated by their employer. Are the moguls of Hobby Lobby concerned that their fine ethical, religiously conservative  employees are covert abortionists who prefer the "arbortifacient" versions of birth control  Is that why Hobby Lobby wants to exercise  religious belief control upon their 13,000 employees?

___

You make a rather all-encompassing statement, teyates:

"The employees are not complaining, they are happy with the perks they get and the other 20 BC methods that are being provided."

And have YOU taken a poll of those 13,000 employees to ascertain that none of them would prefer to be able to select the medications and devices that their employers object to.

How's that third childhood working for you there toilet drinker, does billie

still let you borrow his blow up G.I. Joe doll..??.........No?.......awwwww.

You are the one being fooled.  HL's insurance never paid for those items before the mandate knowingly.  The good thing about the mandate was that it allowed companies to actually see what they were being forced to pay for.  Sorry your argument doesn't hold water, so answer my question....why try to force these companies to provide three forms of BC, when there were at least 20 others on the formulary?

No Contenduh, I have not taken a poll, but is it the employees who are complaining? If you look HL has one of the highest satisfaction rates of any company of their size and make.  They pay their employees above the minimum wage and provide good working hours, and are closed on Sunday.  You don't hear them complaining.

As to making up a formulary, I think I am quite versed in making up a formulary and your premise again does not hold much water. Few formularies take into account the diversity of their needs. What you try to do is to find the cheapest most effective medication to provide the desired effect and then you negoiate with the supplier as to ability to provide the amount necessary and the time frame to do it.

Like I said with 20 other different varieties of meds available, they chose these three for a reason and now want to spend millions defending a lawsuit and trying to make a point.  Only the ignorant savages would think otherwise that there is not more at play here. It was a subtle assault on those who they knew would dig in their heels against drugs that were associated with abortifacients.  if they could get them on the formulary, the next step would be easy, and then they could force the entire procedure on the next revision of the system.  It is a marathon, not a sprint, to get where they want to go.

and yet, they picked the companies that manufacture those exact 3 pills, to invest their money. again, how is that not hypocritical?

___

Don't expect that comment to register with teyates, since he is looking at the issue with a monocular. If he would spring for binoculars, he could see the entire picture in its full dimensions..

First off Contenduh, I read it and responded to it.  Like I said do you know every company in your mutual fund portfolio and what they make? Second, until I am told by that family themselves that they intentionally invested in that stock I have no reason to believe they did it knowingly.  Unlike you I will give them the benefit of the doubt since so far they have demonstrated that they actually walk their talk.

Before you bow down to the altar of Liberal Mother Jones, Huffington or some other media wannabe that has all of the answers you should acutally use a little common sense and try to reason and answer the question I ask you before....Why these three drugs?  What is so important about them that this administration thinks they MUST be present in any helathcare plan?

----

I wrote earlier:

"If you personally know this family, then you should tell them that they need to move with the speed of summer lightning and divest that retirement fund of any investments that support firms manufacturing the devices and nostrums that they claim to object to."

I am tentatively willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, although their own claims of scrupulosity before the Supreme Court would seem to establish a pretty darn strict standard of accountability for their investment portfolio if they really, truly want to absent themselves from all association with or implicit endorsement of those who manufacture and distribute the products to which they object. I reserve my final judgment, however, until I see whether they divest themselves of those contaminated investments in that retirement portfolio.

Well despite the fact that I know some of this family, I will refrain from giving them any of my investing tips, as they seem to be doing OK without my assistance.  But I assure you that if there is anything truthful about their money invested in something like that it will be taken care of as soon as they know.  These are the type of people who play "Christian" for the public and act a different way elsewhere.

__________________

either you made a freudian slip.. or a typo. ha!

Yep, a typo, should have been a big NOT there.  Thnak you for correcting that.  The granddaughter of mr. green is a family friend. She was maid of honor in my son's wedding, and the parents hosted us at their home.  They are not the type of people being made out in the media.  They are gracious, generous and love the work they do.  It is hard to hear people who know nothing about them talk trash about someone who has done nothing except strive to do the right thing. I have said my piece and will retire away from this section of the forum lest my blood pressure boil over.

SMH at the blatant hypocrisy of the left. If it wasn't so freaking scary and destructive, it would almost be funny. This is what stirs up contendah? Really? Notice too, contendah does the same thing bill always did, sure he still does when he's cornered, he just ignores the question. 

___

The only "questiobn" you could be referring to is, teyates', namely  "Like I said do you know every company in your mutual fund portfolio and what they make?"

That is a rhetorical question, but I have no difficulty answering it.  The answer is NO.  And as additional information, I make have made no claim before the Supreme Court to the effect that I hold very strong beliefs that are threatened by provisions of the ACA  and that, as testimony to that claim, I have been very scrupulous in identifying and avoiding participating in or otherwise supporting actions or programs that directly or indirectly conflict with those beliefs.  Hobby Lobby, assisted by presumably competent counsel, has made such a claim.