Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Hobby Lobby hypocrisy.

Dilara
Posts: 661
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 4:28:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
No one Should be forced to pay for something that violated their religious views. They is against freedom of religion. It also pushes pro north control liberal views in other people.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,065
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 6:33:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/6/2015 4:46:00 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

1. Just because the company in question produces abortifacients doesn't mean that's all they produce.
2. The source was pretty blatantly a Liberal talk show thing, so it's likely that it doesn't tell the whole story.
3. Even if it were undeniably hypocritical, Hobby Lobby would still have the right to not provide contraceptives on religious grounds.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
SitaraMusica
Posts: 1,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.
SitaraMusica
Posts: 1,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2015 6:27:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 4:28:18 PM, Dilara wrote:
No one Should be forced to pay for something that violated their religious views. They is against freedom of religion. It also pushes pro north control liberal views in other people.
Freedom of religion is not the right to force religion on people. If women want to prevent a pregnancy, they have that right. Workers should be compensated for their labor.
SitaraMusica
Posts: 1,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2015 6:31:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 6:33:42 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:46:00 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

1. Just because the company in question produces abortifacients doesn't mean that's all they produce.
2. The source was pretty blatantly a Liberal talk show thing, so it's likely that it doesn't tell the whole story.
3. Even if it were undeniably hypocritical, Hobby Lobby would still have the right to not provide contraceptives on religious grounds.
Snobby Lobby is hypocrital because they claim to be against abortion and contraception while at the same time they invest in these things.
Daffypuck
Posts: 29
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 8:58:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
OK, theyre hypocritical. What does that have to do with them not providing certain drugs in their healthcare package? Regardless of their moral standing, a company can pick and choose what they provide in terms of benefits. If I employee you and decide, as a benefit, to give you a $500 bonus each month and vision insurance, then after 5 years I decide to drop both benefits, that's my prerogative. That bonus and vision coverage was not a "RIGHT." It was something I chose to do out of the goodness of my heart, or to keep up with the competitive nature of the corporate world. Hobby Lobbys decision to cut a few drugs from their health coverage is neither wrong, anyones business and most importantly, doesn't infringe on a womans rights.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 11:17:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.

First, a 401(k) is not the company's money, per se, it is the employee's. But it is a bit muddy.
Second, I wasn't aware that Pfizer was known for, and solely produced, abortion products. That's like saying a vegetarian cannot eat at any restaurant that serves meat.
SitaraMusica
Posts: 1,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 2:25:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/13/2015 11:17:50 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.

First, a 401(k) is not the company's money, per se, it is the employee's. But it is a bit muddy.
Second, I wasn't aware that Pfizer was known for, and solely produced, abortion products. That's like saying a vegetarian cannot eat at any restaurant that serves meat.
First, if Snobby Lobby is going to claim to be against abortion and contraception, they would be hypocritical to inverst in these things. Second, there is nothing wrong with contraception. Snobby Lobby is just another hypocritical religious group that wants to control people.
SitaraMusica
Posts: 1,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 2:32:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/13/2015 8:58:31 AM, Daffypuck wrote:
OK, theyre hypocritical. What does that have to do with them not providing certain drugs in their healthcare package? Regardless of their moral standing, a company can pick and choose what they provide in terms of benefits. If I employee you and decide, as a benefit, to give you a $500 bonus each month and vision insurance, then after 5 years I decide to drop both benefits, that's my prerogative. That bonus and vision coverage was not a "RIGHT." It was something I chose to do out of the goodness of my heart, or to keep up with the competitive nature of the corporate world. Hobby Lobbys decision to cut a few drugs from their health coverage is neither wrong, anyones business and most importantly, doesn't infringe on a womans rights.
I respect your honesty. Did you watch the video? I would have more respect for them if they were not hypocrites.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 2:33:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/13/2015 2:25:17 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/13/2015 11:17:50 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.

First, a 401(k) is not the company's money, per se, it is the employee's. But it is a bit muddy.
Second, I wasn't aware that Pfizer was known for, and solely produced, abortion products. That's like saying a vegetarian cannot eat at any restaurant that serves meat.
First, if Snobby Lobby is going to claim to be against abortion and contraception, they would be hypocritical to inverst in these things.
Did you read what I said? Hobby Lobby is not investing in abortion and contraception (and Hobby Lobby does not have an issue with most contraception), the EMPLOYEES are investing in COMPANIES that have a product or two they disagree with. Employers do not make money on 401ks, so the term investing is used very loosely.
Again, would you say a vegetarian is a hypocrite for eating a salad at Burger King?

Second, there is nothing wrong with contraception.
This is irrelevant to the issue of hypocrisy.
Snobby Lobby is just another hypocritical religious group that wants to control people.
Yes, because refusing 4/22 of birth control methods to their employees is totally "wanting to control people". I bet if the employees went out and used those services, they'd be fired on the spot, too. (that is sarcasm)
The issue isn't control, it is in payment.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 8:16:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/13/2015 11:17:50 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.

First, a 401(k) is not the company's money, per se, it is the employee's. But it is a bit muddy.
Second, I wasn't aware that Pfizer was known for, and solely produced, abortion products. That's like saying a vegetarian cannot eat at any restaurant that serves meat.

Well to be fair, if the reason someone is vegetarian is because they oppose animal suffering, then eating at a restaurant that serves meat is helping that restaurant stay in business, which causes more animal suffering. So I would argue that yes, that is hypocritical.

Note that I fully support a private employer's right to pay for whatever health coverage they want to for their own employees. If you don't like the benefits they offer, work for a different company or buy your own plan.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 9:14:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/13/2015 8:16:10 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 2/13/2015 11:17:50 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.

First, a 401(k) is not the company's money, per se, it is the employee's. But it is a bit muddy.
Second, I wasn't aware that Pfizer was known for, and solely produced, abortion products. That's like saying a vegetarian cannot eat at any restaurant that serves meat.

Well to be fair, if the reason someone is vegetarian is because they oppose animal suffering, then eating at a restaurant that serves meat is helping that restaurant stay in business, which causes more animal suffering. So I would argue that yes, that is hypocritical.
I wouldn't call it hypocritical, but it isn't kosher, either. At some point, you have to be pragmatic. Should you not work for your meat-eating boss, since your labor earns him money for which he buys meat?
I don't know a word for it, but hypocritical is not it, and even less so for the case at hand.

Note that I fully support a private employer's right to pay for whatever health coverage they want to for their own employees. If you don't like the benefits they offer, work for a different company or buy your own plan.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 9:46:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/13/2015 9:14:06 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/13/2015 8:16:10 PM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 2/13/2015 11:17:50 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/11/2015 6:24:34 PM, SitaraMusica wrote:
At 2/6/2015 4:54:09 PM, jimtimmy4 wrote:
Where is the hypocrisy?

It is hypocritical to claim to be prolife while invesying in abortion products.

First, a 401(k) is not the company's money, per se, it is the employee's. But it is a bit muddy.
Second, I wasn't aware that Pfizer was known for, and solely produced, abortion products. That's like saying a vegetarian cannot eat at any restaurant that serves meat.

Well to be fair, if the reason someone is vegetarian is because they oppose animal suffering, then eating at a restaurant that serves meat is helping that restaurant stay in business, which causes more animal suffering. So I would argue that yes, that is hypocritical.
I wouldn't call it hypocritical, but it isn't kosher, either. At some point, you have to be pragmatic. Should you not work for your meat-eating boss, since your labor earns him money for which he buys meat?
I don't know a word for it, but hypocritical is not it, and even less so for the case at hand.

Right, so I think the distinction is whether or not you have a reasonable alternative to your actions. So if you're a vegetarian in a large city, it's pretty easy to find restaurants that don't serve meat. But if you live in a tiny town, maybe not so much. It's probably also pretty difficult to find a job anywhere where you aren't working for a boss who will use his earnings to buy meat.

I actually have no clue as to how this particular standard would apply to the Hobby Lobby investment decisions. I've heard people say there are mutual funds run by devout Christians who vet all their investments and make sure your money isn't going to anything you morally oppose. However I'm not very familiar with them and how they operate so I can't really say whether Hobby Lobby should have been using them or not.