Posted on Jun 30, 2014
SFC Intelligence Analyst   Atl
21.7K
507
161
4
4
0
The Supreme Court backed Hobby Lobby in their challenge against the mandate to provide contraceptive care. What do you think.
Posted in these groups: Obamacare logo Obamacare2c8c4d26 Supreme Court
Avatar feed
See Results
Responses: 40
SSG General Services Technician And State Vehicle Inspector
9
9
0
Definitely agree. Spiritual beliefs notwithstanding, it is NOT proper to force others to to do things against their will or beliefs. It is not right for government to intrude on a person's spiritual beliefs. Just as I disagree with discriminating against ANY religious background, be it Muslim/Jewish/Buddhist/Atheist/Pagan/Wiccan/etc, I equally expect the same respect from others for my Christian faith. Discrimination is discrimination REGARDLESS of WHO does it.

To be clear, I will not tolerate idiotic statements by fellow Christians. And I WILL call them out on it too. Ridiculous verbage comes from ALL sides, aspects, ethnic backgrounds and gender. This is NOT to excuse ANY of it but to posit and encourage more rational objectivity instead of emotional subjectivity.
(9)
Comment
(0)
SSG Pod Load Technician
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
If you wanna have an abortion, go ahead. I shouldn't have to pay for it. Besides if people was to learn about the origins of abortion, they would think twice about them
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSG General Services Technician And State Vehicle Inspector
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
SSG (Join to see) , no doubt. The sad truth though is you can show people facts but you can't make them accept it or think rationally.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MSG(P) Michael Warrick
MSG(P) Michael Warrick
>1 y
Yes I do agree with the decision the supreme court made on the Hobby Lobby case.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Pod Load Technician
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
I agree 100% SSG Andres Redondo.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Maj Chris Nelson
7
7
0
My personal belief is this: The government is reaching WAY to far beyond what it should be to control private enterprise in this country. Part of looking for a job is to look at pay and benefits. If you do not like the benefit package (of which insurance is part of it), you can either negotiate for something else OR look at a different company. The Contraceptive care that is most under fire is "morning after pills" and not as much the daily birth control pills that everyone is familiar with (as far as I can tell anyway).
(7)
Comment
(0)
SSG General Services Technician And State Vehicle Inspector
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
Thumbs up
@MAJ Lupold, major uber thumbs up for that comment. Very well stated using scientific facts. Sadly, many will still dispute science even when it disproves their own methods.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Col Squadron Commander
Col (Join to see)
>1 y
I am not misusing, or disputing the science. Major Lupold, unlike you, I will not rush to judgement and make a rash and unprofessional statement regarding my discussion. Frankly as a PA I am surprised that you were not able to extrapulate my intention for using the articles to sustantiate my argument that people need to get the facts before rushing to judgement in assuming that the morning after pills are 1) abortive in nature 2) Prescribed for abortive effects 3) assume the mechanism of action is abortive in nature. None of the 3 points could be farther from the truth. I have attached link to a document that includes the RP thread between myself and Maj Ballinger to include inserted facts disputing his assumptions. My professional belief is that all patients, male and female need to be fully informed and educated prior to taking prescribed medications. It is not my position to debate prolife vs abortion, but to ensure that my patients make educated decisions. I will make a correction and Give Major Lupold his props. Yes I was incorrect in stating that ECPs do not affect a fertilized egg. However can ECPs cause the death of a fertilized egg? The mechanism of action article states : "Based on their studies on human and animals, some are tempted to conclude that there is no postfertilization effect [25]. It is unlikely that this question can ever be unequivocally answered, and we therefore cannot conclude that ECPs never prevent pregnancy after fertilization. Even if there were an accurate test for fertilization, a finding that some fertilized eggs do not implant after ECPs are taken would not mean that ECPs can work after fertilization, since many if not most fertilized eggs naturally do not implant. Nevertheless, even if in some cases ECPs work by inhibiting implantation of a fertilized egg, these probably would be outnumbered by other cases where fertilization of an egg that would not have implanted naturally is prevented because ECPs inhibited ovulation. Therefore, on balance, ECPs probably reduce the incidence of fertilized eggs that do not implant. ECPs do not interrupt an established pregnancy, defined by medical authorities such as the United States Food and Drug Administration/National Institutes of Health [26] and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [27] as beginning with implantation. Therefore, ECPs are not abortifacient." Major Lupold, read the whole passage and the whole article in its entirety. Lastly, I have attached a link to the detailed word document including Major B's and my discussion with the included facts for my statements.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/szu3qmat100kejm/Facts%20behind%20the%20post.docx
(0)
Reply
(0)
Col Squadron Commander
Col (Join to see)
>1 y
MAJ Carl Ballinger as I indicated previously, I made an incorrect statement. But thanks again for reminding me in your response. I was not condescending, nor am I seeking methodical credit, nor do I care about getting credit. In fact you also made incorrect statements such as "It is impossible to take a pill AFTER sex and the mechanism being to prevent ovulation." Not sure if you read document associated with our debate, but I did include the facts for my statements. Neither of us work for Hobby Lobby and thus should not attempt to justify an assumption behind their actions. The bottom line is not religion, insurance, or company decisions. The primary concern for me as the provider is the patient's ability to make an educated decision about their choices, and available treatments; then allow them to make their own decisions. Lastly, this is a great debate that demonstrates we all have our own opinions on controversial topics, and I respect that.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MSG(P) Michael Warrick
MSG(P) Michael Warrick
>1 y
Yes I do agree with the decision !
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Jerry Humphries
6
6
0
Yes because the government was deffently violating the 1st amendment. I am concerned about the 5-4 split in SCOTUS do to activist Justices who think our Constitutuon is a living document. As I read the responses here I understand why the current administration chooses to defund the Military and Veterains . The Vast Majority of us believe in the oaths we swore unlike our politicians.
(6)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close