hypocritexposer
Well-known member
Hobby Lobby won and unions cannot charge dues to those that do not want to be members...
backhoeboogie said:Somebody is fuming over this.
hypocritexposer said:Hobby Lobby won and unions cannot charge dues to those that do not want to be members...
Oldtimer said:I am a bit surprised on the union one- but definitely not disappointed... Their ruling is exactly the stance I've had on all unions forever... Back when I was on the School Board I felt the wrath of the teachers union when I opposed allowing them to go union shop and force a few long term teachers to join the union... I took the same stance when the Sheriff's Deputies went union...
While I support the right and the need for unions to exist- I don't support forcing anyone to join...
As far as the birth control issue in some ways this could be called a win for separation of church and state - altho as I read the ruling the Justices left it open for government/taxpayers to pick up the gap created by those companies that declare religious exemption and they would then still have to furnish the coverage... Just that they could not be forced to pay for that part of the insurance...
Sort of disappointed because I prefer to see taxpayers and companies support/pay for furnishing birth control and day after pills rather than paying for abortions a few months down the line...
Oldtimer said:I am a bit surprised on the union one- but definitely not disappointed... Their ruling is exactly the stance I've had on all unions forever... Back when I was on the School Board I felt the wrath of the teachers union when I opposed allowing them to go union shop and force a few long term teachers to join the union... I took the same stance when the Sheriff's Deputies went union...
While I support the right and the need for unions to exist- I don't support forcing anyone to join...
As far as the birth control issue in some ways this could be called a win for separation of church and state - altho as I read the ruling the Justices left it open for government/taxpayers to pick up the gap created by those companies that declare religious exemption and they would then still have to furnish the coverage... Just that they could not be forced to pay for that part of the insurance...
Sort of disappointed because I prefer to see taxpayers and companies support/pay for furnishing birth control and day after pills rather than paying for abortions a few months down the line...
TexasBred said:Oldtimer said:I am a bit surprised on the union one- but definitely not disappointed... Their ruling is exactly the stance I've had on all unions forever... Back when I was on the School Board I felt the wrath of the teachers union when I opposed allowing them to go union shop and force a few long term teachers to join the union... I took the same stance when the Sheriff's Deputies went union...
While I support the right and the need for unions to exist- I don't support forcing anyone to join...
As far as the birth control issue in some ways this could be called a win for separation of church and state - altho as I read the ruling the Justices left it open for government/taxpayers to pick up the gap created by those companies that declare religious exemption and they would then still have to furnish the coverage... Just that they could not be forced to pay for that part of the insurance...
Sort of disappointed because I prefer to see taxpayers and companies support/pay for furnishing birth control and day after pills rather than paying for abortions a few months down the line...
It has little to do with birth control and everything to do with religious freedom. :wink:
backhoeboogie said:There is the lady in Arkansas who had nine abortions!
OT, Please explain to this rightwingernut why she does not get some type of birth control.
Oldtimer said:I am a bit surprised on the union one- but definitely not disappointed... Their ruling is exactly the stance I've had on all unions forever... Back when I was on the School Board I felt the wrath of the teachers union when I opposed allowing them to go union shop and force a few long term teachers to join the union... I took the same stance when the Sheriff's Deputies went union...
While I support the right and the need for unions to exist- I don't support forcing anyone to join...
As far as the birth control issue in some ways this could be called a win for separation of church and state - altho as I read the ruling the Justices left it open for government/taxpayers to pick up the gap created by those companies that declare religious exemption and they would then still have to furnish the coverage... Just that they could not be forced to pay for that part of the insurance...
Sort of disappointed because I prefer to see taxpayers and companies support/pay for furnishing birth control and day after pills rather than paying for abortions a few months down the line...
Oldtimer said:I am a bit surprised on the union one- but definitely not disappointed... Their ruling is exactly the stance I've had on all unions forever... Back when I was on the School Board I felt the wrath of the teachers union when I opposed allowing them to go union shop and force a few long term teachers to join the union... I took the same stance when the Sheriff's Deputies went union...
While I support the right and the need for unions to exist- I don't support forcing anyone to join...
As far as the birth control issue in some ways this could be called a win for separation of church and state - altho as I read the ruling the Justices left it open for government/taxpayers to pick up the gap created by those companies that declare religious exemption and they would then still have to furnish the coverage... Just that they could not be forced to pay for that part of the insurance...
Sort of disappointed because I prefer to see taxpayers and companies support/pay for furnishing birth control and day after pills rather than paying for abortions a few months down the line...
If birth control were for men - they'd sell it at Starbucks in flavors like Cool Ranch and BBQ..
Oldtimer said:The best FB post I saw the other day (not even Borowitz)- when they were discussing if it was men that got pregnant and had babies :
If birth control were for men - they'd sell it at Starbucks in flavors like Cool Ranch and BBQ..
Some 204 outfits favored by Democrats were granted waivers by the president from ObamaCare, which means their employees do not have the right to employer provided birth control. These include upscale restaurant, nightclubs, and hotels in then-Speaker Pelosi’s district; labor union chapters; large corporations, financial firms, and local governments.
hypocritexposer said:Oldtimer said:The best FB post I saw the other day (not even Borowitz)- when they were discussing if it was men that got pregnant and had babies :
If birth control were for men - they'd sell it at Starbucks in flavors like Cool Ranch and BBQ..
Some 204 outfits favored by Democrats were granted waivers by the president from ObamaCare, which means their employees do not have the right to employer provided birth control. These include upscale restaurant, nightclubs, and hotels in then-Speaker Pelosi’s district; labor union chapters; large corporations, financial firms, and local governments.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/lets_build_a_stairway_to_alberta.html