|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Politics Discussion | by mekkanik_mike | 2014-03-27 00:30:01 |
|
About Hobby Lobby. | by ShadowSystems | 2014-03-27 00:47:59 |
|
Everybody seems to be missing the real story here. | by RetiQlum2 | 2014-03-27 12:14:50 |
|
The question is: Just because you pay for it, | by Peace_Man | 2014-03-27 13:03:00 |
|
First, I disagree with your opinion... | by Ol_Gunner | 2014-03-27 13:55:26 |
| Actually, SCOTUS did announce |
by Peace_Man |
2014-03-27 21:13:57 |
that the ACA was constitutional if it were viewed as a tax. So by the decision of the highest court, it is a tax. Does that mean that we actually agree that the employer does NOT have the right to impose unreasonable limitations on what health care coverage it provides?
Under the present health provision methodology, an employer provided group plan is likely to be a much better deal than to let each employee negotiate individually with insurance companies. It's the exact same function that makes a union negotiated employment agreement much more likely to be better than not having a union. Which is why it makes sense for an employer to provide a group plan.
Exactly what that group plan should cover is, in this case, up to the employer - and that's what I have a problem with. By choosing a plan, and then specifically denying certain (normally covered) items out of religious convictions the company IS imposing its religion on its employees. They might have a case if there were some cost savings involved, but from what I read in the comments, that's not the case. So the company is imposing an additional cost on its employees because of its religious views - and that IS imposing its religion. Not harshly, nor inescapably, but very definitely.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
You're neglecting to define 'gov't approved' | by wwill | 2014-03-28 01:38:25 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
