Skip to main content

In fact they "lavish" it on their employees.

No really

Imagine that a woman starts work at Hobby Lobby tomorrow morning — July 1. She joins Hobby Lobby’s health care plan. It includes access, copay-free, to the following categories of FDA-approved birth-control:

Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants

- National Review

But here are the four things not covered that we poor deluded, talking point liberals are upset about (never mind that this is in a larger part about corporations becoming religious entities which can oppress their employees with the religion of the corporate owner - corporations are people, my friend)
What Hobby Lobby will not cover are four contraceptive methods that its owners fear are abortifacients:

Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
Copper Intra-Uterine Device
IUD with progestin
- National Review

Just a quick look at THE LIST, which some conservative are holding up as some holy writ to bash us heathen liberals with, points out some items which makes the whole list suspect.

Male condoms, female condoms, sponges with spermicide, spermicide (for use alone or in conjunction with diaphragms and/or cervical caps) are all OVER THE COUNTER, requiring NO insurance/medical coverage from Hobby Lobby.

Deroy Murdock of National Review further explains so conservatives can help us  liberal simpletons out:

(This new woman at Hobby Lobby cannot use male condoms or a vasectomy, at least not directly. However, if she chose either contraceptive method, in conjunction with her husband, she would have access to it.)
embolden mine


And here in lies the problem.  A list of 16 items that Hobby Lobby will "generously and lavishly cover," in which the first 4 they are not covering in the first place.  But that the unthinking, incurious will use.

There are other issues with the list which puts the list into "bullshit pasture, nestled in   bullshit valley, beside bullshit mountain.

If the owners fear that those four items are abortifacients - just fear, with no proof, why are birth control pills, rings, rods, patches and injections on the touted list of approval?

The Birth Control Pill is the most popular and widely used method of hormonal contraception. It involves taking a month-long series of pills—three weeks of pills containing hormones, and one without. This allows the woman to have a menstrual period. The Pill contains two synthetic hormones, progestin and ethinyl estradiol and has three mechanisms: 1) it prevents ovulation, 2) thickens the cervical mucus, which makes it harder for sperm to enter the uterus and 3) affects the endometrium or lining of the womb to make it more hostile to implantation. This means the tiny developing baby (embryo) cannot attach to the uterine lining and dies, which is a very early abortion. Even so, they define this as "preventing pregnancy."

- life issues

I won't post their analysis of  rings, rods, patches and injections.  It's there if you want to read it.

So Hobby Lobby is afeared of the Copper 7 and IUDs that contain progestin (without which the IUD would be inert), but other delivery systems of progestin are fine?

The list makes no sense. But that doesn't matter, its still being touted.

“The Greens and their family businesses respect the individual liberties of all their employees. The Greens and their family businesses have no objection to the other 16 FDA-approved contraceptives required by the law that do not interfere with the implantation of a fertilized egg,” the description reads. “They provide coverage for such contraceptives under their health care plan. Additionally, the four objectionable drugs and devices are widely available and affordable, and employees are free to obtain them.”

-The Blaze

But wait, that means that your okay with those methods in the 16 FDA-approved contraceptives that your side considers abortifacients, but you said that you aren't okay contraceptive that " interfere with the implantation of a fertilized egg." but you have no proof a Copper 7 or other IUD does, but then it should be okay, but you said it's not because it's an abortifacient, but other things your side considers as  interfering with the implantation of a fertilized egg, is okay, but . . . but . . .
Does not compute
Does not compute

well actually it does . . .  utter bull shit.


As with many things the upfront cost of that uncovered IUD, especially when you have kids, rent, food, bills, etc. make it a rather heavy lift:

Unlike other forms of birth control, the IUD only costs money in the beginning. The cost for the medical exam, the IUD, the insertion of the IUD and follow-up visits to your health care provider can range from $500 to $900. That cost pays for protection that can last more than a decade.
- Planned Parenthood tumblr

"think piece"

What male employee of Hobby Lobby rapes a female employee of Hobby Lobby while using his employer covered Viagra. She is too ashamed and scared to report the crime (most rape goes unreported), but she has to pay for her Plan B/Day After/Emergency Contraception, out of her own pocket.

In effect he has raped her on the company dime but to clean up the mess and not be as affected by it she had to pay from her own pocket.

12:53 PM PT:
The point is actually moot

since the SCOTUS clarified its decision on Tuesday and  said that the ruling was not just limited to the 4 contraceptives that Hobby Lobby was objecting to, but  would include  all  contraceptives. How  fast willl Hobby Lobby be to delete from  its carrrier plan  coverage for all contraceptives?

by buffan

Yes but conservatives are using it today to bash liberals for being "ignorant."  Kind of funny watching the exchanges.
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (26+ / 0-)

    Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

    by Clytemnestra on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 11:55:21 AM PDT

  •  ZOMG personhood killers! (5+ / 0-)
    Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
    Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
    Copper Intra-Uterine Device
    IUD with progestin

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

    by annieli on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 11:59:05 AM PDT

    •  What our intrepid author missed (0+ / 0-)

      Is the alarm and rage that corporations gained yet another formerly human right.
      First, corporations gained the right of free speech in a political arena.
      Now, corporations have the right of religion.
      Next, corporations will have the right to vote, most likely in line with the number of employees, contractors and stockholders.

      This is not what I spent nearly 28 years of my life in military defense of!

  •  As a talking head on the TV said yesterday, (15+ / 0-)

    during the average woman's reproductive life - she spends about 5 years trying to get pregnant, being pregnant or nursing her child. She spends about 35 years trying to avoid getting pregnant. This includes an estimated 90% of Catholic women.  About 3/4 of women work outside of the home and want to plan their families and pregnancies.  How completely out of touch with reality are these 5 male justices and the phony-baloney Green family who just want to basically harass their workers, spread their warped religiosity and challenge the Affordable Care Act?

    Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love. - Einstein

    by moose67 on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:12:44 PM PDT

    •  even that 1/4 (4+ / 0-)

      of women that don't work outside the home have a need to be able to plan their families and space (or not have) children. With less or no income, they have more of a need for family planning/access to birth control. We have a small farm, and I don't get a paycheck, so I really need to be able to control my fertility. It's month to month for us.
      I just don't see how this ruling can NOT be construed as overt sex discrimination, based on ownership of a uterus. Uterus=extra hassle at preventing pregnancy.
      It's all about how you're a horrrr if you want to enjoy sex without getting knocked up. Even, apparently, if you're married and doing things according to their book. Because Eve and apples, or something, I'm sure...

      •  their fantasies (0+ / 0-)

        and you can bet that they thought only they are denied those fantasy feminine slutty pleasures.  

        I don't know why we bother having personalities, to them there are only two, sluts and mothers.  And the sluts won't put out for them, and the mothers must harvest their DNA by law.  

        It's a position of creepy weakness.  

        and as old as the hills. The first exchange, according to Levi-Strauss, was the exchange of women, by men.  

        plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

        by anna shane on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 04:12:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  About 3/4 of women work outside of the home ... (0+ / 0-)
      About 3/4 of women work outside of the home and want to plan their families and pregnancies.

      I imagine that a sizable percentage of those who work at home want to plan their families as well. If not, we could identify the stay-at-home moms by the throng of children around them, ages at 18-month intervals.

      I know, it's beside the point. I was going to comment that, not only does your employer get to manage your healthcare, but they get to micromanage it ("No, you can't use that contraceptive."), but I got derailed at Picayuneville.

  •  The point is actually moot (9+ / 0-)

    since the SCOTUS clarified its decision on Tuesday and  said that the ruling was not just limited to the 4 contraceptives that Hobby Lobby was objecting to, but  would include  all  contraceptives. How  fast willl Hobby Lobby be to delete from  its carrrier plan  coverage for all contraceptives?

  •  "Over the counter" does not mean insurance won'... (3+ / 0-)

    "Over the counter" does not mean insurance won't cover it.

  •  wingers have all sorts of problems understanding (8+ / 0-)

    female anatomy and how it functions.  For example, the claim that BC is solely for BC except in a "few isolated cases".  Actually, the stats reveal that only 48% or so women take BC solely for the purpose of birth control.  A significant number take BC for other medical reasons while many take it for dual reasons.

    I note that Sandra Fluke is being mentioned again along with other "slut shaming" at women who expect BC as a part of their healthcare.  I also note the SCOTUS has handed the anti-choice people a back door victory, as the BC that is banned by Hobby Lobby prevents fertilization of the egg or implantation of the fertilized egg.  The anti-choice people argue that life begins at conception.  Given the types of BC Hobby Lobby objects to, SCOTUS seems to acknowledge this POV as a valid scientific POV.  Hobby Lobby seems to take the idea of life at conception a bit farther, given the BC they object to, in that it seems they consider life to begin at the possibility of conception, not just conception and any block to conception constitutes a de facto abortion

  •  Shh... don't tell them... (8+ / 0-)

    but plan B is just 2 regular old birth control pills.  Their logic and consistency is complete and utter BS.  Either you believe birth control pills prevent implantation of a blastocyst or you don't.  Which is it Hobby Lobby?  (Hint: preventing implantation is probably not a common way for these pills to work).  So why is Plan B so special compared to birth control pills?  It isn't.  But it's a great start towards full personhood.

    And we should all be terrified.

    I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

    by the dogs sockpuppet on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:28:28 PM PDT

    •  ding ding ding (3+ / 0-)

      or should I say
      "does not compute"

      Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

      by Clytemnestra on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:34:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  True (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clytemnestra, anna shane, Rogneid

      you can take x number of regular BC pills (I think it depends on strength and composition of the pills) to make a DIY morning-after pill. There are a couple websites that show you how to do it, all you have to do is google it.

      Your "personhood" extrapolation is, quite frankly, terrifying.

      •  The number is generally 2. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        anna shane, Clytemnestra, Rogneid

        And yes, they are thinking very hard about how to chip away towards personhood.  This has been in the works for a long time.  They've been very strategic about what cases they will and won't bring to get towards their desired results.

        A couple of years ago, Rachel Maddow did a nice treatment on the systematic right wing approach to chipping away at abortion rights.  It's scarily fascinating.

        I want to live in a world where George Zimmerman offered Trayvon Martin a ride home to get him out of the rain that night. -Bishop G. Brewer

        by the dogs sockpuppet on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 02:59:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I'm frankly surprised (7+ / 0-)

    they didn't include abstinence on their list of "covered" items.

    We view "The Handmaid's Tale" as cautionary. The GOP views it as an instruction book.

    by Vita Brevis on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:32:44 PM PDT

  •  I actually wasn't clear (6+ / 0-)

    how it makes it better that Hobby Lobby will cover some forms of birth control, but not others.

    That actually makes Hobby Lobby look like they're not exactly a moral company.  Just assholes.

    30, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

    by TDDVandy on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:34:40 PM PDT

  •  Even if I didn't LOVE your diary, I still would (10+ / 0-)

    have to tip and rec for this alone:

    There are other issues with the list which puts the list into "bullshit pasture, nestled in  in bullshit valley, beside bullshit mountain.
    What a gem.

    The only hawk I like is the kind that has feathers. My birding blogs: and

    by cany on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:44:44 PM PDT

  •  The specific list is irrelevant to the decision (7+ / 0-)

    Right-wingers are saying that the decision just meant that employers could opt out of covering those four methods of birth control. NOT AT ALL. That was made clear yesterday when they let stand a couple of lower court decisions in which corporations owned by Catholics refused to cover ANY form of contraception.

    Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

    by leevank on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 12:48:17 PM PDT

  •  They won't even pay for the aspirin (8+ / 0-)

    for women to hold between their legs.

    Dick Cheney 2/14/10: "I was a big supporter of waterboarding"

    by Bob Love on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 01:35:41 PM PDT

  •  Why Does HL's Religion Trumps Everyone Else? (7+ / 0-)

    I'm Catholic.  I'm good if some lady somewhere wants to have an abortion to end an unwanted pregnancy.  None of my beeswax.

    But, it's also none of HLs.  Let me be a Catholic my way, & they can be a Fundamentalist Christian in their own homes....just not the workplace.

    Judge not, lest ye be judged, Bible Thumpers.  

    •  it just ... does ..... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      it makes no sense at all, freedom of religion is supposed to protect you from someone imposing their religion on you, not allow that.  


      It's a plot, Roberts court plot.  The new justices aren't suspicious enough. How did they agree with the no buffer for women seeking health care rule?  the right of haters to speak freely trumps the right of women to seek health care safely?  Which freedoms are they 'protecting?'

      plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

      by anna shane on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 03:39:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I only guessed 3 1/2 right... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...I went with "no spermicide" (as every sperm is sacred, of course).

    Strangely enough, they don't endorse "male sterilization methods"--I guess that's not so surprising, come to think of it.

    It's the microeconomy, stupid!

    by chinshihtang on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 03:01:28 PM PDT

  •  it's a distraction (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clytemnestra, anna shane, drmah

    If my doctor prescribes something based on sound medical advice and the law of the land says that to ensure adequate coverage and health for the whole population this item or class of items needs to be covered by plans, it should make no effing difference what a business or individual believes.

    If someone wants to engage in an informed legal discussion about the topic and what other options there are to accomplish the same public health goal, that's a bit of a different story, one that raises more complex issues. And of course the really dangerous problem with this ruling is the idea that corporations have a religious viewpoint at all. But this attempt to suggest that because Hobby Lobby allows some things, liberals are unreasonable to disagree with the policy is pretty lame. No point in even engaging them on that level.

    Want a progressive global warming novel, not a right wing rant? Go to and check out New World Orders

    by eparrot on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 03:01:47 PM PDT

  •  The problem is not which contraceptives HL (0+ / 0-)

    does or does not carry. I don't think HL is likely to expand the list of BC they don't carry, because I don't think they want to.

    The problem is that corporations are not persons, they do not have principles or faiths that need protecting from an overreaching government, and they should not be permitted to use the constitution's religious protections as a legal excuse to refuse to provide mandated benefits to their employees.

    Corporations exist because We the People allow them to exist -- and we allow them to exist for our benefit, not for theirs. Nobody forced the Greenes to incorporate -- they could have run their stores as single proprietorships, or even full-liability partnerships.

    In exchange for the protections provided by limited liability, and the enormous financial and legal conveniences provided by incorporation, it is entirely reasonable, libertarian "thinking" notwithstanding, for We the People to chain corporations with any restraints we happen to please. Any restraints. Nothing is off the table. 20% of gross receipts go into a pension fund for workers? Completely fair, ethical, and moral.  Limits on CEO compensation? Completely fair, ethical and moral. 10% of all issued stock to be given to a federal trust and held in behalf of the citizenry? Absolutely, unequivocally, inarguably, indisputably fair, ethical, and moral.

    And so on.

    They do not have rights. They do not have principles. They do not have faith. And they exist because We the People permit it -- something we are not obliged to do.

    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

    by UntimelyRippd on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 05:18:13 PM PDT

  •  Birth control should not be like a Bingo Game. The (0+ / 0-)

    serious decision on what method is safest for any given woman should be a decision between that woman and her doctor.  Her boss should not be involved in the process at all. That's just sick!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site