<p>They are also against IUDs which do prevent implantation. But I had no idea Hobby Lobby was so big. I’ve never seen one. Still it makes no sense that some religious groups, the Amish, are completely exempt from ACA, because they don’t believe in insurance and others are not exempt on what kind of insurance to offer. </p>
<p>^IUDs are thought to work by preventing fertilization, not by preventing implantation. See for example [here[/url</a>] and [url=<a href=“Well - The New York Times”>Well - The New York Times]here[/url</a>] as well as references listed in the [url=<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormonal_IUD]Wikipedia”>Hormonal intrauterine device - Wikipedia]Wikipedia</a> article on IUDs](<a href=“http://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/mirena/basics/definition/prc-20012867]here[/url”>Hormonal IUD (Mirena) - Mayo Clinic).</p>
<p>There are now 82 cases of the mumps at ohio state. I know so many kids that attend that school. This really infuriates me! I am surprised because I would think anyone in college now was born in the early-mid 90’s before all of this anti-vaccine business started. I am curious as to how this could happen?</p>
<p>@Sally305-- The Justices explicitly raised the vaccination issue during oral argument in the Hobby Lobby case:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-354_5436.pdf”>http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-354_5436.pdf</a></p>
<p>FWIW, I don’t think that the court will rule in favor of Hobby Lobby because of the slippery slope issues - there really is no way to limit the argument to birth control. It’s not just a matter of where does it end – it’s also a matter of whether the Supreme Court would be faced with piecemeal litigation over every possible “religious” objection. </p>
<p>I think the easier path is to simply rule that paying for insurance to cover a wide range of health services is too far removed from the specific service (payment for birth control) to constitute a substantial burden on religious beliefs - it is not as if the law requires the employer to directly supply birth control. What is the difference between paying for insurance – when only a tiny fraction of the . premium dollars will go to subsidize specific forms of birth control – as opposed to being required to pay taxes, when a very large proportion of tax dollars may go to functions (like military spending) that offend the religious sensibilities of many? </p>
<p>My brain agrees with the slippery slope argument, but my gut tells me that it will always be ONLY about women and our uteruses. Pharmacists who don’t want to carry Plan B, employers who don’t want to cover IUDs - it all comes down on women and only women.</p>
<p>For the record, I had an IUD prescribed for non-contraception purposes about 10 years ago. It cost about $500 with most of that cost being the cost of the device, which had to be pre approved in advance or I would have had to pay for it. If I hadn’t been covered for this, the alternative would have been endometrial ablation (makes you sterile) or hysterectomy (also makes you sterile). What would Hobby Lobby Do? Probably deny my coverage. </p>
<p>Was that at Planned Parenthood? Thats where my daughter & I received our IUDs.
( mine didnt stop pregnancy however)</p>
<p>And in keeping with the topic, I got my shingles vaccine on Tuesday.</p>
<p>calmom, thank you so much for weighing in. True to your name, you always calm me down and enlighten me on legal issues. :)</p>
<p>greenwitch, I also agree with you. Sadly. </p>
<p>This link shows some disturbing trends.</p>
<p><a href=“How Many People Aren’t Vaccinating Their Kids in Your State? – Mother Jones”>http://www.motherjones.com//environment/2014/02/vaccine-exemptions-states-pertussis-map</a></p>
<p>For the record, I don’t think I’ve ever had insurance that covered birth control. In fact when D started on it for cramps in high school we paid cash for the prescription at Target eventually getting a discount card from the drug company. This was not a crisis. </p>
<p>It not being a “crisis” for you doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be covered just like other prescriptions. It IS a crisis for people who can’t afford it. It can be $40 or more a month. That is a significant expense that falls disproportionately on women.</p>
<p>Well, I’m sure it was not the only prescription not covered. And, that’s still the case by the way. There are closed drug formularies in most ACA policies that apply to drugs needed by both sexes.</p>
<p>Young men pay more for car insurance. Girls pay more for haircuts. It’s just not something I can get worked up about. It’s a very minor healthcare expense.</p>
<p>My implant is for my cysts primarily, birth control secondary. It’s no different than my asthma meds or UC meds and I owe an explanation to no one about what I take or why (other than medical professionals), least of all my boss. </p>
<p>If they don’t want to “pay for” x, they should pay the fine instead and cover no one. Least hypocritical way to go about it and saves from accidentally paying for something that’s not bible approved ;)</p>
<p>Well, they could always go to all part-timers, too. I mean, it’s a retail store…</p>
<p>I always wonder why Hobby Lobby enthusiasts never notice that the store sells lots of junk from China; a nation that had a one child policy that often was enforced against people’s will. </p>
<p>Young men pay more for car insurance because they are more likely to be the cause of a car accident. it makes sense that the burden would fall on them. Pregnancy is the result of both sexes participating in the act of conception. Why should women have the burden of funding their own contraception?!</p>
<p>I wonder if Hobby Lobby opposes the drinking of alcohol? And if they do should they be able to restrict their employees from using their Hobby Lobby paycheck to buy liquor? Or make-up? Or R-rated movies?</p>
<p>No, they don’t care what the employees do with their paychecks Heck, they can spend it on IUD’s Hobby Lobby just doesn’t want the government forcing them to do the buying. It’s an interesting case and I think it will be close, whatever happens.</p>
<p><a href=“https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t1.0-9/p403x403/1460278_697038167005510_1361594168_n.png”>https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t1.0-9/p403x403/1460278_697038167005510_1361594168_n.png</a></p>
<p>^ I’m totally stealing that</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly.</p>