Anonymous #1 4d

Hobby lobby’s health insurance doesn’t provide birth control

16

Anonymous #4 4d

I only know what a hobby lobby is because of recently exploration of the mid east with that being said I can’t corroborate that because I’ve never worked there but I did work a summer full time at chick-fila and theirs did and chick-fila is definitely just as Christian, you just have to get your provider to code it a certain way.

1

Anonymous #1 4d

The Supreme Court allowed hobby lobby to stop proving birth control through their insurance provider because it goes against their religious beliefs

20

Anonymous #4 4d

Well that’s a violation, because the business shouldn’t know what medications your employees are being prescribed. That’s why I said give the insurance mind the business about meds because it’s none of their business, someone’s private life hello Griswold v Connecticut; so someone needs to re challenge the ruling.

16

Anonymous #5 4d

the thing is that these organizations insurance plans do not have to cover birth control even though the affordable care act requires it (hobby lobby court case established this)

7

Anonymous strawberry_hair 4d

the affordable care act does require employers to have birth control coverage in their insurance plans unless they object due to religious or moral purposes

-3

Anonymous #7 4d

That’s sort of different. What someone does with their health insurance isn’t really the companies.

14

Anonymous strawberry_hair 4d

i’m confused on why you believe it is different? they do not provide birth control coverage and are not forced to (while other companies are) so it directly affects what their employees do with that insurance

0

Anonymous #7 4d

What I am a saying is what someone does with their health insurance should not be up to the companies. Insurance SHOULD cover birth control but often it doesn’t unfortunately mean that is often the case.

12

Anonymous strawberry_hair 4d

let me explain myself a bit more. what i mean is that companies who do not have the grounds to object due to religious or moral purposes (and if they are publicly traded i believe) ARE FORCED to provide birth control coverage. my first comment was responding to you saying it doesn’t matter if they are christian because it is a ruling made under the freedom of religion. i do not disagree that companies should stay out of it, but the no votes mean that they have a right to say what is covered

-1

Anonymous #7 4d

Tbf religion needs to be kept out of women’s health altogether in the first place

21

Anonymous #7 4d

Companies should be required to provide health insurance coverage

1

Anonymous #11 4d

yes i agree

1

Anonymous #7 4d

And health insurance coverage should include birth control

1

Anonymous #11 4d

yes i agree, by voting no on this poll it means that they should NOT be forced to provide coverage on it

1

Anonymous #7 4d

i think many people are misunderstanding the poll. if you voted yes, you believe their insurance plans should cover it. they would have to be FORCED to cover it which is what i am saying

4

Anonymous #7 4d

… I voted yes. And no I understood the question, it’s just a charged biased question and they leave out the context.

6

Anonymous #7 4d

This was providing just the birth control not the insurance. Like Strawberry said it SHOULD, but that isn’t often the case. If anything some companies don’t have insurance at all. If regular insurance isn’t covering you I doubt the company would. That’s a fault on the laws with them removing a lot of accredited insurance companies from pharmacies and making them not provide it. Same with veteran’s

6

Anonymous #8 4d

i didn’t think op had to explicitly state that accessing birth control through your employer requires insurance. obviously companies are not handing out plan b and the depo shot at the office

1

Anonymous #7 4d

They need to be more specific. But still medical needs are not a company specific issue that’s a law stated issue. And companies shouldn’t be controlling it anyway it’s up to the individual need. It SHOULD cover it but birth control isn’t a specific “importance” to all ppl. Which is why it’s but a forceful compliance. Birth control should be left to the consumer of it not the company

5

Anonymous #8 4d

But your insurance should cover some of it insurance doesn’t cover the entirety of things that’s never been how most insurances operate you still have a copay cost regardless

1

Anonymous #8 4d

we are saying the exact same thing. companies who offer insurance should cover birth control for employees who want it, no one is saying they have to use birth control. op’s poll does not mention employees HAVING to take birth control. but because these companies are not forced to cover it, their employees choice is taken away

1

Anonymous #7 4d

Insurance should already cover it if you have it. Most companies are not knowing what you use it for they just give you the policy when the insurance is issued in the mail. And you read the contract, what percent is copay etc. it’s not always the case. I don’t think we’re saying the same thing bc religion should be left out health entirely just hand over insurance and they do whatever they want. Just make sure it’s a fair percentage for everyone though

6

Anonymous #7 4d

Your choice isn’t taken? If you don’t want to have insurance you can also tell companies no it’s just an employee benefit they offer. I have insurance under my employer bc I’m full time, but I still have my own health insurance as well. But I don’t pay too much out of pocket I think it’s only like maybe 15% or so? But since it’s so easy access companies likely don’t need to anymore. You can get birth control over the counter without insurance at all

1

Anonymous #8 4d

that is what i am saying. religious companies should not get to decide if their employees can use birth control. to get religion out of it, we would have to force these companies by law to let their plans cover it

6

Anonymous #5 4d

Forcing is on the extreme side and would not solve much. So I still have to disagree here. That’s if they deny insurance entirely when the state law says that specific sector of work requires all employees to be under work insurance. Insurance isn’t really a guarantee anymore as a whole

4

Anonymous #8 4d

I’ve worked at companies where they have restrictions to insurance. Like you had to be full time over 40 or so pay period hours and have been with the company for over 90 days before they ever think to offer insurance to you. Some just give it to you bc you work full time. Some don’t have a plan for you at all

6

Anonymous #7 4d

Mmm force would be a lil much you can buy it yourself

1

Anonymous #8 4d

Personally if I was denied it I’m getting it anyway. They can’t control what my health needs are. I can get it OTC

1

Anonymous #8 4d

this is a privileged take to say “just buy it yourself” when some forms of birth control can cost upwards of $1,000 with no insurance. not everyone can be on the o-pill. so yeah maybe we aren’t saying the same thing 💀💀

1

Anonymous #7 4d

Wdym not “everyone can be”. Just not everyone uses it. Idk if you’ve ever had insurance but they aren’t covering the full $1000 dollars. You still have a copay. So you are paying regardless

0

Anonymous #8 4d

paying a copay ≠ paying the full amount. my $25 copay on the depo shot that would normally cost $150 per visit makes a huge difference for people who are struggling already

0

Anonymous #7 4d

That’s something that needs to be going to the law itself not the company. Companies don’t decide those things usually the law will. I’m agreeing with strawberry here bc that’s a case by case thing and not something on the company as a whole

1

Anonymous #7 4d

Everyone is struggling already not only with health. And $25 is so much better than $150. Sometimes we need to take the blessings we’re given bc some aren’t offered that at all with ANY health need. Some ppl are paying thousands for surgeries. I’m not that worried if my job isn’t paying my birth control when other needs are far more necessary for some ppl. That’s why companies just need to mind their own business on medical insurance

1

Anonymous #8 4d

But being forced is a crazy take

1

Anonymous #8 4d

now you are already saying what i have said. a supreme court decision is letting religious companies decide, quite literally whole companies are being allowed to choose. so there’s no point in going in circles if we’re repeating the same thing over and over again

0

Anonymous #7 4d

No you’re repeating it I already disagree with you bc it seems like you want to force companies to do it based on religious background. They need to be out of it altogether. Religion should not be in the discussion of health care whatsoever. If it’s a discriminatory cause then yes, please file. Otherwise no

3