Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

6 Bumps

About religious exemptions and health care coverage

A friend posted this:

"If Hobby Lobby can opt out of birth control being supplied by its insurance company because of its religious beliefs, then a Scientologist employer can deny psychological coverage, Jehovah's Witness can deny covering blood transfusions, a Mormon can refuse to cover any medicine that uses alcohol. Just because you employ a person does not mean you have the right to make medical decisions for them."

What do you think?  Should an employer have the right to make these decisions, based on their own personal beliefs about god and medicine?  Should an employer who believes only in natural, homeopathic cures be able to deny his employees traditional medical coverage?

Answer Question

Asked by jsbenkert at 12:06 PM on Jan. 3, 2013 in Religious Debate

Level 37 (89,331 Credits)
Answers (12)
  • I completely agree with what your friend posted. Religious beliefs should only be allowed to dictate personal health decisions. It is against the law to force a religious belief on another, therefore, company religious exceptions should not be allowed. If they are, then we are opening the door to the other exceptions listed above. Because if one is allowed, then the argument can be made for another.

    Answer by 3libras at 12:23 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • I totally agree. And if the issue comes up in courts, I expect them to treat the other religious concerns exactly the same way that they treat Hobby Lobby - either allow all to demand exemptions or allow none to. If our society really does want to support freedom of religion to this level, it has to apply to all religions, not just mainstream Christian religions.

    Answer by Sebbiemama at 12:59 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • If they are not a publicly traded company then legally they can do what the want. If they are publicly traded then they need to offer insurance for everything. The government needs to get out of our lives and let the states and local governments handle things.

    Answer by Anonymous at 1:11 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • If a company is based on its owner's belief system, and if it is made clear to those who are hired before they accept employment there, then they have agreed to those terms of employment and they have absolutely no right to try to force the employer to do anything that is against his principles. This would apply across the board to any type of belief system. That is where the line of distinction should be drawn--not where it is trying to be drawn today!

    Answer by NannyB. at 1:26 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • That's bullshit because most Americans follow some sort of religion to some extent. What are we suppose to do,only get employed by Agnostics and Atheists??
    If we open the door to "I object to (fill in the blank) because of my religious affiliation",NO ONE will be offering insurance.
    It's sickening. If you yourself don't agree with BC,blood transfusions,ethanol IV's,then don't get that,but leave the rest of us alone!
    So what now,we have to research if the owner of the business is a staunch Catholic before we apply to the job?

    Answer by butterflyblue19 at 2:00 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • I completely agree. An employee's rights are not negated by the religious beliefs of the employers.

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 2:19 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • i love this comic...cept this time its not the GOP but rather companies.


    Answer by okmanders at 2:36 PM on Jan. 3, 2013

  • Its a slippery slope for sure and those are all great examples- here is a silly question- before the mandate did we have so many issues with these things not being covered-did HL not cover BC previously- I have heard of hospitals that will not preform tubals (I had to have my second child at a different hospital than my first because of this) but I had not heard until recently about insurance plans of various companies not providing BC.

    Answer by soyousay at 11:40 AM on Jan. 4, 2013

  • I am a FIRM supporter of an INDIVIDUAL to refuse medical care for themselves or their young children based on religious views. However, NO corporation, business, group, etc, should have the ability to impose their religious views on their employees - and that includes their views on healthcare.

    Answer by SabrinaMBowen at 9:27 PM on Jan. 5, 2013

  • Doesn't this become a personal privacy issue at some point? My medical care should be strictly between myself and my doctor, to me my employer being able to dictating what kind of care I can have access to or not infringes on that privacy.

    Answer by emptynstr at 3:49 PM on Jan. 7, 2013

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.