Hobby Lobby Contraceptive Case

This company went through a series of lawsuits and out cries claiming their practices as in constitutional and in ethical. Planned parenthood is a place that offers help with birth control and other things of that manner they also provide abortions which is where their ethical morals came into question and many different cases brought to the court . planned parenthood always stood on the fact that their practices were lawful and helped many even though a many other did not agree with . throughout the question of their ethichs they never divided as a company and stood behind what the center stood for and they successfully pulled through those out cries.that is how I feel it should be done to be a sucessfull company. Another co oany that cane under fire with concerns on ethics was abercrombie a company a tually discussed earlier in this course. This company is widly successful but at a time they were being put under close scrutiny dude to the sizes they choose to carry many people did not believe it to be ethically right to only carry siezes that fit such a small category of people seeing as how a majority of people do not fit into that category

This clinic birth Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest nonprofit supplier of reproductive health services to women and men. With more than 100 years old, the organization is at the center of controversial issues in American political arena. "It has come under attack by Republican presidential candidates seeking to revoke the

The issue is over Hobby Lobby vs. the Obama Administration. Hobby Lobby has taken a stance against ObamaCare’s contraception coverage. ObamaCare’s affordable health care act, gives employees who are women access to contraceptives such as the morning after pill and IUDs, which the plaintiffs of Hobby Lobby considered to be forms of abortion.

In September 2012, Hobby Lobby filed suit against the U.S. government to exempt itself from the contraceptive mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Hobby Lobby’s owners are evangelical Christians who believe that the contraceptive mandate violates their religious beliefs; specifically, that life begins at conception when successful fertilization occurs within a prospective mother. Providing contraceptive measures, in Hobby Lobby’s view, would facilitate the abortion of a pregnancy, which most evangelicals equate to murder. On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Hobby Lobby, along with all other closely held for-profit

As of recently, women have been talking about getting long term birth control or stocking up on Plan B. This is because they are worried the Trump will take away the articles in the Affordable Care Act that say that insurance companies must cover birth control, reproductive health and abortion funding. There are currently provisions in the ACA that allow women access to gynecological visits and birth control without having to pay a copay (Rinkunas, 2016). These provisions when originally passed because a number of businesses filed for exemptions so that they would not have to provide access to free contraception to women; specifically those who may have decided to use Plan B (the morning after pill). Some religious based businesses owners believe that preventing a fertilized egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus is the same as an abortion, and to them life begins at conception (Newton-Small, 2016). Many Catholic members of Obama’s Administration, including Vice President Joe Biden wanted to allow religious entities or groups the right to opt out of the program (Newton-Small, 2016). The women of the cabinet decided that they would

• Spousal Notice – This provision did not hold up in court because the spousal notice was deemed unconstitutional in the case of Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) (Casebriefs, n.d., Pennsylvania General Assembly, 1982).

Not only has Planned Parenthood lied about the services that they provide, but a number of their own employees have filed lawsuits claiming that Planned Parenthood has cheated the system for their own profit. In 2011, Abby Johnson, the former director of the Planned Parenthood clinic in Bryan, Texas, filed a lawsuit claiming that her affiliate had purposefully sent in approximately $6 million in false claims to Medicaid (Sedlak 15). Similarly, in 2008 a former financial executive of Planned Parenthood in California, P. Victor Gonzalez, filed a lawsuit against Planned Parenthood for overcharging state and federal governments by at least $180 million for birth control pills (Sedlak 15). Planned Parenthood clinics in Texas are currently entangled in a lawsuit that “alleges its involvement in ‘repeated false, fraudulent, and ineligible claims for Medicaid reimbursements’ through the Texas

Today many topics cause controversy and division. As we go about our daily lives, somewhere someone is debating an issue of importance. Many of these debated topics are the result of previous political and judicial decisions. The Planned Parenthood v. Casey case was major in history and today remains the center of many political debates. This case had an impact on women in the United States and continues to cause a divide to this very day. Many women felt like the government was trying to take their right of privacy and choice. This specific case caused anger and continues to draw many emotions throughout the world. Planned Parenthood v. Casey of 1992 was argued because the ruling of banning abortion in the Roe v. Wade case. Abortion is a controversial topic. Many view it is a personal issue; women should have the right to their own privacy pertaining to their health.

Galloway (2013), Galloway argued that the town of Greece violated the establishment clause. The establishment clause within the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that the national government is unable to establish an official religion. In this court case, it was ruled that the prayers at the town hall did not violate the establishment clause. The basis for this ruling had to do with tradition. In the case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2013), the Green family had to provide health care to their employees under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The ruling for this case was that the religious beliefs of the Green family are a factor that can let them deny health care to employees that have different religious beliefs. With a five to four ruling, the Hobby Lobby Stores won the case. These two cases show how Freedom of Religion can be used

One of the most hotly debated and legally challenged aspects of the Affordable Care Act has been the contraceptive coverage or the birth control mandate. It mandates the healthcare plan providers to cover the costs of at least one type of the 18 FDA approved preventive contraceptive services/birth control measures to women without copays or shared costs. Although initially employers were required to provide health plans covering contraceptive services to their employees, it was later clarified that certain religious employers including but not limited to religious non-profit organizations, hospitals, educational institutions etc. can opt out of providing birth control/contraceptive services

Should someone’s religion be forced upon you? Well in the case Hobby Lobby, a giant craft supply seller v.s Sebelius, a health and human services secretary fight over if religious freedom should excuse them from the affordable care act where any company with over 50 employees must offer health plans that covers contraception.

When the name, “Planned Parenthood”, comes into conversation, the first thing to come to one’s mind it simply: abortion. The current controversy is that Planned Parenthood should not be funded by the government because its use of money to the perspective of the public eye. Because the company is so highly associated with abortions, taxpayers bring up the fact that the government should not be funding companies like Planned Parenthood due to their affiliation with the medical fields including abortion. However, Planned Parenthood should continue to receive funding because despite getting government aid, the establishment is so much more.

National parks should not be preserved and protected by the federal government because the government currently owns too much land

PORTLAND, Oregon- “I was terrified,” plaintiff Dr. Warren Martin Hern stated as he heard he was on the “Deadly Dozen, GUILTY” poster. The first amendment has been strained throughout this case for the reasons of the unknown. The major question in the Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette, Inc. v. ACLA case is “what defines a true threat?”

They should not have to worry about Congress interfering or dictating what those beliefs should be. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act was created for this very reason. The goal of this act was to protect against government actions that would target or burden religious activities or practices (Rivkin and Wheland). It is clear that forcing businesses to cover something that they do not believe in would burden their consciences and possibly cause businesses to close or not open in order to comply with their religious principles.