# I Pit HOBBY LOBBY **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 28, 2012, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335 "2012-11-28T02:45:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 36
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/701 "2014-07-01T13:06:22Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > And they mistook an anti-Obamacare tantrum for a sincerely held religious belief, so we’re off to a rousing start. Absolutely wrong. They were religiously opposed to abortion and abortifacients while Obama was still organizing communities. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/702 "2014-07-01T13:14:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure they do. They result in the death of a human living creature. > > Do you have some factual definition for human living creature? This is an overstatement. IUDs are designed to and have the purpose of preventing fertilization, and as far as we know that’s how they function. Scientists _speculate_ that it’s possible that in some cases IUDs may prevent pregnancy by preventing implantation, but we don’t really know. Other things that sometimes prevent implantation include: just normal function in the majority of fertilization events; advil; and aspirin. Does Hobby Lobby consider Aspirin to be murder? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/703 "2014-07-01T13:22:19Z")
If taken as an abortifacient, yes, I imagine they would. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/704 "2014-07-01T13:27:30Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If taken as an abortifacient, yes, I imagine they would. So do they object to covering prescription doses of Ibuprofen? Someone could take that with the purpose of preventing implantation too. I must have missed that in their papers. Or could it be that the factually-incorrect belief that IUDs are known to prevent implantation at higher rates than ibuprofen account for the difference? ---
**Author:** ![joyfool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@joyfool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joyfool)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/705 "2014-07-01T13:38:04Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If taken as an abortifacient, yes, I imagine they would. > > Regards, > > Shodan Jesus Jiminy Christmas. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/706 "2014-07-01T13:42:40Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > This is an overstatement. IUDs are designed to and have the purpose of preventing fertilization, and as far as we know that’s how they function. Scientists _speculate_ that it’s possible that in some cases IUDs may prevent pregnancy by preventing implantation, but we don’t really know. Other things that sometimes prevent implantation include: just normal function in the majority of fertilization events; advil; and aspirin. > > Does Hobby Lobby consider Aspirin to be murder? I doubt they object to aspirin. But they object to IUDs because it’s more than speculation: > [@](#): > > On the basis of available data for fertilization rates and clinical pregnancy rates, the relative contribution of mechanisms acting before or after fertilization were quantitatively estimated. These estimates indicate that, although prefertilization effects are more prominent for the copper IUD, both prefertilization \*\*and postfertilization \*\*mechanisms of action contribute significantly to the effectiveness of all types of intrauterine devices. Emphasis added, quoting the abstract for “Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices: Update and estimation of postfertilization effects,” (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:1699-708) Moreover, the FDA label – the one required by law – explicitly says that preventing implantation may occur. What the hell are you talking about? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/707 "2014-07-01T13:42:45Z")
I have to say that I’m not hugely concerned about the immediate ramifications of this decision. As **Bricker** has been at pains to point out, these were never very helpful facts for the DHS. However, Alito’s inability (or refusal) to distinguish these facts from any of the hypotheticals we’ve been discussing for years means the court has opened a humongous can of worms. It’s never going to be able to stuff all the worms back in. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/708 "2014-07-01T13:44:04Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > So do they object to covering prescription doses of Ibuprofen? Someone could take that with the purpose of preventing implantation too. I must have missed that in their papers. Or could it be that the factually-incorrect belief that IUDs are known to prevent implantation at higher rates than ibuprofen account for the difference? Ok, I gave you a study. I think you need to pony up a cite for your claim. Where the hell are you getting the idea that IUDs don’t prevent implantation? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/709 "2014-07-01T13:47:00Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I have to say that I’m not hugely concerned about the immediate ramifications of this decision. As **Bricker** has been at pains to point out, these were never very helpful facts for the DHS. However, Alito’s inability (or refusal) to distinguish these facts from any of the hypotheticals we’ve been discussing for years means the court has opened a humongous can of worms. It’s never going to be able to stuff all the worms back in. If anyone opened anything, Congress did. The Court’s contribution has been to point and say, “Look! Worms everywhere.” I cannot begin to understand why liberals feel the Court’s role should be a super-wise Congress, fixing the laws that Actual Congress didn’t do correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/710 "2014-07-01T13:51:07Z")
I think it might be stretching the truth a little to say this is Congress’ fault when it took 22 years for someone to read the RFRA this way. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/711 "2014-07-01T13:51:20Z")
I’ve driven by a Hobby Lobby recently and it didn’t look like a church, it looked like a for-profit business. If I might use Social Security as an example. Yes, Hobby Lobby does indeed write the check. However, half the money comes from direct withholding on the employee’s paycheck, the other half comes from the employee as a reduction of wages. It doesn’t cost Hobby Lobby anything. The same is true for health insurance, either Hobby Lobby reduces wages or increases prices. This doesn’t cost them a dime. The bottom line is that if Hobby Lobby’s bottom line suffers because of the ACA, then they have mismanaged their business. The owners should shut their doors and go back to flipping burgers. Business is business and religion is religion … the two make for a particularly bad combination. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/712 "2014-07-01T13:51:59Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What the hell are you talking about? I take by your pissy attitude that you’re surprised to learn that the facts you were taught are wrong. But you’re not gonna rebut them by burning down a straw man. No one is claiming that we know that IUDs don’t ever prevent implantation. What I am claiming, because it is true, is that we don’t know if they actually do that at higher rates than, say, aspirin. And more importantly their intention and design is to prevent fertilization. ---
**Author:** ![JackieLikesVariety](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackielikesvariety/32/296_2.png) [@JackieLikesVariety](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JackieLikesVariety)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/713 "2014-07-01T13:55:20Z")
> [@](#): > > And they mistook an anti-Obamacare tantrum for a sincerely held religious belief, so we’re off to a rousing start. exactly. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/714 "2014-07-01T13:57:56Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I take by your pissy attitude that you’re surprised to learn that the facts you were taught are wrong. But you’re not gonna rebut them by burning down a straw man. No one is claiming that we know that IUDs don’t ever prevent implantation. What I am claiming, because it is true, is that we don’t know if they actually do that at higher rates than, say, aspirin. And more importantly their intention and design is to prevent fertilization. Since you asked for a cite: See: Hum Reprod Update. 2008 May-Jun;14(3):197-208. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmn003. Epub 2008 Apr 9. (“IUDs also interfere with implantation but the extent to which this contributes to their contraceptive action is unknown.”) ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/715 "2014-07-01T14:05:06Z")
[The CDC reports](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr62e0614.pdf) (PDF) that IUD’s are over 99% effective in preventing unintended pregnancies in table 1. Are you suggesting that 99% of pregnant women who take an aspirin miscarry? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/716 "2014-07-01T14:06:53Z")
Preventing unintended pregnancies =/= preventing implantation. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/717 "2014-07-01T14:09:02Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > [The CDC reports](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr62e0614.pdf) (PDF) that IUD’s are over 99% effective in preventing unintended pregnancies in table 1. Are you suggesting that 99% of pregnant women who take an aspirin miscarry? There are two category errors here. First, preventing pregnancy includes preventing fertilization, which is what IUDs are designed to do and are very good at it. Second is that miscarriage refers to the loss of an already-implanted fertilized egg. What we’re talking about here is preventing implantation. Preventing implantation is essentially a side effect of some IUDs. It is not how they are intended to function, and we do not know the prevalence of that side effect. ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/718 "2014-07-01T14:17:21Z")
Meanwhile, in China, where Hobby Lobby does huge business: > [@](#): > > [This is How Hobby Lobby Practices Their Allegedly ‘Christian’ Values | News Corpse](http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=11893) > > Hobby Lobby pays millions of dollars to stock their shelves with cheap products made in China, a country where abortion is legal and is even provided by the government for free – when they aren’t forcing it on women who want their babies. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/719 "2014-07-01T14:19:34Z")
Which church splits that hair? ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2014, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335/720 "2014-07-01T14:20:21Z")
I don’t see how anyone can allege that Hobby Lobby is sincere in their beliefs when they previously did pay for these same drugs. That is pretty much the only way of determining the sincerity of someone’s stated beliefs. (Being willing to take a financial hit is not–that’s just a risk evaluation based on whether you will fail.) I can only understand the decision if the court did not evaluate the belief’s sincerity. I also note that most people seem to think that the exception given to non-profits will be given to the for-profits. That means that the government will contract with insurance companies to provide birth control coverage for those whose employers won’t give it. And the fact that this is a possibility is why the law was not narrowly tailored enough. That I can buy, even if it does open a huge can of worms. Since 90% of all companies fit the criteria of a closely held company, I see no reason for a company that values their own profits not to change their religion to avoid whatever they can. Not paying for birth control is still going to save them money. Why not do that? I think the court did not narrowly tailor its decision enough, allowing a religious exemption to be used as a for-profit motive, as obvious proof of insincerity was ignored. The idea that someone must be sincere in their beliefs seems to be a legal fiction. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335.md?page=35) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-hobby-lobby/642335.md?page=37)