Reach of Sibelius v. Hobby Lobby?

[rsa]

@Bricker

Are you asking me to cite the proposition that a store that closes one day a week loses sales?

No. I am asking you to justify your assertion that closing on Sunday causes “an enormous loss of profit”. Chick Fil A has had more sales than KFC two years in a row. Its owners are billionaires. Closed on Sunday.

What about it? Their retirement fund contains a dozen mutual funds; one mutual fund contains thousands of different company stocks. They view that as much mire distant and attenuated than directly funding contraception insurance. And of the twenty types of contraception approved by HHS they object to only four.

Did you read my link?

Several of the mutual funds in Hobby Lobby’s retirement plan have stock holdings in companies that manufacture the specific drugs and devices that the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, is fighting to keep out of Hobby Lobby’s health care policies: the emergency contraceptive pills Plan B and Ella, and copper and hormonal intrauterine devices.

These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella. Other stock holdings in the mutual funds selected by Hobby Lobby include Pfizer, the maker of Cytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions; Bayer, which manufactures the hormonal IUDs Skyla and Mirena; AstraZeneca, which has an Indian subsidiary that manufactures Prostodin, Cerviprime, and Partocin, three drugs commonly used in abortions; and Forest Laboratories, which makes Cervidil, a drug used to induce abortions. Several funds in the Hobby Lobby retirement plan also invested in Aetna and Humana, two health insurance companies that cover surgical abortions, abortion drugs, and emergency contraception in many of the health care policies they sell.
[INDENT][snip]
All nine funds—which have assets of $73 million, or three-quarters of the Hobby Lobby retirement plan’s total assets—contained holdings that clashed with the Greens’ stated religious principles.
[snip]
In their Supreme Court complaint, Hobby Lobby’s owners chronicle the many ways in which they avoid entanglements with objectionable companies. Hobby Lobby stores do not sell shot glasses, for example, and the Greens decline requests from beer distributors to back-haul beer on Hobby Lobby trucks.

Similar options exist for companies that want to practice what’s sometimes called faith-based investing. To avoid supporting companies that manufacture abortion drugs—or products such as alcohol or pornography—religious investors can turn to a cottage industry of mutual funds that screen out stocks that religious people might consider morally objectionable. The Timothy Plan and the Ave Maria Fund, for example, screen for companies that manufacture abortion drugs, support Planned Parenthood, or engage in embryonic stem cell research. Dan Hardt, a Kentucky financial planner who specializes in faith-based investing, says the performances of these funds are about the same as if they had not been screened.
[/INDENT]

On the contrary, there’s a clear compelling interest in a government minimum wage.

As opposed to these medical benefits? What is the difference if I have a religious belief that I should pay my employees based on some formula I have found in the bible?

[Bricker]

@Whack-a-Mole

What are you asking? I’m honestly not sure. The quote is as, well, quoted. Link provided too for the whole thing.

Yes. I read the link. I am asking you if my paraphrase of the link’s information is correct.

I think the text of the write up is carefully crafted to give a different impression than the truth, without actually saying anything false.

A quick read sure makes it sound like Hobby Lobby has invested $73 million into the companies that produce the very same drugs they say they’re against.

But is that actually what Hobby Lobby has done?

[Bricker]

@rsa

No. I am asking you to justify your assertion that closing on Sunday causes “an enormous loss of profit”. Chick Fil A has had more sales than KFC two years in a row. Its owners are billionaires. Closed on Sunday.

Sure. They’re not hurting. But they could be making even more money by opening Sunday.

Did you read my link?

Several of the mutual funds in Hobby Lobby’s retirement plan have stock holdings in companies that manufacture the specific drugs and devices that the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, is fighting to keep out of Hobby Lobby’s health care policies: the emergency contraceptive pills Plan B and Ella, and copper and hormonal intrauterine devices.

These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella. Other stock holdings in the mutual funds selected by Hobby Lobby include Pfizer, the maker of Cytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions; Bayer, which manufactures the hormonal IUDs Skyla and Mirena; AstraZeneca, which has an Indian subsidiary that manufactures Prostodin, Cerviprime, and Partocin, three drugs commonly used in abortions; and Forest Laboratories, which makes Cervidil, a drug used to induce abortions. Several funds in the Hobby Lobby retirement plan also invested in Aetna and Humana, two health insurance companies that cover surgical abortions, abortion drugs, and emergency contraception in many of the health care policies they sell.
[INDENT][snip]
All nine funds—which have assets of $73 million, or three-quarters of the Hobby Lobby retirement plan’s total assets—contained holdings that clashed with the Greens’ stated religious principles.
[snip]
In their Supreme Court complaint, Hobby Lobby’s owners chronicle the many ways in which they avoid entanglements with objectionable companies. Hobby Lobby stores do not sell shot glasses, for example, and the Greens decline requests from beer distributors to back-haul beer on Hobby Lobby trucks.

Similar options exist for companies that want to practice what’s sometimes called faith-based investing. To avoid supporting companies that manufacture abortion drugs—or products such as alcohol or pornography—religious investors can turn to a cottage industry of mutual funds that screen out stocks that religious people might consider morally objectionable. The Timothy Plan and the Ave Maria Fund, for example, screen for companies that manufacture abortion drugs, support Planned Parenthood, or engage in embryonic stem cell research. Dan Hardt, a Kentucky financial planner who specializes in faith-based investing, says the performances of these funds are about the same as if they had not been screened.
[/INDENT]

So $73million has gone into the companies that clashed with their beliefs?

Or is $73 million the total value of the funds?

Because the constant mentioning of $73 million seems calculated to leave the impression that this is the money invested in companies that make the problematic items.

As opposed to these medical benefits? What is the difference if I have a religious belief that I should pay my employees based on some formula I have found in the bible?

Minimum wage has already been adjudicated as a compelling government interest. And it’s narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Do you understand the RFRA’s analysis steps?

[Antinor01]

@Bricker

Until today. Now, of course, they have been.

Uh huh. And I agree with her that it was the wrong decision.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@Bricker

A quick read sure makes it sound like Hobby Lobby has invested $73 million into the companies that produce the very same drugs they say they’re against.

But is that actually what Hobby Lobby has done?

If you are asking if Hobby Lobby wrote a check for $73 million then no, they did not.

What they are doing however is being a party to a fund that between them and employee contributions and growth of the fund has $73 million invested in, partly, companies they claim to have a “sincere” opposition to.

This cannot just be an accident. There are plenty of examples of activist investing…nothing new there. If you care about certain issues it is entirely possible to make investment decisions that match your ideology. If you (general “you”) are ideologically opposed to something like contraceptives such that you literally make a federal case of it and take it to the Supreme Court then it certainly seems reasonable that your concern for this extends to investment decisions.

Yet it doesn’t here. Seems to me their sincere belief extends to their wallets and no further.

[rsa]

@Bricker

So $73million has gone into the companies that clashed with their beliefs?

Or is $73 million the total value of the funds?

Because the constant mentioning of $73 million seems calculated to leave the impression that this is the money invested in companies that make the problematic items.

The $73 million is not calculated to leave the impression that you claim to have. I know you’re smarter than that and I’m a bit disappointed that you are being so willfully clueless. Let me spell it out. (BTW, my prior posts have contained the $73 million figure only once. I think you’re conflating my and Whack-a-Mole’s posts.)

Hobby Lobby has a retirement plan for its employees. That retirement plan has three quarters of its assets, $73 million, invested in funds which contain holdings in companies that make or otherwise have an involvement in abortion related products and services. If you plan to argue that whatever that percentage is, it’s not significant, then you will have to tell me the significance of the amount of Hobby Lobby ACA premiums are accounted for by “abortion” coverage. Similarly small I am sure.

Do you understand the RFRA’s analysis steps?

No, but I’ll look into it.

[Little_Nemo]

In a late-breaking news story, Hobby Lobby has announced it has converted to the Church of Scientology. The corporation expressed its thanks to the Green family for all they’ve done for it and stated there are no plans at this time to sever their business relationship but said it no longer shares their religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby went on to thank the Supreme Court for its recent decision, which granted it the right to hold its own religious views independent of the religious views of its owners.

[rsa]

Analysis of the ruling reveals that the Supreme Court has endorsed a single payer system for contraceptive healthcare:

In a concurring opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy writes that the federal government could choose to pay for contraception coverage, removing the companies from the equation.

It is expected that rulings in the next term will add additional medical components to the preferred single payer healthcare alternative.

[Little_Pig]

I think I can do this on the SDMB.

Here is a link I posted on the subject in a thread in the BBQ Pit. It is for reference only.

[Bricker]

@Whack-a-Mole

If you are asking if Hobby Lobby wrote a check for $73 million then no, they did not.

What they are doing however is being a party to a fund that between them and employee contributions and growth of the fund has $73 million invested in, partly, companies they claim to have a “sincere” opposition to.

“Partly?”

So, like, half?

One fifth?

One tenth?

What’s the magnitude here?

Would it surprise you to learn it’s less than one tenth?

Would it surprise you to learn it’s less than one hundredth?

Would it surprise you to learn it’s less than one thousandth?

One ten-thousandth?

One hundred-thousandth?

At what minuscule percentage might you agree that the involvement is de minimis?

And you understand the fund is not theirs, right? They have a 401K fund. That fund buys mutual funds. Those mutual funds, in turns, by thousands of companies shares. You get that, yes?

Oh, rats. I just gave a hint to my fractions question.

[Bricker]

@Little_Nemo

In a late-breaking news story, Hobby Lobby has announced it has converted to the Church of Scientology. The corporation expressed its thanks to the Green family for all they’ve done for it and stated there are no plans at this time to sever their business relationship but said it no longer shares their religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby went on to thank the Supreme Court for its recent decision, which granted it the right to hold its own religious views independent of the religious views of its owners.

I assume you did not actually read the decision:

A corporation is simply a form of organization used by human beings to achieve desired ends. An established body of law specifies the rights and obligations of the people (including shareholders, officers, and employees) who are associated with a corporation in one way or another. When rights, whether constitutional or statutory, are extended to corporations, the purpose is to protect the rights of these people.

So the decision very clearly, and very explicitly, and in words so simple that most high school graduates could follow, made very obvious that their ruling was that a corporation exists to achieve the ends of natural human persons, not have some independent act or volition independent of its shareholders, officers, and employees.

Now, since you did not read the decision, you were clearly unaware of that.

But now that you have been apprised of that fact, I have saved you from posting any more errors such as the above.

You’re welcome.

[Skammer]

@Bricker

OK, let’s try another approach.

Does the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore, a corporation, have any rights to exercise religion?

I assume you answer “Yes.”

My answer to this is “No.” Because a corporation is a legal construction, not a human being, and cannot have religious convictions.

The leaders and members of the Archdiocese have the right to exercise their religion, of course.

I recognize that the Supreme Court disagrees with me, so this is just my minority and unenforceable opinion.

[Little_Nemo]

@Bricker

I assume you did not actually read the decision:

Hey, don’t blame me. I’m just reporting the news.

[Bricker]

@Little_Nemo

Hey, don’t blame me. I’m just reporting the news.

Oh.

Then, cite?

[Bricker]

@Skammer

My answer to this is “No.” Because a corporation is a legal construction, not a human being, and cannot have religious convictions.

The leaders and members of the Archdiocese have the right to exercise their religion, of course.

I recognize that the Supreme Court disagrees with me, so this is just my minority and unenforceable opinion.

Does a corporation have any rights at all?

[Whack-a-Mole]

@Bricker

“Partly?”

So, like, half?

One fifth?

One tenth?

I do not know what their 401k program is like but if it is like most companies they provide matching funds to their employees. Matching is not uncommon but whatever it is I doubt it is insignificant.

And you understand the fund is not theirs, right? They have a 401K fund. That fund buys mutual funds. Those mutual funds, in turns, by thousands of companies shares. You get that, yes?

Even if Hobby Lobby does not contribute a single penny to their 401k plan they do get to choose what plans are on offer. Per their own Statement of Purpose: “Honoring the Lord in all we do by operating the company in a manner consistent with Biblical principles.”

It may surprise you to know that there are funds out there that invest in accordance with biblical principles. Here are a few I found with about 10 seconds of effort.

I am willing to bet with Hobby Lobby’s resources and $73 million they could find someone on Wall Street willing to help them make investments consistent with their ideology. Why wouldn’t they? We know how REALLY IMPORTANT this is to them!

[rsa]

@Bricker

“Partly?”

So, like, half?

One fifth?

One tenth?

What’s the magnitude here?

Would it surprise you to learn it’s less than one tenth?

Would it surprise you to learn it’s less than one hundredth?

Would it surprise you to learn it’s less than one thousandth?

One ten-thousandth?

One hundred-thousandth?

At what minuscule percentage might you agree that the involvement is de minimis?

And you understand the fund is not theirs, right? They have a 401K fund. That fund buys mutual funds. Those mutual funds, in turns, by thousands of companies shares. You get that, yes?

Oh, rats. I just gave a hint to my fractions question.

I anticipated this argument.

If you plan to argue that whatever that percentage is, it’s not significant, then you will have to tell me the significance of the amount of Hobby Lobby ACA premiums are accounted for by “abortion” coverage. Similarly small I am sure.

Care to respond?

And FYI, Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).

[Little_Nemo]

@Bricker

Oh.

Then, cite?

Okay, you’ve got me. I admit everything. My post was all a lie. Hobby Lobby did not convert to Scientology. Corporations can’t even talk. I don’t know how I thought I could get such a poorly-conceived fabrication past a keen intellect like yours, which obviously never misses anything.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Bricker: let’s leave aside the role of judges for a moment (and thus the issue of whose job it is to fix this). In your view, does the RFRA allow an adherent of religion X to require male employees to wear beards if it is his sincerely held belief that is is sinful for men to be clean shaven?

[Skammer]

Forgive me if this has been covered already, but does anyone know if the Hobby Lobby medical plan is fully insured, or self-funded?

In other words, is Hobby Lobby directly paying health care providers for their employees’ claims, or do they pay premiums to an insurance company who then pays the claims? Because in the second case you could argue that HL doesn’t pay for abortions any more than if an employee took their paycheck from HL and paid for an abortion that way.