Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Dawson Leery

(19,348 posts) Sat Apr 5, 2014, 03:38 PM Apr 2014

Companies opposed to the HHS contraception coverage mandate.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-sebelius-contraceptive-for-profit-lawsuits

Scroll down.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Companies opposed to the HHS contraception coverage mandate. (Original Post) Dawson Leery Apr 2014 OP

Following this logic... doxydad Apr 2014 #1

I doubt the stores will close Warpy Apr 2014 #2

Anyone notice an inordinate amount of plaintiffs from a few states? Namely Michigan. I think the guy okaawhatever Apr 2014 #3

doxydad

(1,363 posts)

1. Following this logic...

Reply to Dawson Leery (Original post)

Sat Apr 5, 2014, 03:51 PM

Apr 2014

Following this logic...what if I wanted all my employees to be...Mormon? Or follow my religious beliefs? Where do we draw the line? BTW: I will stand outside the Hobby Lobby store when they lock the doors for the las ttime, and eat a big old bag of popcorn and cheer. It will never happen.

Warpy

(111,282 posts)

2. I doubt the stores will close

Reply to doxydad (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 5, 2014, 04:00 PM

Apr 2014

They'll just be sold off to some vulture capitalist so the Greens can keep their sanctimonious hands clean.

okaawhatever

(9,462 posts)

3. Anyone notice an inordinate amount of plaintiffs from a few states? Namely Michigan. I think the guy

Reply to Dawson Leery (Original post)

Sat Apr 5, 2014, 05:59 PM

Apr 2014

who owned Domino's and now only owns the farm that supplies to Domino's rounded up a bunch of his friends. He's a billionaire political activist.

Reply to this discussion