ST Alpha - "Honestly I don't understand why it's less bothersome. If we're going to go down this path, why don't employers who are Jehovah's witnesses have the " (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "That'll teach me to jump on the outrage bandwagon with you Lefties!" by Stephen

Honestly I don't understand why it's less bothersome. If we're going to go down this path, why don't employers who are Jehovah's witnesses have the

Posted by pmb (aka pmb) Mar 13 '12, 14:39

right to opt out of paying for blood transfusions (for instance). We've drawn lines in this country to protect individuals from having religious will imposed on them. They're no more palatable because they are catholic or some other more orthodox christian religion than any other.

Responses:

[deleted] 15
- I'll admit to not reading the details, but the first thing that came to mind was - MojaveMeg Mar 13, 15:20 3
  - oh, employers can have access to your medical information. you have to sign away your rights to it, but they can get it. - b. Mar 13, 15:32
  - She's only required to disclose the information if she wants to be reimbursed. -- nm - mara Mar 13, 15:29 1
    - but not to the employer. -- nm - loosilu Mar 13, 15:31
- Anyone who a) saw who posted it, b) saw the blog header, c) read it, and d) still got took.... - TFox Mar 13, 14:50 9
  - *hangs head* multitasking/exhausted-brain fail! -- nm - b. Mar 13, 15:03 1
    - er, please note, I didn't get past a and the comments here. -- nm - b. Mar 13, 15:03
  - I dunno, man. That's a *lot* of reading. -- nm - St.Vermin Mar 13, 14:58 2
    - [deleted] 1
      - It was meant to be posted with a 'dawson si' handle. -- nm - St.Vermin Mar 13, 15:37
  - I saw the blog header. Clicked through to the original link. Saw that blog header. Immediately googled the bill. - spamlet Mar 13, 14:57
  - What if you completely missed b), but if you hadn't you would have looked more closely? - Stephen Mar 13, 14:54 1
    - yes -- nm - tRuMaN Mar 13, 14:54
  - [deleted]
- ya got zeitgot! -- nm - pixitude Mar 13, 14:46
that's my objection to the whole idea. -- nm - loosilu Mar 13, 14:43
Because while I don't believe that non religious institutions should have the right to deny coverage, that's a far cry from "if you take birth control - Stephen Mar 13, 14:43
saracasticly, i will say its because they arent a power in the religious right - tRuMaN Mar 13, 14:42
This. -- nm - Mop on Evo Mar 13, 14:41
/sues for having an office birthday party in my presence -- nm - Verminous Witness Mar 13, 14:41 1
- *eats a donut in front of you* -- nm - znufrii Mar 13, 14:42
exactly. -- nm - b. Mar 13, 14:41

Post a message top

Honestly I don't understand why it's less bothersome. If we're going to go down this path, why don't employers who are Jehovah's witnesses have the

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.