Question For Hobby Lobby And The David Green Family

Will the ‘Christian’ David Green family in charge of Hobby Lobby, given their seeming abhorrence to anything that might smack of abortion, also now not sell anything made in China since that nation has long favored one-child families and encouraged abortions.

Or does David Green just have an ax to grind against a black president and a Democratic majority in congress?  Might the Green’s just  be money-hungry and morally corrupt?  Instead of removing the timber that is lodged in the Green’s family eye do they instead point the finger at everyone else so to not need to be more self-aware?

Those in the nation with any sense of rational thought knows full-well that the war on women the Green family has undertaken, and now is legally able to continue undertaking, is wrong.  Therefore a nationwide boycott of Hobby Lobby will need to be employed to show what we think of this company.


6 thoughts on “Question For Hobby Lobby And The David Green Family

  1. tom

    LOL! What a vindictive post. First of all, the Chinese government isn’t mandating policies which Green must directly support. He is not Chinese, but American. As an American he has standing to petition his government for the his rights–but not the Chinese government. Mr. Green still consents to pay for 16 forms of birth control; isn’t that enough? Why isn’t that reasonable? Women may still obtain abortions so they have access, and I’m sure nothing would please the left more than to donate their money to pay for them.

    And the left has for years made a fad out of the most repressive cultures and had the gall the ignore the very real war on women and homosexuals waged daily in so many parts of the world. Yeah, all cultures are equal!

  2. Alinka

    our tommy tends to cram many words into a little sense.. Hypocrites, that’s your answer, tovarisch Deke. Greenes are bigots and hypocrites.

    On top, this is important part: Hobby Lobby is not legally required to compensate its employees with health insurance at all. The regulations imposed by the ACA are on insurance plans,not on the corporation per se. Simply that means that if corporations choose to take advantage of the tax benefits for compensating employees in health insurance rather than wages, the insurance has to meet minimum coverage standards.

    HobbyLobby wants it both ways, to get the tax benefits without providing the full benefits to employees. Under the guise of ‘religious freedom’.

    Bob Jones Christian University litigated for over a decade to keep black students from attending their school AND maintain their religious tax exempt status, citing the same “religious freedom”. Until Supreme Court gave them the middle finger and said no, choose one or the other( they choose money, as in tax exemption, of course) That’s what technically Hobby Lobby deserved, too..

  3. tom

    Would the employees of Hobby Lobby be better off with no insurance at all?

    Women who chose to destroy their children can still do so; they just need to pay for it themselves. Perhaps if they took up a collection from all those protestors they could afford to destroy several children.

  4. It is silly, Tom, that we still have insurance and employment linked, and since you seem fine with that makes your comment about contraceptives also seem fitting for the era that you seem still to reside politically. I am willing to fight this battle at the polls and I can assure you that most people–even those who label themselves good Catholics–are pro-contraceptive. Contraceptives and abortion will be a fight that one started your party will lose on, again, at the ballot box.

    Game on!.

  5. Tom

    I believe that most Americans support the continued legality of abortion though they think it an abomination–which it undoubtably is. Most of the civilized world, however, places serious restrictions on it, and most will not allow it after 25 weeks (at least most European nations.) I have not seen any data on polls which suggests how happy people would be to have public funding for abortion–as part of a government funded insurance system which I sense you are implying with your comments about the polls.

    Back in my younger and more liberal years, my peers and I who once protested against South Africa and the rest steadfastly believed that one needed to retain a deep suspicion of the government. It is so curious to me that today’s liberals believe they have seized control of that same government and no longer have any reason to fear it. What I mean is that the old liberal in me would caution that what government gives it can take away, and when it does not take away it uses what it “gives” to control.

    Therefore, those who depend on the government are always controlled and never free. Perhaps I just read too much Thoreau.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s