Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bbsam" data-source="post: 943377" data-attributes="member: 22662"><p>The more I think about it, the more I am sure the Obama administration is going to win this.&nbsp; If health insurance is part of a compensation package, the employer&#039;s dictates end once the employee receives them.&nbsp; Can the church dictate that money paid to it&#039;s workers not be spent on pornography because the church finds it contrary to it&#039;s teachings?&nbsp; Can the church dictate that a vacation taken by it&#039;s employees not include gambling and &quot;houses of ill repute&quot; while in Nevada?&nbsp; Can a retiree from the church be prohibitted from moving to Amsterdam to take advantage of it&#039;s ultra-liberal drug laws?&nbsp; It is clear that the answer to each should clearly be &quot;no&quot; and thus it is clear that health insurance as part of a compensation package is not subject to the moral objections of the employer no matter how strongly believed, felt, or expressed.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="bbsam, post: 943377, member: 22662"] The more I think about it, the more I am sure the Obama administration is going to win this. If health insurance is part of a compensation package, the employer's dictates end once the employee receives them. Can the church dictate that money paid to it's workers not be spent on pornography because the church finds it contrary to it's teachings? Can the church dictate that a vacation taken by it's employees not include gambling and "houses of ill repute" while in Nevada? Can a retiree from the church be prohibitted from moving to Amsterdam to take advantage of it's ultra-liberal drug laws? It is clear that the answer to each should clearly be "no" and thus it is clear that health insurance as part of a compensation package is not subject to the moral objections of the employer no matter how strongly believed, felt, or expressed. [/QUOTE]

Verification