Hobby Lobby Delays Fines by Shifting Insurance Dates

A Hobby Lobby store. Photo courtesy of the Becket Fund.

Washington D.C. (CNA/EWTN News).- Arts and crafts retailer Hobby Lobby has found a way to adjust its employee healthcare plan to delay potentially crippling fines for refusing to comply with the federal contraception mandate.

The company will now “shift the plan year for its employee health insurance, thus postponing the effective date of the mandate for several months,” announced attorney Peter M. Dobelbower in a Jan. 10 statement.

“Hobby Lobby does not provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs in its healthcare plan,” Dobelbower said, adding that the retailer “will continue to vigorously defend its religious liberty and oppose the mandate and any penalties.”

By shifting its insurance plan year, the company will gain time in its battle against the federal contraception mandate, which would have taken effect for it on Jan. 1, 2013.

The controversial mandate, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, requires that employers provide insurance plans that offer contraceptives – including some drugs that can cause early abortions – and sterilization. (Read more here.)

  • Lucky Louise

    I hope they find many other workarounds to keep them afloat until they triumph in court. May God bless them and may their business prosper.

  • Sus

    The Pollyanna in me desperately wants a compromise that both sides can agree to.

  • Sarah Kuriakos

    I firmly and heartily support Hobby Lobby’s stance on this. They’re opening a new store near me, and I’m in the process of applying to work there. I pray that God will give them wisdom and guidance on how to proceed, and favor in the courts, as well as His blessing in all that they do!!

  • FW Ken

    A compromise might include the government directly funding non-abortion-inducing contraceptives and maybe sterilization services, probably through public heath services. I suspect such is already happening using the tax money I pay to our excellent public hospital district. That would take the onus of immediate participation in evil away (if I understand the moral principles involved) by moving funding into the amorphous poll of tax money. That’s one scenario, perhaps.

    As an aside, I can’t imagine how any decent person who knows anything about the 20th century eugenics movement can support government involvement in sterilization. Theology aside, its just scarry.

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      Of course it’s already happening Ken. It’s under Title X.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X