world

Major companies stay mum on thorny abortion issue - for now

40 Comments
By HALELUYA HADERO and ANNE D'INNOCENZIO

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

40 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

I'm pro-abortion, if adoption or the "compassionate conservative" people don't step up and figure out a plan to raise all the children their stance would create.

I'm also pro-death penalty for heinous murders or multiple murders that aren't 100% accidental. Intent matters.

I call this being consistent, which is very different than most anti-abortion people and the most anti-death penalty people.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

How about it, Disney? In for a penny, in for a pound?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Lots of big companies are now offering to pay for abortions for their employees. At least some big companies have morals.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I call this being consistent, which is very different than most anti-abortion people and the most anti-death penalty people.

Absolute and utter hogwash! I’m pro-life for the defenseless but very pro-death for any criminal that prays on the weak. You can be consistent and you can change your position n any subject as you wish, there is no law that states you have to stand by one or cannot evolve on the issue, that’s for each person to determine.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

In March, Texas State Representative Briscoe Cain, a Republican, sent a cease-and-desist letter to Citigroup, saying he would propose legislation barring local governments in the state from doing business with any company that provides travel benefits for employees seeking abortions.

Why?

The Disney story is interesting. The DeSantis hothead is trying to revoke Reedy Creek, but glossed over the part in his "woke" speech that two Florida counties will be saddled with over a billion in new debt which will be directly paid for by those homeowners. They've already initiated a lawsuit against Ron.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Companies need to stay “mum”.

somebody’s abortion desire doesn’t need to be brought to the office.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Companies and employees should be able to chose and use their own benefits and not get interference from outsiders thousands of miles away.

After all, corporations are people too, and have freedom of speech rights.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The Disney story is interesting. The DeSantis hothead is trying to revoke Reedy Creek, but glossed over the part in his "woke" speech that two Florida counties will be saddled with over a billion in new debt which will be directly paid for by those homeowners. They've already initiated a lawsuit against Ron.

Florida law and decades of court precedent prevent the dissolution of a taxing authority, which describes Reedy Creek, when there are outstanding bonds. Some have said the state of Florida can simply appropriate money to pay off all of the outstanding debt incurred by Reedy Creek. The problem is a utility bond issue from 2018 the terms of which prohibit that bond issue from being retired before 2028. This will likely end up in court with the state being sued by investors and probably by Reedy Creek itself.

https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/first-lawsuit-file-to-challenge-dismantling-of-disney-worlds-reedy-creek

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Desert: This will likely end up in court with the state being sued by investors and probably by Reedy Creek itself.

Yeah, but wokism will decrease ny 18%!! Heh

They have tons of things to undo. The state will lose about $163 million a year in taxes that Reedy Creek pays, not including the debt. You have pensions for people like firefighters will either lose or the state will take over. Then the counties will be on the hook to provide all the services like fire, police, ambulance, phone service.

If there's a pothole on a Disney road, taxpayers will foot the bill.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

They've already initiated a lawsuit against Ron.

Good luck with that.

Companies and employees should be able to chose and use their own benefits and not get interference from outsiders thousands of miles away. 

Ok, so in this case outsiders should be prohibited? Good to know.

After all, corporations are people too, and have freedom of speech rights.

I hope the left remembers that. Wise words.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Bass: Ok, so in this case outsiders should be prohibited?

What right does Florida have to tell a Seattle based Amazon what terms it will allow in their compensation packages? I thought you'd be against the big government overreach.

You've said your fine with other states keeping abortion as their choice, often saying the should just travel to another state. This is just a means where the company will pay for it. Seems like a win-win and the government needs to stay out of it.

Good luck with that.

I'm sure you'll be so depressed when the courts rule in favor of due process and against retaliation of a private company exercising freedom of speech.

I mean, I'm guessing that's your position in general, but you'll put your convictions aside and give Ron a pass since it makes you feel better.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@Ah_so I 100% support the right to choose but I think you may be reading too much into businesses offering to pay for staff abortions. Not having people out on maternal leave is worth the cost to the businesses of paying for abortions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What right does Florida have to tell a Seattle based Amazon what terms it will allow in their compensation packages?

Maybe if Bezos would treat his staff with respect we could have better service. Musk should buy Amazon then I’m sure people will be a lot happier.

I thought you'd be against the big government overreach.

Usually I am but now it’s gotten to the point where liberals are just out of control and they weren’t this radical. Probably the wokeness and Kool-aid is way too sweet.

You've said your fine with other states keeping abortion as their choice,

if that is what the people vote for.

often saying the should just travel to another state. This is just a means where the company will pay for it. Seems like a win-win and the government needs to stay out of it.

Again, a woman wants to go to another to kill a child then go and if your employer back in your Home state where abortion is illegal pays for it, that doesn’t concern me, that is your choice

I'm sure you'll be so depressed when the courts rule in favor of due process and against retaliation of a private company exercising freedom of speech.

Yeah, that might be a different mountain to climb, but they should go for it.

I mean, I'm guessing that's your position in general, but you'll put your convictions aside and give Ron a pass since it makes you feel better.

actually, it doesn’t make me feel better, I have always been consistent and I think the man is a genius especially when it comes to looking out for the workingman, children and his state, unlike the liberals in my former state of California where, they could care less about anything or anyone and that is the reason why the state is going downhill

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Maybe I am just an old fart, but I yearn for the days when politics didn't infest so many areas of life, as it does today. Sports, entertainment, now business, all feel somewhat obligated to have 'official' positions on whatever happens to be the issue of the day. I don't care what Amazon or their executives think about abortion, or immigration, or gender equality, I just like their service.

I mean, they never REALLY have anything interesting to say anyway. They just repeat the same tired cliches, bromides, and euphemisms that professional politicians use when they want to feign outrage in front of the cameras.

If companies choose to pay for abortions, abortion related travel expenses, and the like, that is their decision. If recruiting is difficult because they are located in a state that has more restrictions on abortion access, they can move or offer the above to their prospective employees.

Politicians should stay out of the way too. I am uneasy at tying politics and business too closely together.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Blacklabel, whats your position on abortion? Exceptions or no exceptions?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Bass: Maybe if Bezos would treat his staff with respect

Thanks for telling me you don't know anything about the situation and are quickly transitioning to the usual, "why I hate liberals" cut and paste. Saves me a lot of time trying to educate you.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

exceptions could be possible for some of the things that happen less than 0.5% of the time that people use to justify to make their abortions of convenience legal.

the butwhatabouts and whatifs that rarely happen could be potential exceptions to an otherwise strict no exception policy. but even those would likely be misused.

so I if I had to chose, I would say no exceptions. after birth, the child can be put up for adoption to a loving family who wants them if they are unwanted.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

so now companies need to have abortion leave?

reimbursement and travel expenses?

would there be a limitation on how many and how often?

Do companies really need to open this box?

If only men could get pregnant, this wouldnt even be a conversation, wasnt it?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

exceptions could be possible for some of the things that happen less than 0.5% of the time that people use to justify to make their abortions of convenience legal.

the butwhatabouts and whatifs that rarely happen could be potential exceptions to an otherwise strict no exception policy. but even those would likely be misused.

so I if I had to chose, I would say no exceptions. after birth, the child can be put up for adoption to a loving family who wants them if they are unwanted.

So a woman raped or the victim of incest should just get over it and be forced to give birth...assume you're OK if that was your wife or daughter...

So pregnant undocumented females should give birth in the US (which makes the baby a US citizen)...contributing to the so-called "Replacement Theory"....

Interesting views...

2 ( +3 / -1 )

So a woman raped or the victim of incest should just get over it and be forced to give birth...assume you're OK if that was your wife or daughter...

yep thats the less than 0.5% of the total that doesnt justify abortions of convenience that are the 99.5%

Whatifs and whattabouts that almost never happen shouldnt define policy.

So pregnant undocumented females should give birth in the US (which makes the baby a US citizen)...contributing to the so-called "Replacement Theory"....

Another reason we secure our borders so that illegal aliens dont do birth tourism.

or we change that law, easy.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Blacklabel: exceptions could be possible for some of the things

How about the big three, rape, incest, or the mother's life? You'd have police reports and doctor's reports to corroborate.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

birthright citizenship is quite uncommon anyway. Mostly South/Central America.

Oddly the same countries that have people trying to give birth in the USA.

The following countries have unrestricted birthright citizenship: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Child, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, the United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

How about the big three, rape, incest, or the mother's life? You'd have police reports and doctor's reports to corroborate.

those are the "big three" used to try to justify convenience abortion, yes.

less than 1% of the total, so actually not the "big three".

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Black: so now companies need to have abortion leave?

They offer it because it's good for business. And it's good since some people are fine with the poor not being able to fly to a new state for the procedure.

Not really any of your concern.

reimbursement and travel expenses?

Depends on the policy, but my guess is it's just travel expenses in most cases.

would there be a limitation on how many and how often?

Again, what do you care. That's between the company and the employee. Not tour concern.

Do companies really need to open this box?

See above.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

So a woman raped or the victim of incest should just get over it and be forced to give birth...assume you're OK if that was your wife or daughter...

yep thats the less than 0.5% of the total that doesnt justify abortions of convenience that are the 99.5%

Nope, it's actually 1.5%. So, are you for abortions in this case or not?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/

Whatifs and whattabouts that almost never happen shouldnt define policy.

Legitimate question - if your wife, sister, or daughter was a victim of rape, would you require her to carry the baby to birth?

So pregnant undocumented females should give birth in the US (which makes the baby a US citizen)...contributing to the so-called "Replacement Theory"....

Another reason we secure our borders so that illegal aliens dont do birth tourism.

But they're already here - at least that's what Fox News says every day - hundreds of thousands....and all those that are pregnant should give birth in the US or have the right to an abortion?

or we change that law, easy.

Won't be easy - when was the last time Congress agreed on an immigration bill? So you're OK with those already here giving birth and becoming citizens.... Glad to see you aren't buying into the kooky Replacement Theory nonsense...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib; I will grant the necessity of abortion for the three terrible reasons you mentioned. Also the first trimester, particularlyl when medication can cause the abortion without an invasive surgical procedure. Now, will YOU agree to limiting abortions to those situations? Banning other abortions in the third trimester, when the vast majority of pregnancies are viable? In the second, as most European countries do? Where is YOUR line?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

But they're already here - at least that's what Fox News says every day - hundreds of thousands....and all those that are pregnant should give birth in the US or have the right to an abortion?

if we secure our borders NOW all the births will be done in no more than 9 months then wont be any more. Yes, they should give birth if there is no way to legally deport them for being in the country illegally.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I believe a women should be able to freely have an abortion if she wants. That's my position.

I would go along with banning it in the third trimester, but those are done only in cases where the woman's life is in danger.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Legitimate question - if your wife, sister, or daughter was a victim of rape, would you require her to carry the baby to birth?

its not my choice, its theirs. I cant require either of them to do anything. The law would tell them it is illegal for them to abort that baby.

Doesnt mean we make the law allow convenient abortions just so that this 1.5% is covered too. Also doesnt mean a rape requires an abortion either, sometimes-to-often the baby is born.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

But they're already here - at least that's what Fox News says every day - hundreds of thousands....and all those that are pregnant should give birth in the US or have the right to an abortion?

if we secure our borders NOW all the births will be done in no more than 9 months then wont be any more.

Then how come we didn't secure our borders from 2016-2020? I thought there was supposed to be a "wall" so pregnant women couldn't walk across the border?

Yes, they should give birth if there is no way to legally deport them for being in the country illegally.

OK, so they should be denied an abortion if they wanted one, and forced to give birth in the US, which entitles the child to US citizenship, and the entire undocumented family to green cards...

You definitely are off-script with your fellow Replacement Theory far-right friends...good...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry Black, are you saying you don't accept the three exceptions? Would you vote against it?

And it's not their choice to have an abortion if you and others take that choice away.

Busby: Legitimate question - if your wife, sister, or daughter was a victim of rape, would you require her to carry the baby to birth?

Remember they don't have to be entirely honest here. Someone could vote to ban abortion in all cases, have a family member raped, get pregnant, fly her to California for an abortion, then return and still vote to ban abortion.

No law against that, and I bet a lot of people would do it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry Black, are you saying you don't accept the three exceptions? Would you vote against it?

And it's not their choice to have an abortion if you and others take that choice away.

No exceptions.

they can still have it, it just won’t be legal. There will always be a liberal woke doctor who will do it anyway. Then the court can decide if there is any humanitarian reason where punishment isn’t necessary.

just like in Texas after they banned it one doctor did 60 in one day, illegally. Was super proud of what he had done.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Black: No exceptions.

Thanks for answering.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No exceptions.

I see....your wife, daughter, or sister who were violently raped would be forced to carry the baby to birth...and you'd pay for the pre-natal care....how compassionate...

And all those illegal alien births....now all US citizens and green card holders...ready to "replace" white America...

Again, interesting views...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Thanks Lib for the answer. It seems like most people actually agree if they think about it, not 100% but at least 80-90. It's the crazies on both sides that make it difficult to discuss rationally. Did you see Senator Warren ranting away? Conspiracy theories about the Supreme Court, stomping around in a flower bed, she was completely unhinged by something that hasn't even happened yet!

Florida just passed a law. Basics- no third trimester abortions (that is unchanged from before) unless the life of the mother is threatened. First trimester allowed up to 15 weeks. The change is the second trimester, where the law changes to not allowing abortions except as above. That comprises only about 4-5% of all abortion procedures in the state. So about 95% is unchanged from the current situation. I think this is a good starting point.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Thanks for telling me you don't know anything about the situation

I think it’s the other way around actually, but you will learn soon enough.

Remember they don't have to be entirely honest here.

Hmmmm

Someone could vote to ban abortion in all cases, have a family member raped, get pregnant, fly her to California for an abortion, then return and still vote to ban abortion.

That could happen, but that’s an exception usually and not the rule.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And all those illegal alien births....now all US citizens and green card holders...

Well, no because there is no boat right now to give any of these people political asylum or granting them US status.

ready to "replace" white America...

with low-skilled workers from Latin America and other countries? Ok, So that means liberals want more homelessness? In other words middle-class people are leaving and be replaced by Low-skilled workers and by the looks of it, California will be a Third World state in no time

Again, interesting views...

Glad I don’t live anywhere near that conundrum.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see....your wife, daughter, or sister who were violently raped would be forced to carry the baby to birth...and you'd pay for the pre-natal care....how compassionate...

Or they could find a woke doctor who will proudly and defiantly break the law for them. their choice but the law is not written for the 1.5% outliers.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

now all US citizens and green card holders...ready to "replace" white America...

6 months of babies can’t do that. It’s why Biden needs to keep the border open for 4 years.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Black: the 1.5% outliers

Are you saying a 98.5% ban doesn't do it for you......you want 100%? I'm not entirely sure because your posts aren't clear to me but it would appear your choosing all illegal and all illegal in your mind?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites