Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Private businesses are trying to block Obamacare on religious grounds? What do companies worship besides, perhaps, the almighty dollar?

That’s the question at the heart of two conflicting rulings from lower courts that the Supreme Court has decided to take up in its second constitutional showdown over President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

Since the law also known as Obamacare was passed, dozens of Christian employers have challenged its birth-control mandate that requires employers to provide health insurance coverage for FDA-approved contraception.

Abortion rights opponents believe some of the allowed contraceptive methods block fertilized eggs from implanting in a woman’s uterus. That’s disputed by other research findings that the methods in question actually work before fertilization occurs.

To placate such objections, the Obama administration has changed the requirement to allow explicitly religious organizations and some other nonprofits to opt out of paying for insurance directly, passing the costs on to their insurance provider instead.

But that doesn’t apply to the big for-profit corporations at issue in the two cases that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear.

In one of them, the 10th Circuit Court upheld the argument of Oklahoma City-based Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., a chain of 500 arts-and-crafts stores with 13,000 full-time employees, that the mandate would violate the rights of owners David and Barbara Green under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. That law says that a “person” can seek to opt out of a law under some circumstances if obeying it would “substantially burden” the exercise of his or her religion.

But is a corporation a “person?” Yes, says the 10th Circuit, under the Citizens United decision, which holds that corporations have the same First Amendment rights as individual people to spend money as a form of speech in political campaigns.

Not so, says the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, in the second of the two decisions the justices will review. In rejecting the arguments of Conestoga Wood Specialties, a Pennsylvania manufacturer of wooden cabinets owned by a Mennonite family, the appeals court wrote that corporations “do not pray, worship, observe sacraments or take other religiously motivated actions separate and apart from the intention and direction of their individual actors.”

That sounds right to me. Even if the corporations qualified as “persons” under the 1993 law, which I am sure would surprise many of those who voted for it, the law cites a “substantial burden” on the exercise of religion.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 The National Memo

84 Responses to Will Supreme Court Endow Corporations With A Soul, Too?

  1. These decisions will determine whether or not we will have to live with an activist court until a new Supreme Court judge can be appointed–which cannot happen soon enough. This Supreme Court’s last decision with respect to the ACA has resulted in five million people who would have been covered by Medicaid to be left with no health care coverage whatsoever in Red states where governors have decided not to accept Medicaid expansion. This court’s last decision gave these Red states the option of refusing to set up state health insurance exchanges, a precedent resulting in the overloading of, which may cause more Americans to be left without health insurance than would be otherwise. The activist flavor of Citizens United and this court’s gutting of the Voting Rights Act do not bode well for the court’s ability, in the case of these two decisions, to resist acting on its Republican propensities. The situation also demonstrates the need for the president’s judicial appointments to reach the bench throughout the nation.

  2. The decisions that have already been made, and the likelihood of worse decisions in the future, will increase by orders of magnitude if the GOP controls the Senate after the 2014 midterm election. Considering how lame the Democratic party is when it comes to electioneering, it is incumbent on us to start a grassroots movement to ensure every single Democrat votes next year.

    • only 48.8% of the registered voters bothered in 2012. In 2010 it was 36% of registered voters, which meant that only 25% of possible voters bothered. People get what they deserve. If they awaken enough to be angry about the decisions, maybe they will bother to register and bother to vote. Apparently half the people are hypnotized by the lame “belief” that “they are all the same”. Obviously, those people are not capable of nuance. Maybe its best that they sit at home and watch CSI.

      • I think that one of the reasons for poor voter turnout is the fact that voting gets you put on the jury duty list. Commissioners of jurors try to deny it, but they’re just lying.

        The last time that I was selected for jury duty, I was pleased to see that the usual pep talk didn’t assert that voting didn’t expose one to jury duty.

        • More and more states, including Florida where I lived until 2 years ago, are pulling jury-duty lists from BOTH voter and driver license rolls. I am not sure about Georgia, but since I was called to a jury poll only twice in 20 years (first time I was not picked for a trial, second time I sat on a trivial case inflated from a domestic dispute), it cannot be a very high risk.

          Maybe if EVERY state went to combining driver license rolls and voter registration, and ADVERTISED that voting would not make ANY difference in jury callups (unless you don’t drive or have a non-driver photo ID, which in many states keeps you from voting anyway), more people would be willing to vote.

          • In New York we’re told that four years will elapse before we’re called again.

            Personally, I think that the jury system is deeply flawed, because it’s impossible in many cases for a litigant to get a jury of his or her peers, especially if the issues are highly technical

        • When I get a Jury Summon I tell the Attorneys ( I’ll vote yes to a guilty verdict ), so the door is open for me and I am told go home. If someone is in court that someone had to do something and now they want the jurors to listen to their sad story about being raped as a teen, and that led them to do some killings.

          • You’re fortunate that you haven’t been cited for failure to report, because in effect that’s what you’re doing. People who repeatedly answer the lawyers’ questions in a way to get them off jury duty sometime receive reprimands from the presiding judge to stop doing it.

            Your last sentence makes no sense to me at all. Would you care to express it easy to understand terms?

          • I do report, but get out of serving as a Juror. They ask you for your honest opinion and that’s a good reason to not have you as one of the jurors. You can’t be cited for being honest. If they ask you ( has someone ever robbed or hurt a family member ) you have the right to tell them yes and they won’t choose you as a juror since they will feel you won’t be fair to the killer or thief. They will tell you thanks for coming in and you know where the door is to exit the Courtroom. ( About the last sentence ) Someone that ends up in court isn’t there for being a nice person, so that’s why they are in a Courtroom Setting.

    • I agree it all come down to how many turn out to vote and the place that efforts works the best is at a local level. If everyone just donated a few hours helping and encouraging others to vote, it contribute more to a win than all the dollar donations in the world.

      • I believe there are some counties where it is illegal NOT to vote ? Of course it would be easier if elections were held on the weekends OR if election day were a National holiday . Won’t happen because Republicans Know that they LOSE if voter turnout is High .

        • I wouldn’t go so far as to make it illegal not to vote but I agree that it should be made more convenient and it should be encouraged and people should be reminded that it is something we have fought for and should be done with the memory that it is a privilege .

    • There is no faster way to lose our freedoms than to no vote. Maybe if voting took place from 0001 on Friday to 2359 on Tuesday, we’d have a better turnout. And how about having voting places in Malls. It seems a lot of Americans can make the mall but not the voting booth.

      Also, why can’t our voting registrars maintain accurate records–Amazon, Social Security, and the IRS seem able to track us? If we had a master list that interfaced with the IRS or SS, then the state and localities would know who was alive and a citizen. Heck, why doesn’t the government use our SS# as our registration, and automatically add people as soon as they turn 18, then a month prior to primaries or Nov, they could interface with the SS Admin, and confirm who’s alive and who’s not, plus the accurate domicile of the voter. It’d sure simplify voting and the voter lists.

      • Excellent and very accurate points. Unfortunately, the trend seems to be towards making things as difficult as possible to vote, rather than finding ways to encourage people to exercise one of our most important rights.
        One of my greatest fears is that complacency or indifference may deliver the Senate to the GOP in 2014.

      • Those in Congress got voted in same as the President and what have these clowns done for the American Citizens? Nada! Last I heard their first thought is the Illegals and than the Illegals again and again.

      • Nothing proved more disastrous to the Democrats than sitting out the 2010 election resulting in the rise of the Tea Party . It was compounded by the fact that it enabled Republicans to win majorities in state offices thus enabling them to gerrymander election districts to ensure an almost unbeatable Republican House . Remember the Democrats won the vote almost a million more votes for the House but still did not come close to taking the house .It accounts for the obstinacy of .the House Tea Party members whose districts are safe no matter WHAT they do OR more accurately don’t DO .
        When this Congress adjourns it will have passed the Fewest Bills EVER including a Farm Bill ,a Water bill and other previously non controversial bills . It will be interesting to see if they let the ban on Plastic guns EXPIRE ( especially since such weapons now can be made : original Bill proposed By Reagan passed the house with ONLY 4 negative votes)

  3. Corporations do not have a soul
    Corporations owners and directors do, and any decision they make should weight on their conscience.
    We are not talking about Walmart here, we are talking about a couple of business owners that are good and fair to their employees living up to their Christian values in many other ways.
    And comparing a religious belief to not pay for contraception to human sacrifice is a ridiculous hyperbole……If you are really concerned about human sacrifice, then why so adamant about protecting abortion?
    Abortion is Human Sacrifice literally speaking , human sacrifice to the god of lust and unprotected sex.

    • If you don’t have a problem with “protected” sex, why do you object to contraceptives, which would reduce the incidence of abortion dramatically?

      • Conservatives can’t wrap their brains around that concept. Their brains only function on autopilot from what others tell them to think and/o believe.

        • That is as stupid as saying
          “all blacks are thief and liars” OR
          “all Irish are drunks” Or
          “all lefties are just lazy people that just want to live of somebody’s else work”

      • I do not object to contraceptives. I think they are great (well maybe they cause blood clots) and women use them for other reasons that to prevent pregnancy , like controlling and stabilizing menstruation.
        I object to government forcing any person/employer to pay for them if it is against their religious belief. If you are an traditional Catholic you are still not supposed to use them.
        Of course, there is always an option for these employers. Terminate their company health plan and send all the employees to to get any government subsidy they can qualified to…after all Obama postponed the large employer mandate because he did not want to see higher unemployment in a year of congressional elections or affect the collection plates of congressional Democrats OR maybe he want it to see the health insurance companies suffer the losses of paying claims for the previously uninsurable while not receiving the benefits of the premiums from large employer groups.
        Oh, the purity of politics !!!

        • Do you object to the government’s forcing religious (or non-religious) pacifists to pay for wars? What about for all the surveillance? What about corporate giveaways? Completely unjustified wars, even if one recognizes the need for war as a final choice? Surely war is a greater “sin” than preventing childbirth, unless of course one buys into the writings of the pathologically obsessed sexual deviants who wrote the rules for the churches regarding sex, in which case it’s worse than rape, than incest with one’s own mother, it’s murdering one’s descendants, etc.
          The law applies to all equally. Justice Scalia himself said religious belief does not excuse breaking the law, though he’ll no doubt not follow that line of thinking if confronted with this.

          • Government can pay for whatever they legally determine is necessary with the tax dollars they collect from me and other taxpayers. I may disagree and punish them with my vote.
            As a guy who has been shot at during 2 of America’s “non-wars” and one that argued against our involvement in Syria while your buddies here were claiming a desire to go and help the islamists over there , I am a pacifist. War is seldom justified.
            Assuming Republicans are warmongers is dumb mistake. Go back to American History and see who got America in their most destructive wars and see what party they belong to…..with the exception of Lincoln…who was a Republican.
            Religious guidelines were not written by sexual deviants, but anything touch by humans by either priests/pastors or politicians could be corrupted. Besides, what you Democrats may consider “normal sexual” activity, I (and most world cultures) would consider it to be “deviant sexual behavior”.

          • You don’t know crap about other world cultures. Americans are probably the least sexually sophisticated people in the modern world.
            Furthermore of all people that should stay out of the conversation it is both the Catholics and the Muslims. The Catholics for their abhorrent abuse of children and the Muslims for the same plus the abuse of most women. Many religions are hardly shining lights when it comes to sexual misconduct.
            Most countries wouldn’t even consider limiting access to contraception and believe Americans are prudes.

          • Lets see…..
            I was born in Cuba of German father Italian mother. I have lived longer than a year in 5 different countries in 2 different continents. My blood have been spilled in 2 other different continents and I speak 3 languages…I guess you are right, how is that I may know anything about world cultures…….idiot !!
            And you are “so knowledgeable” that you assume all Catholics and Muslims are going around abusing children and women.
            Really, what you are is a Godless Bigot that feel that your lefty’s views are so progressive….
            And as usual you are missing the point AGAIN
            I am not against contraception. I am against forcing anybody to buy them if it is against WHATEVER religious beliefs they have.
            Trust me, the more I deal with you…the more I believe in justification for contraception or abortions

          • You say you are worldly but write like a typical right wing religious “I am Godly so I am right” asshol^.
            Born in Cuba? So you probably came over during the Cuban crisis and then took advantage of all of the government programs provided to you. I know for a fact that companies that hired you people were given subsidies by the US government. Many people were fired to give you those jobs because business only had to pay a part of your salary. Why didn’t you stay in Cuba and fight?
            You say you know 3 languages; well one of them is surely Spanish and probably the other some German. You should know, if you ever visited Germany, that they have sex shops on every corner and just love visiting Thailand so that they can take advantage of the very young prostitutes.
            You say you are not against contraceptives, but if you make an exception for those then business will want exceptions for every part of the Affordable Care Act on Religious grounds. That is the problem with religion fanatics; they want to shove it down everyone’s throat. Keep your religion to yourself and stay the hel& out of Health care. if you are not a doctor you should have no say in what it prescribed for other people.
            I Was raised a Catholic and have spent a large part of my life wondering way everything is a sin. That is the whole Catholic doctrine: don’t do it, it is a sin; you will burn in hell forever you little sinful kid. Hell is waiting for you. Go to confession and tell the priest how sinful and black your heart is Say prayers until you become a mindless robot.
            It that you? Sure sounds like it.

          • And AGAIN you prove you are a boorish moron that ASS-U-ME the worst from everybody, just because that was what you saw happening in your family.
            You are and will continue to be irrelevant.

          • I noticed that you didn’t dispute anything I wrote.
            I must have come very close to your personal truth.

          • You have no idea what I consider “normal sexual activity,” but it sounds like you are a sexual deviant who feels justifiedn in barging in on others’ privacy to tell them they’re wrong. Not many of my buddies as you call them were all that enthusiastic about Syria, and I see that the right wing is blaming Obama for “funding Al Quaeda” when he was extremely reluctant to support the Syrian opposition, and Republicans were trashing him for not doing it. But the best is about the “Democratic wars.” Of course, you guys always claim Thomas Jefferson and James Madison as “Republicans,” but I see you’re not willing to own the War of 1812. The Civil War was caused by southern racists, now politely referred to as “conservatives,” though most haven’t really changed much. The Mexican War was caused by American greed for Mexican Land: was it Buchanan who was president? If so, same answer as Civil War. The Spanish American War was McKinley, with a strong push by Roosevelt, both Republicans.Invading Nicaragua and Cuba may have been a bi-partisan thing, but at least the latter was set up by the Spanish-American War.
            On WW I, you got me, and perhaps we should have stood by and let the Germans and the Japanese destroy all our potential allies as the Republicans wanted to do in WW II. But then, if we’d done what the Republicans wanted, the whole nation would have been bankrupt and financially, industrially, and psychologically devastated by the time the war started anyway. Korea, maybe we should have let the lunatics in North Korea take over the South. Vietnam – well, I guess it was Truman that paid 80% of the cost of France’s attempt to re-colonize, but Eisenhower convinced the South Vietnamese not to sign the Geneva Accords and got them on the road to War. Eisenhower and the the Dulles lunatics did what Truman refused to do to start our problems with Iran, and overthrew an elected government in Guatemala, replacing it with one of the most brutal dictatorships in the history of the Western Hemisphere. Nixon accelerated and expanded the Vietnam war, replaced an elected Chilean government with a brutal dictatorship, and replaced the relatively innocuous Sinahouk (sp?) in Cambodia with a rightist junta, opening the door for the Khmer Rouge. Ford would have re-started the Vietnam War if Congress had let him. Carter let the hawks talk him into supporting the surviving Fascists from Somoza’s dictatorship and the Islamists in Afghanistan, but it was really Reagan that got both rolling big time. Bush allowed the most destructive and successful attack on the continental US in history, bungled the attempt to capture the culprit in Afghanistan, invaded Iraq for no reason other than his own prestige, as his father invaded Panama to silence a US-supported thug who was probably more truthful about what was going on in Nicaragua and the rest of Central America than Bush was, and who was a personal embarrassment to Bush rather than a threat. And I forgot the hypocrisy and lies about Grenada by Reagan and co, not to mention Iran-Contra, etc. But you’re right, Republicans just LOVE peace.
            So go ahead and get hypocritically holy about other people’s private sexual activities; it fits with the rest of the house of cards you seem to have for a PHILOSOPHY.

          • You really have no idea of history do you?
            Southern Racists, oh yeah the people that thought black were inferior and incapable of progressing….they were Democrats
            (still believing blacks can not make it on their own without big white Uncle Sam’s help)
            Mexican War President was Polk…let me see… a Democrat as well.
            And do you know the reason the Japanese attack us on Pearl?
            I am not justifying Republicans, they are not much better
            As for sexual deviant…maybe I am in todays society…I am what you people call “a heterosexual”, and a tax payer on top of that…yes you are right, I am a deviant

        • In an ideal world, everyone would understand and accept their social responsibilities and embrace national priorities without question, but we do not live in an ideal world and we are all far from perfect. That is one of the reasons government exists and the reason for policies designed to benefit the majority of the population are put in place.
          I only support abortion when the life of the mother is at stake, and accept as a necessary evil in cases of proven incest and rape. My position on this issue is not influenced by religion, I am an agnostic leaning atheist, but by the fact that pregnancy is preventable thanks to the availability of contraceptives, and because I am convinced that if population growth continues at its present rate famine, disease, extreme poverty, and warfare will be the norm half a century from now. Our global resources are simply insufficient to sustain the current population growth rate. With that in mind, why shouldn’t we make contraceptives available to every woman, and condoms available to every man, free of charge?
          By the way, ACA only provides subsidies to those who have trouble paying insurance company premiums. If your earnings are too high, you don’t qualify for subsidies.

          • I have nothing to disagree with your post
            If Gov wants to make contraceptive available to all women with no access to them now, they can do so with a fraction of the money they spent in grants given to “community organizers” to explain ACA while most of them know nothing about

          • The issue, as far as I am concerned, should not be what the government wants, but what we – society – wants. Government is just an instrument used by society to pursue, regulate, and make available the things that are important to us when we cannot achieve them by ourselves.
            I confess that I have not heard of community organizers being paid to explain ACA, but I am willing the bet the grants they are, allegedly, getting to perform a social function is a tiny fraction of one the largest redistributions of wealth in the history of the USA: the $1T blown during the invasion of Iraq, when dozens of corporations – large and small, got sole source contracts to rebuild things we had destroyed to help the Iraqi people. Personally, I rather see an American getting paid to explain the intricacies of new legislation to fellow Americans than see my tax dollars go to a foreign country, or more accurately in the example cited above, see our national debt escalate in the pursuit of borrowed money to pay for unfunded crusades.

          • I rather not see my tax dollars wasted in either stupid wars Or stupid laws.
            I would like to see my tax dollars spend in better breakfasts in school for children OR better text books without any lefty propaganda in them OR public funded elections couple with electoral finance reform OR incentives for companies to bring manufacturing and foreign earnings back to the US OR improving our infrastructure while creating more good paying constructions jobs.
            But, What the heck….we are still stuck in the Obamacare quagmire.

          • Mr. Vila:

            You’re an “agnostic leaning atheist” huh? Anything to not “keep it simple.” I’ll bet that you annoy a lot of people.

        • I don’t want any person or company limiting my rights to get any legal health care procedure or medicine. It is my life and they should have no say.
          The last thing we need is a theocracy in this country.
          I’ll stay out of your religion it you stay out of my life.

          • Is not the subject here
            Nobody is stopping you from buying contraceptives or stopping from having an abortion or buying any medicine (allowed by the FDA)
            The same way I will speak about the right for a person to follow his religious beliefs I will also defend your right to live your live as you wish as long as you are not affecting anybody else

          • Except you are not. You are putting religious belief before health care. If a company can say they will not pay for health care that includes contraception then they are saying they should not pay for vaccinations, or blood transfusions because their religion doesn’t believe in them. Where does it end? I’ll tell you, it wont because religious people are narrow minded and spend their entire lives trying to tell other people how to live their lives. Busybody, nosy. self righteous I am going to heaven and your not asshol^s is a good description. Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of health care. You don’t know dick about medicine.
            If contraception is not a part of health insurance many people will be deprived of that benefit and may not be able to purchase it themselves so you are effecting what is available to other people.

          • Wrong AGAIN
            Unless you are a doctor or a nurse, I am a benefit consultant and I deal with healthcare insurances and claims daily so I know dick about medicine.
            Contraceptives and the reluctance of Catholics in paying for them have nothing to do with fringe protestants refusing a blood transfusion.
            AGAIN….I still do not see the big issue….How much do contraceptives cost? I am sure with the money Obama spent in his last 2 vacations Gov. can provide for contraceptives for all those female employees from Hobby Lobby for a lifetime.
            The option is Hobby Lobby to terminate their plan and for employees to go to and purchase the ACA compliant plans and get their contraceptives and a Gov subsidy if they qualify.

          • So let them terminate their plan. Are they being forced to continue paying for health care? hobby Lobby will not be satisfied with contraceptive coverage being removed because they also don’t want to cover abortions, vasectomies, tubal ligation’s and drugs that treat women s health that also may cause infertility. Hobby Lobby wants to dictate health care to women. I wouldn’t be surprised if they hate their mothers because they had sex with their fathers. Fuc em and their GD narrow minded religious beliefs.They are a company that makes money and I am sure that is their real GOD. Hobby Lobby, go worship the GOD of money because that is all you care about.

          • I also have to add that if the Government made contraceptives free for everyone Hobby Lobby would still protest because they wouldn’t want their tax dollars to go toward contraceptives. That is the problem with religious bastar&s, they are never satisfied because they want you to believe as they do.

    • While I am certainly not pro abortion, sometimes abortion is the only humane and merciful solution. We live on a planet where human overpopulation is a threat to all life. Our solutions to overpopulation are war, famine, and poverty. We sacrifice human life for the riches of a few. We send our sons and daughters to kill other human beings any where in the world. Isn’t that human sacrifice to the god of war? God’s grace and mercy extend to the aborted fetus as well as to the parents, just as God’s grace and mercy are for the killers and the killed in war.

    • A women that wants an abortion should not have to answer to you. i mean who the hell do you think you are? Talk about a superiority complex.
      Furthermore why should any person male or female have to answer to anyone when it comes to their own personal health care?
      Get off of your high horse you are nothing great and should never be used as a role model. In very simple terms, mind your own business.

      • You are a rude idiot and continue to prove it. You are missing the point…AGAIN
        I personally do not care if the sluts of this world have 100 abortions. It is not to me they have to answer, it is to God and to their conscience as must women I know that have an abortion get to regret them afterward.
        I just love the stupidity of the people in the far left comparing obedience to a religious belief and exercising their conscience to allowing human sacrifice. This is from the people that proclaim the killing of fetuses as a basic right.
        If you do not see the irony in that, you are a narrow minded lefty with no sense of humor…..Oh yeah, I forgot who I was writing to…you are!

        • How dare you throw your religion at people that don’t care what you believe? You think you are somehow superior?
          You do not know what God thinks and are delusional if you do. You have no idea what a women feels about having an abortion so anything you say is just speculation on your part. What gall you have. Many women have to have an abortion because they can not carry a child to term. Maybe the fetus is malformed and not viable.
          It does not matter because you insist on minding other peoples business and not your own. You’ve proven what a dick you are when you said any women having an abortion is a slut.
          How about you go fuc yourself? Is that plain enough?

          • And you are a someone that likes meddling in other people’s personal lives. How about minding your own business and let the adult women take care of their own lives. They don’t want or need your help.
            I’ll bet you have to ask your wife for permission to spend a dime on lunch.

          • Point one: On blog like this one doesn’t have to “mind one’s own business.” Any posting is fair game.

            Point two: I don’t have a wife.

          • OK, but your never answered the question about telling women what is right for them or the fact that some people are determined to impose their will on others. You don’t have a wife and perhaps you did at one time but never assume that any woman needs a man to tell them anything, especially about their personal health care.
            In the year 2013 it is hard to believe that some men think it is 1713 and that women are nothing but a belonging. The whole discussion would be moot if it were men that were being denied something concerning their health care. Hobby Lobby is not a religious organization and should get no special treatment concerning health insurance.
            Perhaps the best way to solve the whole issue and shove it up the posterior of all of those opposed to contraception is to have the government provide that benefit and leave the insurance companies out of it. I would then guess that Hobby Lobby would find something else they don’t like and want another exclusion. It is impossible to please those that don’t want “pleased.”

      • I think that abortions are a good idea for the promiscuous ghetto unwed mothers, because I want as few of their little bastards running around as possible. In fact, I think that the government should pay for those abortions on the condition that the mother agree to a simultaneous hysterectomy.

  4. Only those who are without a mind and soul could ever want such nonsense to be put before the SC. Has the nation gone mad? The citizens united decision was one of the worst in over a half a century. I am so tired of those that I consider to be mentally and morally defective to keep putting the nation through this endless drivel by the right wing!!

    • They’re anything but mentally defective, but they are morally defective. Hey, if the Dred Scott decision could be made to stick, anything can.

      • Dred Scott was morally offensive as well as purely wrong. Citizens United was a decision made by those who put logic and common sense aside and allow stupidity to reign in their decision.

  5. no one claimed that companies are people. the claim was that companies shall have the “rights of a person” when it comes to federal election campaign donations, thus granting the right to buy all elections to any company willing to spend a billion on an election that would grant them ownership of Congress, something worth trillions. And the decision was 5-4. In ten years, another Supreme court will have the opportunity to reconsider this idiocy and restore the democratic electoral process to we the people.

    • “…restore the democratic electoral process to we the people.”? Don’t bet on that happening anytime soon. The crap that fills our legislatures and other public offices aren’t going to restore anything to the people. They’re making too much money screwing us.

  6. no employer should be allowed to make decisions about the healthcare choices of their employees. Maybe people will wake up and vote if this court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby. Maybe not.

    • If they rule in favor of hobby lobby, what will be the next step. Taking a persons ability to be in charge of their own health care would be terrible.

      • I guess you guys are forgetting WHO PAYS for this healthcare policy?
        If you want control of your healthcare policy, PAY FOR IT.
        Nobody in that company is restricting the ability for the employee to and buy his own policy with ANY kind of coverage they want.
        Remember Obama left the large employers off the hook when he postponed the large employer mandate (because he knew it would cost unemployment in a congressional election year) so even if Hobby Lobby loses the case, they can always say….”oh well, I do not have to offer any health insurance”
        Then, guess who the real losers are? Do I need to spell it out?

  7. Whether or not employers can deny their female employees prescription contraception coverage has been addressed before by the Supreme Court and was found to be in violation of title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964. So there is established law that clearly states that women’s prescription contraception must be covered by employers. I am not sure why the Supreme Court has chosen to address this issue again but given the mix of their past decisions all anyone can do is keep their fingers crossed that sanity will win the day they make their decisions.

  8. This is always a tough area. Contraception sure seems like a must-have in our over-populated world. On the other hand, religion is a valid, Constitutionally supported reason to opt-out of a number of things. Is hobby lobby a public corporation? If that’s the case, I’d have to say they have no grounds for claiming an exemption. But if it is a privately owned corporation that might be a different story. If the owners feel that they are being forced to provide something they object to on religious grounds, I’d be inclined to say they have a decent case. It’ll all boil down to whether or not the Supreme Court defines the corporation as the “person” unto itself, vs. the corporation being an avatar of the owners.

    • And if they didn’t believe in blood transfusions and vaccinations that would be OK too? What about their objection to antibiotics and preventative procedures? Where do we draw the line about what a employer can dictate to their employees concerning birth control and other medically approved treatments? You are aware that birth control pills are also prescribed for treatment of other medical problems aren’t you?
      It is one thing to work for a company, it is another when that company wants to dictate your health care and consequently your life.
      God help us if Hobby Lobby gets away with this?

      • Not arguing for or against, just presenting both sides the way I believe the court will look at it. Obviously, if the ruling applied to contraception on the basis of religion, it could possibly be applied to other things as well. However, courts have discretion and I think they’d make sure their opinion left no certainty that contraception is a unique issue and any exemption only applies to situations where there is a difference of opinion regarding when life begins. There are plenty of definitions, but you’d be hard-pressed to make a case that it begins any time prior to fertilization. Therefore, if I were writing an opinion in favor of the petitioner I would permit exclusion of post-fertilization contraception (i.e. the “morning after” pill). Contraception that prevents fertilization in the first place would not fall under the exemption. And with that, obviously your references to other common treatments would not be even be considered. But not providing contraception is not “dictating your healthcare” any more than my current medical plan not covering dental or optical dictates mine. I still wear glasses – I just have to pay for them myself.

        • Obviously, you are not speaking for women. Contraception is just the starting point for those that want to dictate to their employees.
          Additional objections will follow like not wanting to provide certain health care procedures for those that smoke or drink alcoholic beverages. Then they will object to those that are overweight or have high blood pressure because they think your personal eating habits are unhealthy. Diabetes treatment will be out of the question and possibly grounds for termination.
          Once you allow companies to start practicing medicine where does it stop? Contraception and abortion for that matter are medical procedures which doctors can recommend depending on the medical needs of their patients. Does Hobby Lobby practice medicine or sell hobby supplies?
          Would you go to Hobby Lobby for a medical procedure?
          Then why are they involved in dictating what medicine is appropriate for their employees?

          • You miss the point entirely – I speak for no one. This is a Constitutional issue, which is why the Supreme court is taking it on. The vast majority of past rulings have been in favor of religious rights under the Constitution. I expect this to be considered from the Constitutional standpoint (as it should when the Supreme Court is involved). It doesn’t matter how you or I view the general topic of contraception (I suspect our views are very similar). The Court will have to decide whether the newly-found Constitutionality in requiring Americans to purchase something trumps the religious provisions that have been a part of the Constitution since the Bill of Rights amendments became law. I wouldn’t wager you either way on this one.

      • Hobby Lobby is NOT obligated to offer (and pay for) any health insurance. Obama delayed the large employer mandate…remember?
        Since when a VOLUNTARY employer paid benefit became an obligation or an entitlement for you guys to bitch about.
        The ONLY thing a company is obligated by law to buy for their employees is WorkersComp.

        • Actually, that is incorrect. They have 13,000 employees and have to offer health insurance for full time employees or pay a penalty.
          If they don’t want to offer insurance then they don’t have to but many of their employees will leave and find employment elsewhere.
          A company survives or fails based on its employees.

          • You are the one incorrect
            Go check your sources. Large employer mandated is delayed for one year
            Besides, even afterward , it is cheaper to pay the $2000 per employee per year of penalty than to actually pay for their premiums.

  9. If Supreme Court allows exceptions to the laws of US on the grounds of religious convictions to any one group, then it will set a precedent for every one to ignore the US laws on the grounds of their own individual beliefs. Then everyone will live by their own religious codes. Then we don’t need Congress to enact any more laws. So, let’s get rid of them.

  10. For those who believe abortion is murder, no argument can dissuade their objection
    to it. Not it’s contradiction to a big intrusive government. Because, many for whom
    abortion is their sole issue, do not care about the size of the government. To assert
    it is a personal, and private decision, falls on deaf ears. As the government may intervene in cases of child abuse, they see no right to privacy. But an overriding
    obligation of the government to protect innocent life. The key word is innocent, as
    most of this faction supports capital punishment. Even as they acknowledge the
    Courts are not perfect, and may take an innocent life by mistake. They are aware
    of this contradiction, and have decided to ignore it. As their objection to abortion
    reigns supreme above any, and all contradictions. Including their opposition to
    most forms of birth control, or sex education in public, or private institutions that goes beyond urging abstinence. Same as their drug policy, by the way. If you fail, then punishment must follow. They also ignore, or disagree the State that insisted
    on the woman carrying to term, has a further obligation to continue to protect this child from malnutrition, lack of medical care, lack of shelter, or a decent education. They do not see this as cold hearted, or a contradiction to other tenets of their faith. But a policy that will over time, effect the behavior of both men, and women to engage in the sexual act as a means of procreation, not recreation. So then, we may conclude, this faction believes Government can, and should use public policy, and civil law, to create a society that more closely adheres to the doctrine of what many of this faction believe to be the higher law. Any assertions of separation of Church, and State, truncating the woman’s Rights to control her body. Or similarities drawn between the idea of government enforcing a moral code, and Middle Eastern Theocracies, are dismissed as the Godless advocacy of secularism.

Leave a reply