$9.00 month for birth control pills...
yep! she's in touch!
Posted on 06/30/2014 10:08:14 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is being called narrow by some analysts, but that’s true only in that Hobby Lobby got everything it wanted and nothing more. In her blistering dissent Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg correctly called it “a decision of startling breadth.”
The question before the Court was twofold: Do corporations enjoy the same protections for religious liberty as individuals do? And if so, does providing contraceptive coverage in an employee health plan – as required under the Affordable Care Act – violate that liberty?
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for all of the Republican-appointed justices, answered “yes” to both questions.
Giving for-profit corporations exemption from the law, he said, “protects the religious liberty of the humans who own and control them.” He said “any suggestion that for-profit corporations are incapable of exercising religion because their purpose is simply to make money flies in the face of modern corporate law.”
That religious exercise was being burdened by employee birth control coverage, Alito said – especially when the government could just provide birth control directly to women, or require insurers to provide it directly to employees.
The majority brought no such passion to considering the real-life impact on employees – in this case, women.
That was where Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stepped in, furiously. Joined in full by Justice Sonia Sotomayor and in part by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, Ginsburg pointed out that the ruling was radical because “exemptions had never been granted to any entity operating in ‘the commercial, profit-making world.’”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...
No need to remind me.
You are exactly right. Progressives are very evil and vile creatures. They would force us into the cattle cars in a split second.
Yes, the 2nd Amendment is their enemy.
Two points.
First, if you want to have sex do it on your own dime. It is a choice.
Second, if you don’t like the policies of a Muslim owned company then don’t work for it.
It is as simple as that.
Islam is exempt from Obamacare. Are Islamist business owners exempted from having to cover kufir on the payroll? Do Islamist business owners HAVE any non-muslims on staff?
$9.00 month for birth control pills...
yep! she's in touch!
I’m attending a gathering with Cory Gardner here in La Plata County, CO on July 6. I can’t wait to give Gardner an ear full. Udall must go.
I’ve never understood this thinking either. I’d gladly pay for contraception coverage if it saved one baby from being sucked down a drain.
Hobby Lobby DOES cover most forms of that, but not “Plan B” type pills.
You’re mixing your analogies. While the Muslim company has no business telling people they can’t eat pork after hours, it would certainly be wrong to legally REQUIRE the company to purchase and provide pork to their employees, just because their employees have the right to eat pork. That’s the analogy to what was covered under this ruling.
A corporation holds the same rights as an individual with the distinction of being plural.
To incorporate is to consolidate the rights of the individuals as to benefit the whole of the group.
Our nation was formed as a corporation known as "We the people."
Contraceptive coverage isn’t the issue, abortion is.
What’s not good about it is that forcing the owners of Hobby Lobby to pay for and subsidize a drug that causes the spontaneous abortion of a fertilized egg would be violating their their right to practice their religious beliefs.
You apparently do not have a problem with contraception or abortifacients. If you did, I’m sure that you would not care what other people choose to do with unplanned pregnancies, but you would not want to be forced to pay to terminate conceived life either.
Why should we care? No one is forced to work for Muslim owned companies. The idea that the federal government has blurred the line so much between private business and the federal sphere is the problem. Such regulations were never meant to be at the federal level. I personally would’ve loved if the ruling went further in affirming individual liberty in the ownership of a business and used freedom of conscience as something that can apply to any business. Its not as if there is any lack of left wing companies like Mozilla that think firing anyone who doesn’t agree with gay marriage is just great and I’m all good with that provided that conservative companies can make the same kind of decisions when hiring a firing from a conservative basis.
I believe it is healthy. What is killing and dividing America is the growing federal strait jacket where the left is using regulations to force their views onto everyone else with patently unconstitutional laws like VAWA and ENDA and Equal pay bs and worse like Obamacare. This ruling reasserts in a small way that the federal government does NOT get to foist its social views on private business overriding the religious views of the owners and that is a very good thing. It is the path to deconstructing the behemoth if built upon.
Either way the beast is going to come down. The only difference is if it can be done peacefully or not. I prefer peacefully through reassertion of the constitution but we still have a problem with an oligarchy and elected officials that don’t seem to think anything limits them and there is only one solution if that persists and that is a Bastille day.
http://rock.rapgenius.com/Rush-bastille-day-lyrics
“That is the true reason why they protect abortion so much because to them abortion is just a clever method to get people to consent to population control”
ok, because i’m in the mood for an academic exercise, i’m going to disagree with that. first, I don’t think Marxists care if people agree with them, its their way or the highway. we’ll get population control whether we like it or not.
I think they like birth control for two reasons.
one, there is huge money for clinics and doctors. and a lot comes from government subsidies. Marxists like that income the best.
and two, liberals know most conservatives are against birth control because of religious beliefs, and they believe they can win that argument in popular culture and at the ballot box.
You are right but its not like the government isn’t already funding those things. This ruling doesn’t go far enough but its better than a loss which would’ve opened the flood gates to this kind of stuff. We have a long way to go before we re-establish true individual liberty as it was meant to be in this country. The degree of unconstitutional bs where businesses are concerned is a mountain. The founders never intended for the federal government to micromanage business the way it does.
They have to get the disillusioned Obama voters ginned up for the election this fall by arousing the worst in them.
If senate stays democrat after 2014, Obummer will appoint extreme liberal replacement justices and they will be approved on fast track via change of rules by Harry Reid.. If Hillary or other extreme liberals win WH in 2016, 2 to 4 liberal justices will be ensconced in SCOTUS, with lasting impact of 30 years.
Whoever wins republican primaries will get my vote. I don't care if it is the dog catcher. Anything beats Hillary.
MOre Ginsburg clones are waiting in the wings. Many justices are old and could be gone quickly. Harry Reid will eliminate filibuster rules for fast track senate approvals.
I heard on FOX today that liberals are calling on Ginsberg to retire now so Obama can replace her while they have the senate. They said they fear they will lose the senate in November and Obama will be forced to nominate a moderate.
LA Times Calls for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Retire Now to Ensure a Liberal Replacement.
I wonder what Reid is going to think about his new rules when he is no longer in charge.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.