• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Oh So Godly Hobby Lobby Holy Hobbie Horse Decision Discussion

AthenaAwakened

AthenaAwakened

Contributor
Joined
Sep 17, 2003
Messages
5,339
Location
Right behind you so ... BOO!
Basic Beliefs
non-theist, anarcho-socialist
Today, the SCOTUS will hand down their Oh So Godly Hobby Lobby Holy Hobbie Horse decision.

The question: Can a company refuse to pay to provide for health insurance covering contraception under the ACA for religious reasons?

Can a company have a right to religious freedom?
 
So... Hobby Lobby should be decided today

deleted - added to other thread.
 
AthenaAwakened said:
Today, the SCOTUS will hand down their Oh So Godly Hobby Lobby Holy Hobbie Horse decision.

The question: Can a company refuse to pay to provide for health insurance covering contraception under the ACA for religious reasons?

Can a company have a right to religious freedom?
Click to expand...
Hobby Lobby... they believe in Pro-Choice... they feel that they reserve the right to choose your reproductive choices.
 
one thought is that either way it goes, it shows a need - a desperate need - to get corporations the hell out of the insurance providing industry.

Your employment should not be a prerequisite to insurance access, nor a shackle that binds you to a corporation. When I wanted to go look on the exchange for an insurance policy, I am _prevented_ from accessing those plans because my corporation offers insurance. I am shackled to the corporation and unable to buy independently at any group ("exchange") price.

Changing jobs, starting new businesses, economic freedom, it's still under the thumb of a corporation that may have destructive personal views. Medicare for all... make it happen now.



Also, I really REALLY hope that if HL wins the case, people everywhere start targeting the owners PERSONALLY for liability, since they have torn down their own separation between personal and corporate identities. If your personal religious views are strong enough to reach into my vagina, then my personal injury case ought to be able to reach into your pocket.
 
A corporation is a fictional entity and cannot practice a religion, therefore has no right to religious freedom. If the owners of said corporation think otherwise, then I think they should lose the legal corporate shielding and benefits.

But in any case, no - the owners/CEO's of a company do not get to impose their religious belief on their employees.

Or... everything Rhea said:

Rhea said:
one thought is that either way it goes, it shows a need - a desperate need - to get corporations the hell out of the insurance providing industry.

Your employment should not be a prerequisite to insurance access, nor a shackle that binds you to a corporation. When I wanted to go look on the exchange for an insurance policy, I am _prevented_ from accessing those plans because my corporation offers insurance. I am shackled to the corporation and unable to buy independently at any group ("exchange") price.

Changing jobs, starting new businesses, economic freedom, it's still under the thumb of a corporation that may have destructive personal views. Medicare for all... make it happen now.



Also, I really REALLY hope that if HL wins the case, people everywhere start targeting the owners PERSONALLY for liability, since they have torn down their own separation between personal and corporate identities. If your personal religious views are strong enough to reach into my vagina, then my personal injury case ought to be able to reach into your pocket.
Click to expand...
Can't rep you again so soon
 
You mean the abortion pill decision? LOL That is what the right wing is calling it. I think it should be framed as whether or not corporations can have a religion.

No one is really talking abut the other decision that is coming out today: Harris v Quinn. This could kill off the unions and have a dramatic effect on on the a Democratic Party. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files...arris-v-quinn/
 
It won't really have and effect on the Dems. People think the unions have more power than they do. But this will have an effect on my job.
 
The problem with contraception and religious issues is why should a particular organ be selected for religious intervention? If people that don't believe in modern medicine be in charge of a company can they add organs to that list?
 
Yahoo says SCOTUS (probably 5 justices) says Hobby Lobby can exclude it. Corporations can now believe in god. So how long until corporations can own guns?

No links yet. Nothing at SCOTUS Blog.

SCOTUS Blog live blog said:
Here is a further attempt at qualification: This decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate and should not be understood to mean that all insurance mandates, that is for blood transfusions or vaccinations, necessarily fail if they conflict with an employer's religious beliefs.
Click to expand...
How in the fuck is that supposed to make sense?! And from the early vibe, this applies to contraception period.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
The problem with contraception and religious issues is why should a particular organ be selected for religious intervention? If people that don't believe in modern medicine be in charge of a company can they add organs to that list?
Click to expand...
Well (Kennedy's concurring) opinion did single out contraception and is explicitly (according to Scotus Blog) not applicable to other medical issues like tansfusions. Doesn't make any legal sense to me either.
 
Derec said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
The problem with contraception and religious issues is why should a particular organ be selected for religious intervention? If people that don't believe in modern medicine be in charge of a company can they add organs to that list?
Click to expand...
Well (Kennedy's concurring) opinion did single out contraception and is explicitly (according to Scotus Blog) not applicable to other medical issues like tansfusions. Doesn't make any legal sense to me either.
Click to expand...
Organ donations, blood transfusions also carry religious implications to some people. What about vaccinations? I'm still uncertain whether this is just about emergency contraception or contraception in whole.
 
Yahoo says SCOTUS (probably 5 justices) says Hobby Lobby can exclude it. Corporations can now believe in god. So how long until corporations can own guns?
Click to expand...
Two caveats:
- the decision only applies to "closely held corporations".
- according to ScotusBlog quoting Kennedy government does have the remedy of giving these corporations the same figleaf as they do religious non-profits. I wonder if that has any implications to the "Little Sisters of the Poor" case.
 
Derec said:
Yahoo says SCOTUS (probably 5 justices) says Hobby Lobby can exclude it. Corporations can now believe in god. So how long until corporations can own guns?
Click to expand...
Two caveats:
- the decision only applies to "closely held corporations".
- according to ScotusBlog quoting Kennedy government does have the remedy of giving these corporations the same figleaf as they do religious non-profits. I wonder if that has any implications to the "Little Sisters of the Poor" case.
Click to expand...
I'll need to read the decision to see why a privately held company is being kept in exception to publicly held companies. The right-wing of SCOTUS seem to love making these absurd arbitrary exceptions.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Hobby Lobby... they believe in Pro-Choice... they feel that they reserve the right to choose your reproductive choices.
Click to expand...
How is "I'm not going to pay for it for you" equivalent to "you can't have it at all"?
Click to expand...
How is "We're not going to include it in your insurance coverage package that you, the employee, are paying for" equivalent to "I'm not going to pay for it for you"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom