Hobby Lobby Decision..

DonAlejandroVega

Well-Known Member
make it none of the employer's business what coverage their employees have. take employers out of the insurance brokerage business. next..........................
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
they refuse to cover plan B for their employees due to moral objection, but they have no problem profiting from plan B for themselves.

such sincerely held.

much sincerity.

so conviction.

very wow.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
The Dictionary Act (yes, there is such a thing), which the court is obligated to use, defines “person” in the RFRA to encompass “corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.”
 

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
make it none of the employer's business what coverage their employees have. take employers out of the insurance brokerage business. next..........................
Thank FDR and his grand idea to freeze labor wages. Right around the time he was trying to change SCOTUS, dictating how much wheat a man could grow on his own property, putting Japanese Americans in "camps", and pushing policies that kept us in a depression until he left (Bush's fault ldo).

Liberals love him.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
SCOTUS lost its moral and ethical credibility with me when they affirmed that money was equivalent to free speech.

Clearly, they're nothing more than corporate greedheads themselves.
Well, that is it. We don't let you be the judge of that. It is totally irrelevant. This is real.
They were never trying to seek your approval.

They don't need credibility. It is the Law.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
make it none of the employer's business what coverage their employees have. take employers out of the insurance brokerage business. next..........................
That is what the government is going to have to do. In the specific case of abortion inducing drugs, the feds plan to handle that on their own ala single-payer.

The progs are all butt hurt because they can't force the pope to abort and then consume a baby on Easter sunday. This progressive War on Religion will end badly for all us.
 

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
all hormonal birth control can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting, which is abortion by their narrow, extremist definition.

not that they mind profiting from these exact same drugs, mind you. they just won't pay for them.

making money from them is a completely different "sincerely held" belief altogether.
Start a charity to help women who can't afford BC pills and I'll make a donation.

Or you could sit on the internet all day bitching about what a travesty it is you don't get to force people to pay for things they don't want, it's working so well for you.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Start a charity to help women who can't afford BC pills and I'll make a donation.

Or you could sit on the internet all day bitching about what a travesty it is you don't get to force people to pay for things they don't want, it's working so well for you.
i don't want to pay for heart transplants to racist folks like you, but i really have no choice.

medicine is medicine, yours ain't any more special than your wife's, who left you.
 

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
i don't want to pay for heart transplants to racist folks like you, but i really have no choice.

medicine is medicine, yours ain't any more special than your wife's, who left you.
LOL

Like you contribute to my insurance in any way taker.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
But keep preaching about what you have to pay others against your will.
funny, that's the whole right wing argument in this case.

for some reason, you feel that other people's medicine is not as valid as yours.

i've never seen "libertarians" so opposed to greater liberty, save the whole keeping blacks out of stores argument.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
The Dictionary Act (yes, there is such a thing), which the court is obligated to use, defines “person” in the RFRA to encompass “corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.”
Corporations are persons, too, legally. And the entire subject here is an exercise of lies.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
.[1] The bill was passed by a unanimous U.S. House and a near unanimous U.S. Senate with three dissenting votes[2] and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. It was held unconstitutional as applied to the states in the City of Boerne v. Flores decision in 1997, which ruled that the RFRA is not a proper exercise of Congress's enforcement power. But it continues to be applied to the federal government, for instance in Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, because Congress has broad authority to carve out exemptions from federal laws and regulations that it itself has authorized. In response to City of Boerne v. Flores, some individual states passed State Religious Freedom Restoration Acts that apply to state governments and local municipalities.

Self rule sucks for these wannabe partisans.

RIU is ridden by liars spreading lies.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
funny, that's the whole right wing argument in this case.

for some reason, you feel that other people's medicine is not as valid as yours.

i've never seen "libertarians" so opposed to greater liberty, save the whole keeping blacks out of stores argument.
b l a h b l a h b l a h
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
The funniest part is that RFRA is a (mostly) Democrat piece of legislation. That was back when Dems saw some profit in pandering to religious people. Now the Dems see political benefit in conducting their War on Religion. Progs have only one value system: fascist control and imposition of an iron-handed rule. It will not end well.
 
Top