Does the Hobby Lobby decision mean any entity can successfully argue for its own ‘line item veto’ of federal law based on a claimed religious belief? And, as SCOTUS wrote, it isn’t their place to question the validity of such beliefs.
I’d like to start with a religious exemption from paying my share of federal income tax that is used to fund foreign wars.
Excite, did you see the President saying it was not his decision to pull out of Iraq leaving it vulnerable to ISIS? Hmm! Who was in charge during that time? Did he leave the decision to Hillary, the Joint Chiefs or just who? As we were leaving there, he proudly proclaimed he was leaving a stable, confidant Iraq.
Relevance? I don’t care whose decision it was. Iraqis threw down their arms by the tens of thousands and fled. And that’s supposed to be our responsibility? Look, if we are tired of carrying trillions of dollars of debt maybe we should stop spending one trillion dollars per year on the U.S. Military & Intelligence sector. Instead we allow our bozo politicians to demonize low-wage teachers and try to savage our social programs.
…But that wasn’t even my point. My point was, where does the Hobby Lobby decision end? Or is abortion the only moral objection one is allowed to use to exercise a personal line item veto of federal law?
Could you please explain what Social Programs are being savaged? We have Social Programs out the kazoo and that is the main reason why we have added $7 trillion in debt in 6 years. Do you think the Stimulus that wasn’t a stimulus was a good idea? We spent nearly a trillion on that? Obamacare is a huge disaster of several trillion with no end in sight.
Hobby Lobby did not give corporations the right to refuse to provide all contraceptives – it only allowed Hobby Lobby to refuse to provide the methods of contraception that caused the abortion of a fertilized embryo. The court also went to great pains to point out that there were 20 other forms (or some similar number) of contraceptives that Hobby Lobby was still willing to provide to their employees. This case appears to exceed the scope of the Hobby Lobby ruling.
Poor reporting again from IJ. Jeesh guys, get the story right. Because you don’t report very accurately I don’t know enough about the decision handed down in this case. But I do know in the Hobby Lobby case that they were not exempted from providing any contraceptive coverage. They were only expempted from providing 4 methods out of the 20 methods mandated by Obamacare. Thery still cover the other 16. The four methods for which they obtained an expemption, were the 4 methods which killed/eliminated a fertlized egg which some people view as obortion.
They tend to keep these lists private but I can give you a few dead give-a-ways. Stores where a majority of the clientele are wearing NASCAR clothing, have fewer teeth than neck tattoos, or have NRA stickers on the back of their pick up trucks/pools, usually are the types of businesses that you are talking about. They want them to keep breeding because it is the only way they can perpetuate their customer base and employee referral programs.
Hobby Lobby did not ask for an exemption for all forms of birth control, only those they objected to; however, the court issued follow-up orders making clear that closely held companies whose owners have religious objections to contraception may refuse to cover any method at all.
Dave, if we had a truly free country, a company should be able to choose what benefits they offer to employees, not have them mandated by the left in the worst piece of legislation ever passed by Congress. Can you believe we are still arguing over this travesty four years after passage? That should tell us how bad this law was and is.
Whether or not somebody other than the user should pay for contraceptives is another debate. But Hobby Lobby agreed to do it except for 4 abortion drugs. The terrible reporting here needs to be pointed out. Journalism was once an honored occupation which has been cheapened by ratings and political bias. I think when I retire I’m going to take a journalism class just to see the garbage they are teaching the kids today. Either they’re badly taught, really stupid or the folks doing the hiring are just hiring the worst rather than the best.
IJ gives you just enough information to be dangerous. I am usually forced to do further searching to nail down all the facts. I don’t know if it’s a rush to deadline on their part or what. But it is very spotty coverage of the “news.”
August 12, 2014 at 8:40 am
KY jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It appears this is a Bloomberg article, not one written by IJ staff.
August 11, 2014 at 2:20 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I searched for this case, but didn’t find much. Evidently it’s being sent back down to the original U.S. District court for the final ruling. But the link I posted says that any closely held company can ban all contraceptives from it’s plan. Freshway owners are Roman Catholic and they don’t believe in any form of contraception. I think it’s pretty clear they can pick and choose what, if any, birth control they want to provide.
Libby, I also think it is pretty clear that a US company should be able to choose the benefits they want to provide to their employees. If the employees don’t like the choices provided, they can seek other employment or buy their own as the country had for many, many years in the past.
Actually, I didn’t thumb you down on your answer to Dave. So far, you are doing pretty well on your posts. If you would like, I could thumb you down if you like. How about thumbing booger down for his racist, bigoted comments and thumbing him down as he should be. He has the new record for hidden comments you know.
Awe Shucks Opie. I couldn’t have the number of hidden posts with out you and your members of your digital human centipede. Still don’t see where my posts are racist, yours are though. I don’t even see where they are bigoted comments either I just call it as I see it.
August 14, 2014 at 4:19 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
He has a record number of hidden comments thanks only to you, Agent. You are the one censoring people that you don’t like on here and giving your own posts massive thumbs-up. Kinda sad, really. Are you that insecure with yourself?
August 13, 2014 at 11:02 am
Celtica - Click Here to See says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And maybe those same companies can hire only white men if given the choice — or pay women and men of color a lower wage — if given the choice. As if they already don’t.
This ruling is ridiculous. This is a company trading with the public. As such, it has a responsibility to the public at large. Again, I ask…when they swipe the credit card or add the cash to the till, do they inquire about the birth control practices of their paying clients?
I am tired of the perversions of “religious freedom”…other peoples religion being rammed down my throat. That Roman Catholics eschew all forms of birth control except rhythm are allowed to skip out on allowing their health insurers to provide this to their employees is the height of hypocrisy. Didn’t someone do a survey recently which showed that practicing Catholics use other methods of contraception?
This is what happens when “corporations” get the rights and freedoms that CLEARLY and LOGICALLY should only be assigned to natural persons, and not a legal construct.
I can only hope that Scalia or Thomas are suddenly taken ill before 2016…this Supreme Court is perverting the amendments and common sense.
Can Supreme Court justices be impeached? You can’t tell me these guys really believe that corporations deserve the same rights as natural persons; they are now just another polarized political group that is also contributing to the log jam of our government. They are allowing the tyranny of the minority, which was a concern of the founding fathers way back when. They are twisting the words and intent of the Constitution and the amendments to foster their own political stance. Another example of “old white men” syndrome that is stifling our good sense. The Roman Catholic Church is another outstanding example of the same…
Well, that’s quite a post. Of course, we wouldn’t have the SCOTUS making a decision about the rights of closely held corps if the ACA didn’t mandate coverages.
For what it’s worth, to me corporations (whether closely held or not) should not have “rights”. However, they also shouldn’t be forced to provide certain things for their employees. I’m not sure I even like that the ACA requires employers to provide insurance, let alone specific coverages within health insurance. No clue where this is going, but it will be an ugly and depressing trip.
We have lost sight of the original good cause in all the political gamesmanship, invective and double dealing. The original good cause was to provide access to healthcare to all citizens and, in this country, that means access to insurance to pay for that care.
for those who don’t believe access and deliverance from fear of medical caused bankruptcy is a right, we have no more to discuss. For those of us like me who do, I can only be disgusted at the mechanations to destroy the ACA. If corporations treated their employees fairly we wouldn’t need the laws we have protecting the workers and the public. I think many of us can agree that the greed of some companies endangers the employee, the public, and the economy. I think we can all agree that the “uninsurable” needed access and that certain coverage MUST be mandated.
ACA is certainly not perfect by any means. If our elected representatives had dispensed with the partisan drech and worked to improve it, we would all be ahead. The issue is fair healthcare for ALL our citizens…and the USA was way overdue in provisions for same.
Allowing corporations to have “religious freedom” is absurd. Does this corporation go to mass? Confess its sins like a good Roman Catholic? Can it be punished for criminal activity the way natural citizens are (imprisonment, for instance, vs. money fines)? Is it for profit? QED…
Casandra you say how great obumacare is. You think it would be better if “If our elected representatives had dispensed with the partisan drech” Correction: If the dems didn’t shut out the repubs and just suck more money out of our pockets and include all the illegals. I was injured out of state and my health care co denied all claims because we are ‘out of network’ now the proud owner of over 80,000 in medical bills.
THANKS Obummer!
Universal care would have been the answer. At least a universal option. Obama caved to the right wing pressure and tried to negotiate with teajadist terrorists.
Lesson learned, Barak – don’t negotiate with terrorists.
Does the Hobby Lobby decision mean any entity can successfully argue for its own ‘line item veto’ of federal law based on a claimed religious belief? And, as SCOTUS wrote, it isn’t their place to question the validity of such beliefs.
I’d like to start with a religious exemption from paying my share of federal income tax that is used to fund foreign wars.
Excite, did you see the President saying it was not his decision to pull out of Iraq leaving it vulnerable to ISIS? Hmm! Who was in charge during that time? Did he leave the decision to Hillary, the Joint Chiefs or just who? As we were leaving there, he proudly proclaimed he was leaving a stable, confidant Iraq.
Relevance? I don’t care whose decision it was. Iraqis threw down their arms by the tens of thousands and fled. And that’s supposed to be our responsibility? Look, if we are tired of carrying trillions of dollars of debt maybe we should stop spending one trillion dollars per year on the U.S. Military & Intelligence sector. Instead we allow our bozo politicians to demonize low-wage teachers and try to savage our social programs.
…But that wasn’t even my point. My point was, where does the Hobby Lobby decision end? Or is abortion the only moral objection one is allowed to use to exercise a personal line item veto of federal law?
Could you please explain what Social Programs are being savaged? We have Social Programs out the kazoo and that is the main reason why we have added $7 trillion in debt in 6 years. Do you think the Stimulus that wasn’t a stimulus was a good idea? We spent nearly a trillion on that? Obamacare is a huge disaster of several trillion with no end in sight.
I keep waiting for IJ to pull articles from PRAVDA to use on here for some communist propaganda.
I just can’t wait!
Hobby Lobby did not give corporations the right to refuse to provide all contraceptives – it only allowed Hobby Lobby to refuse to provide the methods of contraception that caused the abortion of a fertilized embryo. The court also went to great pains to point out that there were 20 other forms (or some similar number) of contraceptives that Hobby Lobby was still willing to provide to their employees. This case appears to exceed the scope of the Hobby Lobby ruling.
Poor reporting again from IJ. Jeesh guys, get the story right. Because you don’t report very accurately I don’t know enough about the decision handed down in this case. But I do know in the Hobby Lobby case that they were not exempted from providing any contraceptive coverage. They were only expempted from providing 4 methods out of the 20 methods mandated by Obamacare. Thery still cover the other 16. The four methods for which they obtained an expemption, were the 4 methods which killed/eliminated a fertlized egg which some people view as obortion.
Really bad reporting here!
Does anyone know if there is one complete list of the companies that get this exemption?
That way it will be easier to boycott the business or support it if you want.
glassflower,
They tend to keep these lists private but I can give you a few dead give-a-ways. Stores where a majority of the clientele are wearing NASCAR clothing, have fewer teeth than neck tattoos, or have NRA stickers on the back of their pick up trucks/pools, usually are the types of businesses that you are talking about. They want them to keep breeding because it is the only way they can perpetuate their customer base and employee referral programs.
Yet another bigot.
Hobby Lobby did not ask for an exemption for all forms of birth control, only those they objected to; however, the court issued follow-up orders making clear that closely held companies whose owners have religious objections to contraception may refuse to cover any method at all.
http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/supreme-court-s-conestoga-wood-hobby-lobby-ruling-applies-to/article_66f66e62-020d-11e4-aa79-001a4bcf6878.html
What about this case? We obviously cannot count on the poor reporting by IJ.
Dave, if we had a truly free country, a company should be able to choose what benefits they offer to employees, not have them mandated by the left in the worst piece of legislation ever passed by Congress. Can you believe we are still arguing over this travesty four years after passage? That should tell us how bad this law was and is.
Whether or not somebody other than the user should pay for contraceptives is another debate. But Hobby Lobby agreed to do it except for 4 abortion drugs. The terrible reporting here needs to be pointed out. Journalism was once an honored occupation which has been cheapened by ratings and political bias. I think when I retire I’m going to take a journalism class just to see the garbage they are teaching the kids today. Either they’re badly taught, really stupid or the folks doing the hiring are just hiring the worst rather than the best.
IJ gives you just enough information to be dangerous. I am usually forced to do further searching to nail down all the facts. I don’t know if it’s a rush to deadline on their part or what. But it is very spotty coverage of the “news.”
It appears this is a Bloomberg article, not one written by IJ staff.
I searched for this case, but didn’t find much. Evidently it’s being sent back down to the original U.S. District court for the final ruling. But the link I posted says that any closely held company can ban all contraceptives from it’s plan. Freshway owners are Roman Catholic and they don’t believe in any form of contraception. I think it’s pretty clear they can pick and choose what, if any, birth control they want to provide.
Libby, I also think it is pretty clear that a US company should be able to choose the benefits they want to provide to their employees. If the employees don’t like the choices provided, they can seek other employment or buy their own as the country had for many, many years in the past.
Why are you getting on my case and thumbing me down for just answering Dave’s question?
Actually, I didn’t thumb you down on your answer to Dave. So far, you are doing pretty well on your posts. If you would like, I could thumb you down if you like. How about thumbing booger down for his racist, bigoted comments and thumbing him down as he should be. He has the new record for hidden comments you know.
Awe Shucks Opie. I couldn’t have the number of hidden posts with out you and your members of your digital human centipede. Still don’t see where my posts are racist, yours are though. I don’t even see where they are bigoted comments either I just call it as I see it.
He has a record number of hidden comments thanks only to you, Agent. You are the one censoring people that you don’t like on here and giving your own posts massive thumbs-up. Kinda sad, really. Are you that insecure with yourself?
And maybe those same companies can hire only white men if given the choice — or pay women and men of color a lower wage — if given the choice. As if they already don’t.
Please save me from the 1 hour Christians!
Man! I just want to blast some Oak Ridge Boys right now.
This ruling is ridiculous. This is a company trading with the public. As such, it has a responsibility to the public at large. Again, I ask…when they swipe the credit card or add the cash to the till, do they inquire about the birth control practices of their paying clients?
I am tired of the perversions of “religious freedom”…other peoples religion being rammed down my throat. That Roman Catholics eschew all forms of birth control except rhythm are allowed to skip out on allowing their health insurers to provide this to their employees is the height of hypocrisy. Didn’t someone do a survey recently which showed that practicing Catholics use other methods of contraception?
This is what happens when “corporations” get the rights and freedoms that CLEARLY and LOGICALLY should only be assigned to natural persons, and not a legal construct.
I can only hope that Scalia or Thomas are suddenly taken ill before 2016…this Supreme Court is perverting the amendments and common sense.
Can Supreme Court justices be impeached? You can’t tell me these guys really believe that corporations deserve the same rights as natural persons; they are now just another polarized political group that is also contributing to the log jam of our government. They are allowing the tyranny of the minority, which was a concern of the founding fathers way back when. They are twisting the words and intent of the Constitution and the amendments to foster their own political stance. Another example of “old white men” syndrome that is stifling our good sense. The Roman Catholic Church is another outstanding example of the same…
I am fed up with this garbage…
‘This is a company trading with the public. As such, it has a responsibility to the public at large.’
Right. Companies trading with the public should be controlled by the public. Public ownership of means of production.
You have an interesting moniker Karl. Perhaps you should move to China or Russia or even Cuba and you would be more at home with your beliefs.
Well, that’s quite a post. Of course, we wouldn’t have the SCOTUS making a decision about the rights of closely held corps if the ACA didn’t mandate coverages.
For what it’s worth, to me corporations (whether closely held or not) should not have “rights”. However, they also shouldn’t be forced to provide certain things for their employees. I’m not sure I even like that the ACA requires employers to provide insurance, let alone specific coverages within health insurance. No clue where this is going, but it will be an ugly and depressing trip.
SCrOTUS
KY jw
We have lost sight of the original good cause in all the political gamesmanship, invective and double dealing. The original good cause was to provide access to healthcare to all citizens and, in this country, that means access to insurance to pay for that care.
for those who don’t believe access and deliverance from fear of medical caused bankruptcy is a right, we have no more to discuss. For those of us like me who do, I can only be disgusted at the mechanations to destroy the ACA. If corporations treated their employees fairly we wouldn’t need the laws we have protecting the workers and the public. I think many of us can agree that the greed of some companies endangers the employee, the public, and the economy. I think we can all agree that the “uninsurable” needed access and that certain coverage MUST be mandated.
ACA is certainly not perfect by any means. If our elected representatives had dispensed with the partisan drech and worked to improve it, we would all be ahead. The issue is fair healthcare for ALL our citizens…and the USA was way overdue in provisions for same.
Allowing corporations to have “religious freedom” is absurd. Does this corporation go to mass? Confess its sins like a good Roman Catholic? Can it be punished for criminal activity the way natural citizens are (imprisonment, for instance, vs. money fines)? Is it for profit? QED…
Cassandra: Stop making sense!
Casandra you say how great obumacare is. You think it would be better if “If our elected representatives had dispensed with the partisan drech” Correction: If the dems didn’t shut out the repubs and just suck more money out of our pockets and include all the illegals. I was injured out of state and my health care co denied all claims because we are ‘out of network’ now the proud owner of over 80,000 in medical bills.
THANKS Obummer!
Universal care would have been the answer. At least a universal option. Obama caved to the right wing pressure and tried to negotiate with teajadist terrorists.
Lesson learned, Barak – don’t negotiate with terrorists.
Teajadist! I like it, can I use it? If so, you can use Rethuglicans, Really Gay Virus AND his sleazy daughter, Highly Virus!
Great post cassandra. Especially the last paragraph.
Yay Jeebus!