Hobby Lobby decision from SCOTUS, Hobby Lobby Wins

In the same way that a Jehovah's Witness striptease club owner could impose his religious dogma by excluding blood transfusion coverage for strippers he employs.

Should liposuction, dialysis, and any number of other treatments be excluded if every puritanical tightarse boss decided they revealed moral decadence that violated with his strictures?

 

Please cite us an example of the Jehovah's witness strip club owner.

If people are unhappy with the benefits offered by their employer, they should market their skills elsewhere. It's called "Freedom".

Why does the Left HATE IT SO BADLY?

 

How is it a restriction of a woman's freedom to have her pay for her own contraceptives? What's the big deal?

- - - Updated - - -

You people make some odd arguments.

 

The left's opposition to this decision is perplexing. To me it suggests that it is really not an issue of restrictions on freedom, which it isn't, but something else. What could that be?

 

if the end result was the extermination of a life then yes

why would you force people to pay for that?

 

any number of other treatments are not being denied; try another straw man.
but in your line of reasoning; if the government can make people pay for things they are morally against; like an abortion; does the governemnt then have the right to FORCE people into having an abortion? isnt the governemnt saying it has a stake in this in the interest of public health? make people take birth control?
what if the government decides your personal freedom is being hindered by your children; or desires to have them?

 

What a hoot all the whiney assed libs bawling and complaining that they didnt get their way.

Maybe if they went out and got a copy of the constitution and read it, they wouldnt be so surprised.

What is even more sweet that the correct verdict, is the fact that Obama's imperial presidency is crashing down around his ample ears.

 

And here come the mindless talking points.

 

Both the ruling and the concurring opinion specifically address many of these points. Numbered by bullet point:

1. The concurring opinion states no such denial of access is indicated within the existing pool of exemptions to employer cost-sharing. Access is still enshrined by the scheme devised by HHS for non-profit exemptions, as such it would be unreasonable to expect a denial of access via the same mechanism.

3. The ruling does not restrict an employee's the right to choice, it does however uphold the employer's right not to pay for it.

5. The ruling is specific to the 4 forms of contraception under consideration before the Court. It goes further to expressly state the ruling does not apply to things like blood transfusions and vaccines.

6&7 are the same paragraph, and a weird editing. This is actually one point on which the concurring and dissenting opinion agree.
Here's the full three sentences from the dissent:
There is an overriding interest, I believe, in keeping the courts “out of the business of evaluating the relative mer(*)its of differing religious claims,” Lee, 455 U. S., at 263, n. 2 (Stevens, J., concurring in judgment), or the sincerity withwhich an asserted religious belief is held. Indeed, approv(*)ing some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be “perceived as favoring onereligion over another,” the very “risk the EstablishmentClause was designed to preclude.” Ibid. The Court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield, cf. Spencer v. World Vision, Inc., 633 F. 3d 723, 730 (CA9 2010) (O’Scannlain, J., con(*)curring), by its immoderate reading of RFRA.

 

I remember back in the day, prior to Obamacare being passed when it was being debated. Liberal politicians, posters, talking heads, etc... all insisted that Tax Dollars were absolutely NOT going to be used to pay for contraceptive or abortions. They also assured that people were not going to be forced into providing such coverage.

Here we are today where these same liars have the audacity to now argue that we should be paying for it and that employers should be forced to provide it.

 

It is just the wealthiest simply "purchasing" better privileges and immunities to due that disparity of wealth.

 

...never hear of any J Witnesses that own a strip club...is that you just playing the "what if" game since it's so damned popular with the Progressive Lib crowd?

 

Right.

We should all have the same things in life. So what if others work harder and went to school for a better life, I deserve what they have.

 

why complain about taxes under our form of Capitalism since it is a Social concept regarding equality.

 

Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with health.

A pregnant women is just as "healthy" as an unpregnant woman.

- - - Updated - - -

At least all catholics, baptists, Mormons, and more.... so yes.

 

I thought the right was for family values that may even include planning.

 

You don't believe in equal pay for equal work?

- - - Updated - - -

Went right over your head I see.

Because the owners have a right to their religious beliefs in the operation of their business and their money.

- - - Updated - - -

So you don't believe in equal pay for equal work?

- - - Updated - - -

It's the specific coverage that is in question, what specific coverage only affects conservatives and would be specifically denied them but not liberals and how would you determine who is or isn't a conservative?

 

I never realized that when I walked into a bar and didn't offer to buy every woman in the bar a drink, I was denying them their right to have a drink.

I'm a conservative and I'm all for family planning. I don't understand why any fool would think otherwise. Oh, wait, if someone doesn't pay for you.....I get it.

 

It's a condition that is the result of a disease. What disease causes pregnancy?

 

How are they forcing their religious faith and views on anyone?

 

I think the SCOTUS ruling today was correct, usually I don't agree with them. This is the second time in less than a month that I have agreed with their rulings.

 

Yes like when one place I worked the union worked with management to come up with the next contract before negotiations were even started and then fooled the employees through three votes telling them how they were fighting for them and then told them to accept the contract that had the predetermined agreement. And that was in Chicago.

 

Hahaha! Freedom! This is a victory for America.

 

1) Dont work there

2) If you do work there buy a wonderful obama plan.

No one is forcing you to do anything. What you are trying to do however is force people to go against their religion.

Its pretty simple.

 

If your planning requires contraceptives, then buy them yourself.

We are about planning just as much as we are for personal responsibility.