Supreme Court Broadens Hobby Lobby Ruling to All Forms of Birth Control

[Synthaholic]

This ruling will be irrelevant. Insurance companies - even Hobby Lobby's - will still provide contraceptive coverage to women because it's cheaper than the alternatives, i.e. pregnancy.

A point I have made more than once, yet you are still whinging about it like a little girl.

I'm not "whining", I am pointing it out. If you've also stumbled upon that point, bully for you.

 

[Synthaholic]

Supreme Court Broadens Hobby Lobby Ruling to All Forms of Birth Control | Mother Jones


told you so.....

told you so. this is what you get for a cheap partisan win. You get chaos.

So why when many of us pointed out the legitimate slippery slope aspect of this, the RWnuts around here pounded the table insisting that was bullshit?

Let's be clear. Most conservatives want birth control coverage out of the mandatory minimums of employer provided insurance. This has nothing to do with any trumped up arguments about abortion.

I don't recall you screaming and yelling about slippery slope when Sotomayor, who went on a rampage over this, granted the exact same injunction to Little Sisters of the Poor. Is that because you are an idiot with a short memory, or is it because you are a hack?

I am not familiar with that case, but just from what you said I disagree with Justice Sotomayor. Vehemently.

Obamacare is a health insurance regulation. That's it. If religious institutions do not want to abide by the regulations they should get out of the insurance business. They don't even have to provide insurance. They can compensate employees, who can then buy their own insurance through an exchange.

 

[Synthaholic]

How refreshing. Voice being given to Americans. Whoda thunkit?

corporations are fictitious entities used by individuals to shield themselves from personal liability they exist to allow jurisdiction to be asserted over an entity or by an entity.

they are not humans. no one ever contemplated corporations having first amendment rights.

but the rabid right wouldn't be singing the same tune if islam was the majority religion.

i'm embarrassed by the decisions being issued by this court.

i do however think if you want to claim you have the right to impose your religion on your employees, then you shouldn't be able to shield yourself from liability for debt, or the torts and criminal actions of your corporation

good luck with that.

If no one ever contemplated corporations having 1st Amendment rights why are newspapers and other sources of news, including Mother Jones, assumed to have 1st Amendment rights when the publish something the government doesn't like?

Also, can you explain how anyone is forcing their religion on anybody? Are Hobby Lobby employees forced to attend mass?

No one is claiming they are.

 

[TheIceMan]

Why are you and the guy who thanked your post such douchebags, after I posted the similar story from National Review Online?

Hobby Lobby Ruling Applies to More Than Just Abortifacients | National Review Online

Does the fact that National Review has an opinion somehow obligate me to agree with them? The fact that you are fed all your thoughts by external sources does not mean everyone else is.

No, it obligates you to not be a fucking douchebag, attacking Mother Jones instead of "investigating" it yourself, since you see yourself as above mere reporting by, you know, reporters.

Get a fucking grip.

Douchebag? REALLY?

At which point and time to do you grow up and argue your point on merit?

 

[Synthaholic]

Supreme Court Rules JCPenney Allowed to Sacrifice Employees to Appease Cthulhu. Citing the newly-established precedent of corporate-religious exemption, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in favor of JCPenney, upholding the company's right to sacrifice pure-hearted employees in order to assuage the Dread Lord Cthulhu, Bringer of Madness.

Supreme Court Rules JCPenney Allowed to Sacrifice Employees to Appease Cthulhu - The Moonmont Chronicle

“The majority's ruling sets a frightening precedent for our nation,” Justice Sotomayor wrote in the dissent. “Would the court extend to the Tcho-Tcho people of Chaugnar Faugn the freedom of cannibalism, or grant commitment-free zoning permits to the Chesuncook Witch Coven for erecting their subterranean shoggoth pits? This ruling opens the door to such atrocities.”
​

 

[Mr. H.]

corporations are fictitious entities used by individuals to shield themselves from personal liability they exist to allow jurisdiction to be asserted over an entity or by an entity.

they are not humans. no one ever contemplated corporations having first amendment rights.

but the rabid right wouldn't be singing the same tune if islam was the majority religion.

i'm embarrassed by the decisions being issued by this court.

i do however think if you want to claim you have the right to impose your religion on your employees, then you shouldn't be able to shield yourself from liability for debt, or the torts and criminal actions of your corporation

good luck with that.

If no one ever contemplated corporations having 1st Amendment rights why are newspapers and other sources of news, including Mother Jones, assumed to have 1st Amendment rights when the publish something the government doesn't like?

Also, can you explain how anyone is forcing their religion on anybody? Are Hobby Lobby employees forced to attend mass?

No one is claiming they are.

Wasn't it you that said they "got religion"?

 

[Synthaholic]

Does the fact that National Review has an opinion somehow obligate me to agree with them? The fact that you are fed all your thoughts by external sources does not mean everyone else is.

No, it obligates you to not be a fucking douchebag, attacking Mother Jones instead of "investigating" it yourself, since you see yourself as above mere reporting by, you know, reporters.

Get a fucking grip.

Douchebag? REALLY?

At which point and time to do you grow up and argue your point on merit?

I already did that pages ago.

This is the retard recap, for you conservative "readers".

 

[Synthaholic]

If no one ever contemplated corporations having 1st Amendment rights why are newspapers and other sources of news, including Mother Jones, assumed to have 1st Amendment rights when the publish something the government doesn't like?

Also, can you explain how anyone is forcing their religion on anybody? Are Hobby Lobby employees forced to attend mass?

No one is claiming they are.

Wasn't it you that said they "got religion"?

Yeah - they are claiming a "deeply held" religious belief. How do the Justices measure that? Just take their word for it, even when their own history contradicts that claim?

* They offered abortafacients to employees before they were mandated by law

* They funded employee retirements and benefits through investments in companies that manufacture abortafacients

* Does most of it's business with a country which has a terrible human rights record, and has forced abortions.

So, it does look like they just got religion.

 

[Stephanie]

watching them meltdown over this ruling has been an eye opener

these people can't live on there own they need government to make all their decisions

sad, but this government is toasting them for making them their masters...

how simple was that

 

[TheIceMan]

No, it obligates you to not be a fucking douchebag, attacking Mother Jones instead of "investigating" it yourself, since you see yourself as above mere reporting by, you know, reporters.

Get a fucking grip.

Douchebag? REALLY?

At which point and time to do you grow up and argue your point on merit?

I already did that pages ago.

This is the retard recap, for you conservative "readers".

Then I guess you lost. You have no argument. Calling people names doesn't count as a win on merit.

It kind of counts as you being everything you accuse anyone who opposes you of. Loser.

Now, you want to argue your point with me leftwingnut? Or you just want to try to flame? You suck at that too, btw.

 

[Mr. H.]

No one is claiming they are.

Wasn't it you that said they "got religion"?

Yeah - they are claiming a "deeply held" religious belief. How do the Justices measure that? Just take their word for it, even when their own history contradicts that claim?

* They offered abortafacients to employees before they were mandated by law

* They funded employee retirements and benefits through investments in companies that manufacture abortafacients

* Does most of it's business with a country which has a terrible human rights record, and has forced abortions.

So, it does look like they just got religion.

Why has the Liberal agenda been shoved down the throats of America for the past 6 years? And if it's questioned, it just creates more ammunition for Liberals- Cons hate women, the poor, veterans, the disabled... etc. Oh- and we don't believe in science or education?

Deal with the Supreme Court decision. Suck it up like we've had to suck up the Liberal bullshit since Obama took over the helm.

 

[daveman]

corporations are fictitious entities used by individuals to shield themselves from personal liability they exist to allow jurisdiction to be asserted over an entity or by an entity.

they are not humans. no one ever contemplated corporations having first amendment rights.

but the rabid right wouldn't be singing the same tune if islam was the majority religion.

i'm embarrassed by the decisions being issued by this court.

i do however think if you want to claim you have the right to impose your religion on your employees, then you shouldn't be able to shield yourself from liability for debt, or the torts and criminal actions of your corporation

good luck with that.

If no one ever contemplated corporations having 1st Amendment rights why are newspapers and other sources of news, including Mother Jones, assumed to have 1st Amendment rights when the publish something the government doesn't like?

Also, can you explain how anyone is forcing their religion on anybody? Are Hobby Lobby employees forced to attend mass?

No one is claiming they are.

Jillian is. Some prog retard at DailyKos is. George Takei is. This dumbass liberal is.

Liberals lie. All the time.

 

[Darkwind]

No one is claiming they are.

Wasn't it you that said they "got religion"?

Yeah - they are claiming a "deeply held" religious belief. How do the Justices measure that? Just take their word for it, even when their own history contradicts that claim?

* They offered abortafacients to employees before they were mandated by law

* They funded employee retirements and benefits through investments in companies that manufacture abortafacients

* Does most of it's business with a country which has a terrible human rights record, and has forced abortions.

So, it does look like they just got religion.

Your little bullet list is chock full of lies, and twisted cherry picked information. All of which means nothing. Not a single point you made alters the fact that this company has the right to determine what they will or will not cover going forward. They have that right because of the very laws that allow you to bitch and moan about it.

You act as if the country just died in a horrible nuclear blast when in fact, the sun came out just a little bit.

 

[Synthaholic]

Wasn't it you that said they "got religion"?

Yeah - they are claiming a "deeply held" religious belief. How do the Justices measure that? Just take their word for it, even when their own history contradicts that claim?

* They offered abortafacients to employees before they were mandated by law

* They funded employee retirements and benefits through investments in companies that manufacture abortafacients

* Does most of it's business with a country which has a terrible human rights record, and has forced abortions.

So, it does look like they just got religion.

Why has the Liberal agenda been shoved down the throats of America for the past 6 years? And if it's questioned, it just creates more ammunition for Liberals- Cons hate women, the poor, veterans, the disabled... etc. Oh- and we don't believe in science or education?

Deal with the Supreme Court decision. Suck it up like we've had to suck up the Liberal bullshit since Obama took over the helm.

Elections have consequences.

Bush pushed his conservative agenda down our throats for 8 years. Now it's your turn to take it.

Although I don't know what you're bitching about - wingnuts in Congress haven't let him do much, while Democrats in Congress let Bush do a whole hell of a lot. Way TOO much.


(and I noticed you ignored my Hobby Lobby points. )

 

[Synthaholic]

Wasn't it you that said they "got religion"?

Yeah - they are claiming a "deeply held" religious belief. How do the Justices measure that? Just take their word for it, even when their own history contradicts that claim?

* They offered abortafacients to employees before they were mandated by law

* They funded employee retirements and benefits through investments in companies that manufacture abortafacients

* Does most of it's business with a country which has a terrible human rights record, and has forced abortions.

So, it does look like they just got religion.

Your little bullet list is chock full of lies, and twisted cherry picked information. All of which means nothing. Not a single point you made alters the fact that this company has the right to determine what they will or will not cover going forward. They have that right because of the very laws that allow you to bitch and moan about it.

You act as if the country just died in a horrible nuclear blast when in fact, the sun came out just a little bit.

What if they claim next week that blood transfusions are against their religion?

(some religions forbid them)

 

[Synthaholic]

Can Scientology owned businesses refuse to cover anti-depressants, and all psychological drugs?

 

[Mr. H.]

Yeah - they are claiming a "deeply held" religious belief. How do the Justices measure that? Just take their word for it, even when their own history contradicts that claim?

* They offered abortafacients to employees before they were mandated by law

* They funded employee retirements and benefits through investments in companies that manufacture abortafacients

* Does most of it's business with a country which has a terrible human rights record, and has forced abortions.

So, it does look like they just got religion.

Your little bullet list is chock full of lies, and twisted cherry picked information. All of which means nothing. Not a single point you made alters the fact that this company has the right to determine what they will or will not cover going forward. They have that right because of the very laws that allow you to bitch and moan about it.

You act as if the country just died in a horrible nuclear blast when in fact, the sun came out just a little bit.

What if they claim next week that blood transfusions are against their religion?

(some religions forbid them)

What of it? What gives you more voice than others?

Oh yeah- you're a Liberal. Liberals trump shit.

And if anyone dare to step upon the shit of a Liberal- watch out.

 

[Synthaholic]

Your little bullet list is chock full of lies, and twisted cherry picked information. All of which means nothing. Not a single point you made alters the fact that this company has the right to determine what they will or will not cover going forward. They have that right because of the very laws that allow you to bitch and moan about it.

You act as if the country just died in a horrible nuclear blast when in fact, the sun came out just a little bit.

What if they claim next week that blood transfusions are against their religion?

(some religions forbid them)

What of it? What gives you more voice than others?

Oh yeah- you're a Liberal. Liberals trump shit.

And if anyone dare to step upon the shit of a Liberal- watch out.

So, if one of their employees needs a blood transfusion, let them die?

Compassionate conservatism!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This ruling will be irrelevant. Insurance companies - even Hobby Lobby's - will still provide contraceptive coverage to women because it's cheaper than the alternatives, i.e. pregnancy.

A point I have made more than once, yet you are still whinging about it like a little girl.

I'm not "whining", I am pointing it out. If you've also stumbled upon that point, bully for you.

I didn't stumble upon anything, I read the actual decision, unlike you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So why when many of us pointed out the legitimate slippery slope aspect of this, the RWnuts around here pounded the table insisting that was bullshit?

Let's be clear. Most conservatives want birth control coverage out of the mandatory minimums of employer provided insurance. This has nothing to do with any trumped up arguments about abortion.

I don't recall you screaming and yelling about slippery slope when Sotomayor, who went on a rampage over this, granted the exact same injunction to Little Sisters of the Poor. Is that because you are an idiot with a short memory, or is it because you are a hack?

I am not familiar with that case, but just from what you said I disagree with Justice Sotomayor. Vehemently.

Obamacare is a health insurance regulation. That's it. If religious institutions do not want to abide by the regulations they should get out of the insurance business. They don't even have to provide insurance. They can compensate employees, who can then buy their own insurance through an exchange.

Trust me, what I said is true.

Sotomayor delays birth control mandate for Catholic groups | MSNBC

That alone proves that what the the other justices did is not an expansion of Hobby Lobby, it is simply giving the plaintiffs a chance to make their case in court without them having to pay the penalty for non compliance. They can't actually expand it unless they take a case next term and rule against the government.

By the way, Obamacare doesn't work the way you think it does, but that belongs in another thread.