Another Obama Smackdown from SCOTUS

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
You [I mean Christians, not just you personally] are rejoicing, because your religious beliefs have been made more powerful - but how will you feel when the religion in question isn't yours?
You [I mean Christians, not just you personally] are rejoicing, because your religious beliefs have been made more powerful - but how will you feel when the religion in question isn't yours?
It doesn't matter, because if one religion's beliefs are supported, they all must be - and that's a recipe for disaster. Exactly what the Founding Fathers hoped to prevent.
You've completely, utterly and totally missed what has happened. You think some particular religion has been singled out by the Supreme Court for favoritism. A, the ruling doesn't make Christian beliefs "more powerful." And B, and the most incredibly important, the ruling doesn't "support" a religious belief at all - the ruling prevents a law that infringes upon the free exercise of religion. Period.

Hobby Lobby opposes the law forcing them to have to pay for, and thus make available free of charge to their employees, contraceptives and abortifacients, because doing so is against their religious beliefs. A law forcing them to do so would be a law forcing them to violate their own religious beliefs. That's a far cry from them wanting to prohibit their employees from using contraceptives and abortifacients. A ruling allowing them to prohibit their employees from using them would be a ruling that made their beliefs more powerful, and would certainly be a ruling that supported a specific religion. But that's not what happened.

Until September 2012, when Obamacare forced them to change their health insurance plan, Plan B and Ella emergency contraceptives were covered in Hobby Lobby's health insurance plans. The difference was, the employees were paying for it, not Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobby wasn't refusing to allow it to be covered by insurance, and they weren't forcing their religious beliefs onto employees by prohibiting they be able to use that insurance coverage. Hobby Lobby simply wouldn't pay for it.

And yes, just like the Founding Fathers wanted, this ruling applies to all religions. Any closely held private corporation, be it Christian, Muslim or whatever, can refuse to provide contraceptives and abortifacients to their employees if providing it violates their religion. What's the big deal? It's straightforward and clearly understandable - neither Congress nor any other legislative body can create a law which forces an individual or a private company to violate their own religious beliefs.
 

asjssl

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
It's amazing how many people just don't get it.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

Get what...you don't think all of this will open Pandora box..please. .

Sent from my SM-G900V using EO Forums mobile app
 

asjssl

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
You've completely, utterly and totally missed what has happened. You think some particular religion has been singled out by the Supreme Court for favoritism. A, the ruling doesn't make Christian beliefs "more powerful." And B, and the most incredibly important, the ruling doesn't "support" a religious belief at all - the ruling prevents a law that infringes upon the free exercise of religion. Period.

Hobby Lobby opposes the law forcing them to have to pay for, and thus make available free of charge to their employees, contraceptives and abortifacients, because doing so is against their religious beliefs. A law forcing them to do so would be a law forcing them to violate their own religious beliefs. That's a far cry from them wanting to prohibit their employees from using contraceptives and abortifacients. A ruling allowing them to prohibit their employees from using them would be a ruling that made their beliefs more powerful, and would certainly be a ruling that supported a specific religion. But that's not what happened.

Until September 2012, when Obamacare forced them to change their health insurance plan, Plan B and Ella emergency contraceptives were covered in Hobby Lobby's health insurance plans. The difference was, the employees were paying for it, not Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobby wasn't refusing to allow it to be covered by insurance, and they weren't forcing their religious beliefs onto employees by prohibiting they be able to use that insurance coverage. Hobby Lobby simply wouldn't pay for it.

And yes, just like the Founding Fathers wanted, this ruling applies to all religions. Any closely held private corporation, be it Christian, Muslim or whatever, can refuse to provide contraceptives and abortifacients to their employees if providing it violates their religion. What's the big deal? It's straightforward and clearly understandable - neither Congress nor any other legislative body can create a law which forces an individual or a private company to violate their own religious beliefs.



Sent from my SM-G900V using EO Forums mobile app
 

Attachments

  • 1404301131741.jpg
    1404301131741.jpg
    92.6 KB · Views: 18

Jamin_Joe

Seasoned Expediter
There are several very important points that the Left is ignoring.

1. We have the right to disagree and in no way is the Government permitted to penilize us for standing up for what we believe. Of course that changes if we break the law. Examples, vandalizim, violance, harrassment, and other uncivilized behavior.

2. The Left is not above the law and their arrogance is very unamerican.
Obama with his "Contitutional Laywers" disagreeing with the Supreme Court for example is like any Dictator stating that the Law doesnt apply to him. VERY dangerous precident for ANY politition to believe and their brainwashed followers to believe.

No one has the right to force their beliefs on anyone AND no one has the right to keep anyone from following their beliefs......Period.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
This thread probably has a record number of uninformed, irrelevant posts. Once again, the decision only applied to the HHS Contraception Mandate. As plainly stated in the article referenced in the OP:
...the decision is limited to closely-held for-profit corporations...
The decision is also strictly limited to the issue of the contraception mandate, not other medical practices.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion:
This decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate and should not be understood to hold that all insurance-coverage mandates e.g., for vaccinations or blood transfusions, must necessarily fall if they conflict with an employer's religious beliefs. Nor does it provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice.

As previously pointed out by Turtle, a company's investments in mutual funds has nothing to do with this issue; and the "rich" are not going to get richer due to this exemption of four particular contraceptives from certain ObamaCare controlled health care plans.

What will likely happen is the "rich" will likely pay higher taxes and health care costs along with the common people when Obama decides to require insurance companies controlled by ObamaCare to provide these four contraceptives for "free", along with the other 16 already covered. After all, isn't it a basic right for all of us to have free birth control, cell phones, food, etc...how about transportation? I need a new pickup go get all these free govt goodies.:rolleyes:

 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
It must be nice to have enough patience to write detailed responses. It's too bad they usually can't overcome the feelings driven incorrect logic applied by most of one side of the discussion.
 

paullud

Veteran Expediter
Get what...you don't think all of this will open Pandora box..please. .

Sent from my SM-G900V using EO Forums mobile app

Get what the ruling was about. No, not a chance it opens Pandora's box because the ruling was specific.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
It must be nice to have enough patience to write detailed responses. It's too bad they usually can't overcome the feelings driven incorrect logic applied by most of one side of the discussion.
lol ... just on general principles ...
 

asjssl

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
Get what the ruling was about. No, not a chance it opens Pandora's box because the ruling was specific.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

Precedent is precedent....you watch...religion is all about control....
Give em 1/16" they will take 12 miles..

Sent from my SM-G900V using EO Forums mobile app
 

paullud

Veteran Expediter
Already starting....

Post-Hobby Lobby, Religious Orgs Want Exemption From LGBT Hiring Order

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/religious-groups-lgbt-hiring-hobby-lobby

Sent from my SM-G900V using EO Forums mobile app

So you feel like the government should get involved in religion? They wrote a letter requesting that an executive order(keywords executive order) shouldn't force them to hire people that have a direct conflict with their beliefs.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
 

asjssl

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
Not happy at all...but to think for 1 second this is it...is foolish.....

Sent from my SM-G900V using EO Forums mobile app
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Twenty some years ago legislation was written, adopted and signed into law. The Obamacare provision directly contradicted that legislation. I can't remember the specific word for it but the provision is something less than law. The SC said the lesser can't trump and countermand the superior, the twenty something years ago law stands. It has nothing to do with religion. Religion isn't even considered. It's what is law and what takes precedence. Oh, for those who won't like that, complain to CNN or MSNBC, whichever one was on in McD's and made that statement.
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
I think it is laughable that all I am hearing from the left (including Hillary yesterday) is how religion and five male justices are taking away their rights for birth control. They didn't take birth control away. You just have to go somewhere else if you have a religious employer. No big deal.
I'm surprised liberal males aren't screaming for their free Viagra. Now there will be a "war on men".
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
People need to get the idea that they are OWED something right out of their heads. It is not anyone's else's responsibility to pay for another's recreation. It is time for people to take responsibility for their own actions.


Birth control is VERY inexpensive. In fact, the ONLY 100% sure fire form of birth control, IS FREE!

The government should get OUT of the health care business, it is not their job. Linked is an article that would get the politics out of recreational sex.

[h=1]A simple solution to Hobby Lobby outrage[/h]
A simple solution to Hobby Lobby outrage?health care?birth control?Commentary.
 
Top