U.S. Supreme Court considers cases relating to corporations’ religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby & Conestoga Wood Specialties. Hobby Lobby funding a vast right-wing Christian movement

  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 25, 2014 8:07 PM GMT
    U.S. Supreme Court considers cases relating to corporations’ religious beliefs


    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/03/u-s-supreme-court-considers-cases-relating-to-employers-religious-beliefs/


    Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., an Oklahoma City


    Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. of East Earl, Pa.
    - ha...this was one of the companies I was looking at for new cabinets for my Mom's home. No more.

    I wish I could get a list of the other companies.
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 25, 2014 8:09 PM GMT
    Live Blog: Contraception Cases at Supreme Court

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/03/25/live-blog-contraception-cases-at-the-supreme-court/

    "Justice Anthony Kennedy, potentially a key vote in the case, asked Mr. Clement how the court should take into account the religious rights of employees, which may differ from the religious views of their employer.

    He asked: Under the challengers’ arguments, do employer rights trump those of workers? Among other things, Mr. Clement suggested the government could step in to subsidize contraception coverage for women who work at companies that don’t provide it, just as the government is doing in cases involving objections by religious nonprofits."
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 25, 2014 8:13 PM GMT
    Supreme Court seeks compromise in contraception case


    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/25/supreme-court-religion-contraception-hobby-lobby/6860479/


  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Mar 25, 2014 9:15 PM GMT
    ^^

    Corporations have been people since 1819 (Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward).

    It's bullshit that health insurance covers contraception and drives up costs for everyone. Your sex life is not a healthcare problem.

    Buy a box of Trojans.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Mar 25, 2014 9:25 PM GMT
    ^^

    so what does that have to do with contraception and health insurance? You want the coverage, you pay for it. Leave the general population out of it.

    The desire of not wanted to get knocked up is not a medical issue or a religious issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 25, 2014 9:40 PM GMT
    Any word of the brilliant Clarence Thomas interaction with the participants?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 25, 2014 11:05 PM GMT
    tj85016 said^^
    It's bullshit that health insurance covers contraception and drives up costs for everyone. Your sex life is not a healthcare problem.

    Buy a box of Trojans.

    Many insurance plans also pay for male ED problems. Why should women policy holders pay for that? They can't get ED. Sounds like an exclusive male sexual healthcare problem to me.

    What about uterine or ovarian cancer? Men don't have a uterus or ovaries. And women don't have a prostate or testicles, 2 sites where males alone can contract cancer. Let's eliminate coverage for all those treatments, too.
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Mar 25, 2014 11:12 PM GMT
    QUOTE AUTHOR GOES HEREso what does that have to do with contraception and health insurance?


    Talk to a woman...
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 26, 2014 12:16 AM GMT
    How can one not see that birth control is health care related? Birth control is also used for other things than preventing pregnancy.

    http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/features/other-reasons-to-take-the-pill

    You know, this is why men who are not medical doctors should not make decisions about women's health. Most male politicians, especially the ones that do not have empathy for others, should stay out of women's health issues.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Mar 26, 2014 12:24 AM GMT
    ART_DECO said
    tj85016 said^^
    It's bullshit that health insurance covers contraception and drives up costs for everyone. Your sex life is not a healthcare problem.

    Buy a box of Trojans.

    Many insurance plans also pay for male ED problems. Why should women policy holders pay for that? They can't get ED. Sounds like an exclusive male sexual healthcare problem to me.

    What about uterine or ovarian cancer? Men don't have a uterus or ovaries. And women don't have a prostate or testicles, 2 sites where males alone can contract cancer. Let's eliminate coverage for all those treatments, too.


    I agree, ED meds shouldn't be covered. Why not cover coffins because death is a medical problem?

    It's just another reason why medical costs are out of line
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Mar 26, 2014 1:20 AM GMT
    metta8 saidHow can one not see that birth control is health care related? Birth control is also used for other things than preventing pregnancy.

    http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/features/other-reasons-to-take-the-pill

    You know, this is why men who are not medical doctors should not make decisions about women's health. Most male politicians, especially the ones that do not have empathy for others, should stay out of women's health issues.


    I saw an episode of Rachel Maddow and she made a good point in showing how some guys don't understand birth control.

    Don't forget, you have a politician in congress who alluded to a male fetus getting sensation by touching its genitals.
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 26, 2014 1:24 AM GMT
    Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan come out swinging against Hobby Lobby corporate religion claim

    http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/justices_ginsburg_sotomoyor_and_kagan_come_out_swinging_against_hobby_lobby_corporate_religion_claim/
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 26, 2014 1:53 AM GMT
    At the Supreme Court, a potential catastrophe for women’s rights

    "Corporations are not people. Corporations cannot have religious views. If religious rights are extended to corporations, it puts us on a slippery slope where any private company could argue that religious beliefs prevent it from offering vital employee protections."


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sandra-fluke-at-the-supreme-court-a-potential-contraception-catastrophe/2014/03/24/4c41f4aa-b38a-11e3-b899-20667de76985_story.html
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 26, 2014 2:03 AM GMT
    Time to express some Lawd...

    17141865-lol-reaction.gif
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Mar 26, 2014 3:02 AM GMT
    metta8 saidHow can one not see that birth control is health care related? Birth control is also used for other things than preventing pregnancy.

    http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/features/other-reasons-to-take-the-pill

    You know, this is why men who are not medical doctors should not make decisions about women's health. Most male politicians, especially the ones that do not have empathy for others, should stay out of women's health issues.


    those situations should be the discretion of the prescribing physician, but 99% of birth control is to avoid getting pregnant, which is not a medical problem.

    But this is probably the wrong forum for what I'm trying to say. The religious argument for not covering birth control in insurance is bullshit
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 27, 2014 8:10 AM GMT
    1743513_10152303207134255_281727581_n.pn
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 27, 2014 8:11 AM GMT
    10150616_687626097949587_1723901851_n.jp
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 27, 2014 4:29 PM GMT
    Hobby Lobby case fuels bigotry


    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/03/24/hobby-lobby-obamacare-contraception-supreme-court-column/6838853/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2014 5:02 PM GMT
    metta8 saidHobby Lobby case fuels bigotry

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/03/24/hobby-lobby-obamacare-contraception-supreme-court-column/6838853/

    From this link, quoted from an Episcopal Bishop:

    "A decade later, I am watching a remarkable phenomenon: Followers of Jesus pleading with the government to allow them to shun those they regard as "sinners." Arizona's recent attempt to make it a religious right to discriminate, and similar efforts in other states, would give businesses the right not to serve almost anyone, for almost any reason, as long as it involved a seriously held religious belief. Services of all kinds could be denied to anyone whom the provider judged to be living an immoral life, according to their brand of religion."

    The key phrase here is: "According to their brand of religion." WHOSE religion? Mine? Yours?

    Some Christian religions accept gays, some do not. Some Jewish sects accept gays, some do not. And so it goes. Even if the US government chooses to follow religious tenets, WHOSE religion? There's more than one.

    Why should YOUR anti-gay religion trump MY pro-gay religion? Is it the function of secular government to make that call?

    This is precisely why the Founders wanted separation of Church and State. Over 200 years ago they were a lot closer historically to the devastating European religious wars. Catholics against Protestants, Protestants against Catholics, and everyone against the Jews. The torture, burning and expulsion of religious heretics from the political body. They knew their history, and didn't want those horrors to happen in the new nation they were creating.

    A new nation based on self-evident universal human rights. The very thing Christian fundamentalists reject.

    But that religious supremacy is trying to creep back in. The Christian fundamentalists want to turn the US into a theocracy according to their exclusive doctrine. The Bible trumps the US Constitution, and the Bible says... well, whatever it's interpreted to say, by whomever is doing the interpreting at the moment.
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 28, 2014 6:17 AM GMT
    1964946_10152310713221955_1926513361_n.j
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 28, 2014 6:18 AM GMT
    1484103_675942642444024_2049066080_n.jpg
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 28, 2014 6:43 AM GMT
    1544591_10152304705159255_453507140_n.jp
  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 28, 2014 6:55 AM GMT


  • metta

    Posts: 39108

    Mar 28, 2014 7:27 PM GMT
    If Hobby Lobby Wins, It Will Be Even Worse For Birth Control Access Than You Think

    "Essentially, if Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood are successful, they’ll win the right to refuse to extend coverage for doctor’s visits that include discussion about certain forms of contraception, like IUDs or the morning after pill."

    "And birth control isn’t the only type of medical care that some Americans object to on religious grounds. There are some groups who are opposed to modern health services like vaccinations, blood transfusions, or mental health care. If these upcoming legal challenges are successful, that could open the door for employers to restrict their workers’ coverage for doctors’ visits that include discussion of those topics, too. It’s a slippery slope."

    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/03/19/3415983/hobby-lobby-contraception-counseling/
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Mar 28, 2014 7:29 PM GMT
    ^^

    everybody has access to birth control, get an Rx and go get some - or buy a box of Trojans