LGBTI groups alarmed by US Supreme Court ruling in Hobby Lobby case. Obama administration thinks they found fix for this.

  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 12:32 AM GMT
    LGBTI groups alarmed by US Supreme Court ruling in Hobby Lobby case

    They wonder if ruling could open the way for companies to also claim religious exemption on non-discrimination policies



    http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/lgbti-groups-alarmed-us-supreme-court-ruling-hobby-lobby-case300614
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 12:37 AM GMT
    metta8 saidLGBTI groups alarmed by US Supreme Court ruling in Hobby Lobby case

    They wonder if ruling could open the way for companies to also claim religious exemption on non-discrimination policies



    http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/lgbti-groups-alarmed-us-supreme-court-ruling-hobby-lobby-case300614


    Why do they "wonder"?
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 12:44 AM GMT
    Sign the pledge to boycott Hobby Lobby


    https://www.dailykos.com/campaigns/751?detail=email
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 4:21 AM GMT
    Help me understand. At first, I thought Hobby Lobby was against all contraceptives, based on the news reports. But after doing some research, it turns out that is not the case. They are only against a few that are of the "morning after" types. That being the case, I don't have such hard feelings against them. While I am Pro Choice, I respect their right to be Pro Life and not wanting to pay for what they consider abortion. I don't agree with them that that is actually abortion, but, respect their opinion.

    My question is: did the Supreme Court rule that employers can refuse to pay for ALL contraceptives, are just the few that Hobby Lobby is against?
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 3:24 PM GMT




    List of companies in the Hobby Lobby lawsuit:

    for those that buy organic foods, Eden Foods is listed in it: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/30/1310789/-Boycott-Eden-Foods-organic-beans


    Geneva College, PA
    Seneca, Lumber
    WLH Enterprises - sawmill
    O'Brien Industrial Holding, MO - mfg.
    Hercules Industries, CO - mfg a/c
    Weingartz Supply Company - Power equip.
    Legatus - organization
    Triune Health Group, IL
    Hobby Lobby Stores Inc, OK
    Mardel - Bookstore
    Tonn and Blank Construction, IN
    Tyndale House - Publishing
    Autocam Corporation
    Autocam Automotive, MI
    Autocam Medical - parts mfg.
    Korte & Luitjohan Contractors Inc
    American Pulverizer, MO - scrap metal
    Springfield Iron and Metal, MO - scrap metal
    Hustler Conveyor Company, MO - scrap metal
    City Welding, MO - scrap metal
    Grote Insustries, IN - mfg.
    Annex Medical Inc - mfg
    Sacred Heart Medical - mfg
    Habile and Venture North Properties
    Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation - cabinet mfg.
    Domino's Farms Corporation, MI - property mgmt
    Sharpe Holdings, MO - farming
    Ozark National Financial Services - MO
    CNS Corporation, MO
    Ozark
    N.I.S
    Sharpe Holdings
    Sioux Chief Mfg, MO - plumbing
    Freshway Foods, OH - food processor/packer
    Continuum Health Partnership, CO - oxygen supploy
    Conessione - Investment company
    American Mfg. Company, MN - mfg.
    Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel LLC - law firm
    Cherry Creek Mortgage Co, CO
    Beckwith Electric Co., FL
    Bick Holdings, MO
    Eden Foods, MI
    Mersino Management Company, MI
    Mersino Enterprises
    Mersino Dewatering
    Global Pump Co.
    Mersino South-West
    Hart Electric LLC, IL
    H.I. Cable
    MK Chambers Company, MI
    Johnson Welded Products, OH
    Ozinga Bros., IL, IL - mfg concrete
    SMA LLC, MN
    Holland Cheverlet, WV
    QC Group, MN
    Willis & Willis PLC - law firm
    Trijicon Inc, MI - mfg firearms
    Barron Industries, MI - mfg
    Midwest Fastener Corp, MI
    Feltl & Co, MN - brokerage/investment
    Randy Reed Automotive, MO
    Randy Reed Buick GMC, MO
    Randy Reed Nissan, MO
    Randy Reed Chevrolet, MO
    Zumbiel Packaging, KY
    Electrolock Inc., OH
    Doboszenski & Sons, MN
    Encompass Develop,Design & Construct, LLC, KY
    Hastings Automotive Inc, MN
    Hastings Ford, MN
    Hastings Chrysler Center, MN
    Stone River Management Co.
    Dunstone Co.
    Catholic Benefits Association
    Catholic Insurance Company
    M&N Plastics, MI
    Mersino Dewatering Inc, MI, FL, NC, NE, PA



    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-sebelius-contraceptive-for-profit-lawsuits#cases
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 3:39 PM GMT
    What if a Muslim Company Used the 'Hobby Lobby' Decision to Impose Its Values on White Christians?

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/30/1310729/-What-if-a-Muslim-Company-Used-the-Hobby-Lobby-Decision-to-Impose-Its-Values-on-White-Christians
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 3:51 PM GMT
    10509775_871400652887346_192028478164755



    Christians Call Out Hobby Lobby For Hypocrisy
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-christian_n_5545618.html
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 4:00 PM GMT
    strokeme220 saidHelp me understand. At first, I thought Hobby Lobby was against all contraceptives, based on the news reports. But after doing some research, it turns out that is not the case. They are only against a few that are of the "morning after" types. That being the case, I don't have such hard feelings against them. While I am Pro Choice, I respect their right to be Pro Life and not wanting to pay for what they consider abortion. I don't agree with them that that is actually abortion, but, respect their opinion.

    My question is: did the Supreme Court rule that employers can refuse to pay for ALL contraceptives, are just the few that Hobby Lobby is against?


    From The Syllabus ("Précis") in "Burwell et al. vs Hobby Lobby Stores et al."

    "Nonexempt employers are generally required to provide coverage for the 20 contraceptive methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration, including the 4 that may have the effect of preventing an already fertilized egg from developing any further by inhibiting its attachment to the uterus. Religious employers, such as churches, are exempt from this contraceptive mandate. HHS has also effectively exempted religious nonprofit organizations with religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services. Under this accom- modation, the insurance issuer must exclude contraceptive coverage from the employer’s plan and provide plan participants with separate payments for contraceptive services without imposing any cost- sharing requirements on the employer, its insurance plan, or its employee beneficiaries.

    In these cases, the owners of three closely held for-profit corpora- tions have sincere Christian beliefs that life begins at conception and that it would violate their religion to facilitate access to contraceptive drugs or devices that operate after that point. In separate actions, they sued HHS and other federal officials and agencies (collectively HHS) under RFRA and the Free Exercise Clause, seeking to enjoin application of the contraceptive mandate insofar as it requires them to provide health coverage for the four objectionable contraceptives."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 4:05 PM GMT

    lol, meanwhile hobby lobby has invested in the manufacture of the morning after pill. Isn't that special?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_n_5070279.html

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif

  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 4:14 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    lol, meanwhile hobby lobby has invested in the manufacture of the morning after pill. Isn't that special?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_n_5070279.html

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif


    "It has also been reported that the Vatican has shares in pharmaceuticals, arms, gold reserves and even contraceptives pills ("The Power and the Glory", David Yallop, p. 146; 191.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 4:21 PM GMT
    This sets a dangerous precedent for all kinds of cases, as Ruth Bader Ginsberg laid out in her minority opinion. I hope that the kinds of religious groups the majority didn't consider start coming out of the woodwork with all kinds of problematic suggestions, such as Jehovah's Witnesses denying blood transfusions to their employees or Amish women's groups calling Viagra "against God's plan"
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 4:29 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    lol, meanwhile hobby lobby has invested in the manufacture of the morning after pill. Isn't that special?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_n_5070279.html

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif


    "Hobby Lobby's 401(k) employee retirement plan holds $73 million in mutual funds that invest in multiple pharmaceutical companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and abortion-inducing medications."

    This is from the article you cite. Now, look carefully above at the Syllabus attached the SCOTUS decision. See this bit?

    "...the owners of three closely held for-profit corporations have SINCERE Christian beliefs that life begins at conception and that it would violate their religion to facilitate access to contraceptive drugs or devices that operate after that point.."

    That word "sincere" looks harmless enough. In "Clay vs United States, 403 U.S. 698", Muhammad Ali's conviction was about to be affirmed by SCOTUS, UNTIL Justice Harlan became convinced that Ali's conscientious objection was "sincere", as, in the transcript, the Government "did not doubt his sincerity."

    By the same point in law that Harlan then cast the deciding vote NOT to uphold Ali's conviction, this Supreme Court should reverse itself on this decision, as Hobby's investment in for-profit companies which manufacture exactly the products they claim contravene their "religious beliefs" are clearly NOT "sincere".

  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 4:33 PM GMT
    Sorry, "clearly render those religious beliefs" not sincere, I should have said.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 4:38 PM GMT
    WrestlerBoy said
    meninlove said
    lol, meanwhile hobby lobby has invested in the manufacture of the morning after pill. Isn't that special?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_n_5070279.html

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif


    "Hobby Lobby's 401(k) employee retirement plan holds $73 million in mutual funds that invest in multiple pharmaceutical companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and abortion-inducing medications."

    This is from the article you cite. Now, look carefully above at the Syllabus attached the SCOTUS decision. See this bit?

    "...the owners of three closely held for-profit corporations have SINCERE Christian beliefs that life begins at conception and that it would violate their religion to facilitate access to contraceptive drugs or devices that operate after that point.."

    That word "sincere" looks harmless enough. In "Clay vs United States, 403 U.S. 698", Muhammad Ali's conviction was about to be affirmed by SCOTUS, UNTIL Justice Harlan became convinced that Ali's conscientious objection was "sincere", as, in the transcript, the Government "did not doubt his sincerity."

    By the same point in law that Harlan then cast the deciding vote NOT to uphold Ali's conviction, this Supreme Court should reverse itself on this decision, as Hobby's investment in for-profit companies which manufacture exactly the products they claim contravene their "religious beliefs" are clearly NOT "sincere".



    Thanks Wrestler, that was my point. They're (being polite) insincere at best, but really displaying an appalling hypocrisy and double standard worth noting. I hope that somehow this Supreme Court ruling can be appealed and/or revisited and struck down in light of Hobbylobby's investments.
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 4:47 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    WrestlerBoy said
    meninlove said
    lol, meanwhile hobby lobby has invested in the manufacture of the morning after pill. Isn't that special?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_n_5070279.html

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif


    "Hobby Lobby's 401(k) employee retirement plan holds $73 million in mutual funds that invest in multiple pharmaceutical companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and abortion-inducing medications."

    This is from the article you cite. Now, look carefully above at the Syllabus attached the SCOTUS decision. See this bit?

    "...the owners of three closely held for-profit corporations have SINCERE Christian beliefs that life begins at conception and that it would violate their religion to facilitate access to contraceptive drugs or devices that operate after that point.."

    That word "sincere" looks harmless enough. In "Clay vs United States, 403 U.S. 698", Muhammad Ali's conviction was about to be affirmed by SCOTUS, UNTIL Justice Harlan became convinced that Ali's conscientious objection was "sincere", as, in the transcript, the Government "did not doubt his sincerity."

    By the same point in law that Harlan then cast the deciding vote NOT to uphold Ali's conviction, this Supreme Court should reverse itself on this decision, as Hobby's investment in for-profit companies which manufacture exactly the products they claim contravene their "religious beliefs" are clearly NOT "sincere".



    Thanks Wrestler, that was my point. They're (being polite) insincere at best, but really displaying an appalling hypocrisy and double standard worth noting. I hope that somehow this Supreme Court ruling can be appealed and/or revisited and struck down in light of Hobbylobby's investments.


    A SCOTUS decision cannot be "appealed", as such, but:

    "In the years 1946–1992, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed itself in about 130 cases. The U.S. Supreme Court has further explained as follows:

    [W]hen convinced of former error, this Court has never felt constrained to follow precedent. In constitutional questions, where correction depends upon amendment, and not upon legislative action, this Court throughout its history has freely exercised its power to reexamine the basis of its constitutional decisions.
    —Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 665 (1944)."

    Sadly, in this "politicized" climate, I don't think we should be holding our collective breath.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 5:49 PM GMT
    Jesus, talk about a slippery slope! This could be one of the worst Supreme Court decisions ever. icon_sad.gif
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 5:58 PM GMT
    unckabasa saidJesus, talk about a slippery slope! This could be one of the worst Supreme Court decisions ever. icon_sad.gif


    "Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be 'perceived as favoring one religion over another,' the very 'risk the [Constitution's] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude."

    "The court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield."

    Ginsburg in Dissent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 6:02 PM GMT
    Since when does a business have a Religious conscience? People do, businesses don't. Rich people own large businesses, they will have their personal and business interests represented.....twice. While poor people will have less representation....once if they are lucky.

    We already know businesses have huge amounts of power, this codifies it. And gives them even more power. Now a business as an entity (not a living, breathing one) can control it's workers???
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 6:04 PM GMT
    unckabasa saidSince when does a business have a Religious conscience? People do, businesses don't. Rich people own large businesses, they will have their personal and business interests represented.....twice. While poor people will have less representation....once if they are lucky.

    We already know businesses have huge amounts of power, this codifies it. And gives them even more power. Now a business as an entity (not a living, breathing one) can control it's workers???


    Yes, because according to this Decision, a corporation now has a (religious) "faith", amazingly.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2014 6:15 PM GMT
    I love Ginsburg!!! Part of her dissent:

    She claims that the majority has actually undermined the very principle, religious freedom, it claimed in its ruling to have upheld:

    "Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be ‘perceived as favoring one religion over another,’ the very ‘risk the [Constitution's] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude."

    http://www.salon.com/2014/06/30/here_are_the_highlights_of_justice_ginsburgs_fiery_hobby_lobby_dissent/
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 6:19 PM GMT
    Ruth Bader Ginsburg Writes Scathing 35-Page Dissent In Birth Control Case

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/231968582/Burwell-v-Hobby-Lobby










    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/ruth-bader-ginsburg-write_n_5544111.html
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 6:36 PM GMT
    Anti-Gay Activists See Hobby Lobby As Crowbar Into Legal Discrimination

    http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/anti_gay_activists_see_hobby_lobby_as_crowbar_into_legal_discrimintion
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Jul 01, 2014 8:01 PM GMT
    unckabasa saidSince when does a business have a Religious conscience? People do, businesses don't. Rich people own large businesses, they will have their personal and business interests represented.....twice. While poor people will have less representation....once if they are lucky.

    We already know businesses have huge amounts of power, this codifies it. And gives them even more power. Now a business as an entity (not a living, breathing one) can control it's workers???



    for conservatives of a certain stripe, life begins at the moment of incorporation.
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 01, 2014 8:05 PM GMT
    tazzari said
    unckabasa saidSince when does a business have a Religious conscience? People do, businesses don't. Rich people own large businesses, they will have their personal and business interests represented.....twice. While poor people will have less representation....once if they are lucky.

    We already know businesses have huge amounts of power, this codifies it. And gives them even more power. Now a business as an entity (not a living, breathing one) can control it's workers???



    for conservatives of a certain stripe, life begins at the moment of incorporation.


    Which brings us to the elephant in the room: We have too many conflicting definitions (under law) as to when "life" begins and when "personhood" begins. In Roe v Wade SCOTUS held, more or less, that if "philosophers and scientists" couldn't agree on this, it wasn't for them to decide, either.

    But, of course, in decisions like Hobby, they "are" deciding, without saying they're deciding, aren't they.
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jul 01, 2014 10:04 PM GMT


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GY1TJ8JazkQ