Damn dude, you're in a mood today. First Crandc and now this brownfinger crack? Nothing wrong with having a life extension directive for your doctor and family. Obviously you're one of the people who no matter how brain dead you might be you don't want that cord unplugged or your organs donated. And that's alright. That's your right. But it is important to make your wishes known. Death is inevitable, nothing wrong with having how you want to go out in writing.
Maybe for you. Most people have more active lives. And we're not just talking trojans here, contraception is an entire medical field. Some forms of contraception cost tens of thousands of dollars. An unwanted child costs all of us millions.
10s of thousands??? Geez, why the hell would you force an atheist to buy insurance covering that, let alone a Christian? Does any one of those 4 contraceptions the Hobby Lobby objected to cost that much? Or are you hallucinating?
Is that in play here? No!!! "all four of the contraceptive methods Hobby Lobby objects to—Plan B, Ella, and two intrauterine devices"
"In Hobby Lobby Case, the Supreme Court Chooses Religion Over Science" This is a ridiculous headline. The 1st amendment covers Religion not Science. What the hell would you expect? Then the idiot says their beliefs are not supported by science!!! Geez, I think the nit wit needs to study and learn the difference and the value of each. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/supreme-court-hobby-lobby-decision
I don't and I don't think this employer wants to dictate either. I expect an employer can indeed decide what the wages shall be and in this case it does not include insurance that covers four types of birth control. Employees can choose to accept or decline. The US government should have no roll in the agreement between these parties.
In reading Ginsburg's Dissent, she tries to make several points, all wrong, I think The first point. "The exemption sought by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would…deny legions of women who do not hold their employers' beliefs access to contraceptive coverage" Obviously wrong, they are not denied access. The only point that discusses the Constitution's Establishment Clause and here again she is wrong. "Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation..." The court only held that Hobby Lobby's and Conestoga's claims were worthy. They did not deem others unworthy. Why was she picked to serve on this court???
We are just talking trojans and the pill here. Maybe the morning after pill. Whatever these religious people find violates their belief. If you don't want the employer's offered insurance, go buy your own.
Because she is probably it's most qualified member. SCOTUS has ruled over and over that the law trumps "religious" beliefs. That is what she referred to.
Honestly, this is part of my problem with this whole case. I can understand opposition to abortion even when I disagree with it. Anti-contraception is nothing more than the belief that women exist to serve the fatherland as good little incubators for the next generation of soldiers and laborers. That's *politics*, not religion.
Actually, it's slavery, which is also illegal. Most religions are okay with slavery, or stoning people to death for their beliefs, the list is endless. Let's just exempt from our laws anyone who claims to be religious.
Can not be the case. as the 1st Amendment says, ""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Congress can not make a law that trumps the exorcizer of religion.
The contraception in question in the case was akin to abortion, not ordinary contraceptives. The morning after pill, for example. IUDs, too. http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/30/politics/scotus-obamacare-contraception/ The Hahn family, owners of Conestoga, and the Green family, owners of Hobby Lobby, said some of the mandated contraception prevent human embryos from being implanted in a woman's womb, which the plaintiffs equate with abortion. That includes Plan B contraception, which some have called the "morning after" pill, and intrauterine devices or IUDs used by an estimated 2 million American women.
