Remember the issue is can the government compel behavior that defies an owner's religious beliefs.
Which ever way it goes, it's going to be 5 - 4. And, if the majority opinion wrangles in the 14th Amendment, a can of worms gets opened.
Yeah, I was making a joke, only because my wife goes into that store all the time. I made the mistake of going in once.
The Hobby Lobby case will get all the publicity, but will probably have very little real impact for most of us. The Harris case, on the other hand, has the chance to be a real game changer.
That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.
Sounds like the public unions take a blow in Harris. People will have to read and digest the opinion to see to what extent.
That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.
Apparently Alito also wrote Hobby Lobby. Can't see that going well for the government.
That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.
Sounds like the fatal bullet missed public unions, at least for now. The personal care attendants can't be forced to pay union dues, but the Court didn't take the final step.
That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.
I am founding my own religion/corporation/person. My religion says it is immoral to pay income, property, sales or any other tax. Our God is insistent on that fact.
It appears the Court decided that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies not only to non-profits, but also closely held for profit corporations? Sounds like a long opinion with some pretty scathing dissents. Probably fun to read.
That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.
No, the issue is whether a company can dictate the owner's religious beliefs to his employees.
What case is that? I thought that the ruling today was whether the owners of closely-held companies had the right not to be forced to act against their religious beliefs? There is nothing in that case at all about the owners of a company dictating anything to his employees, nothing at all. The owner of the company even agreed to pay for contraceptives for his employees. What is so objectionable about that?
"Hope is a good thing; maybe the best of things."
"Beer is a sign that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin
"Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." -- W. B. Yeats
"People generally are most impatient with those flaws in others about which they are most ashamed of in themselves." - folk wisdom
What case is that? I thought that the ruling today was whether the owners of closely-held companies had the right not to be forced to act against their religious beliefs? There is nothing in that case at all about the owners of a company dictating anything to his employees, nothing at all. The owner of the company even agreed to pay for contraceptives for his employees. What is so objectionable about that?
You are correct. It's just Lynah being Lynah. Anything to do with religion he gets all bent about.
Most states will say you vote on it. Same way you decide other corporate action.
That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.
I think people tend to blow the impact of these court cases way out of proportion, but what essentually has now happened is every instance of an employer raising a religious exemption just became a court case. Keeps the SCOTUS busy I suppose, but this has also maginalized the mostly Southern part of the country from everywhere else as companies providing contraception has strong support amongst voters. Not sure how you run nationally on an anti-contraception platform (which supporting this decision will be viewed as).
Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin
Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin
"I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."
Comment