Dem senators urge justices to deny Hobby Lobby ObamaCare exemption

[sandorski]

Dont like your job, go work somewhere else.

Don't like your Government, move!

 

[ElFenix]

The current system doesn't work and needs changes. I thought I made this clear from the start.

no, all you did was rant about socialism.

fair 'nuff tho

 

[ElFenix]

What point are you trying to make?

I can provide you with numerous examples of religious beliefs and/or morals and values playing a part of business decisions.

hobby lobby, inc. doesn't have religious beliefs. the people that run it might, but the people that run it are not hobby lobby, inc. the court should not rule on whether the law is valid or not because it doesn't need to. it can say, the party before the court does not have religious beliefs so no first amendment question is at issue.

 

[sportage]

You know...

What I want to know is, what is this with abortion and those so called religious persons who think abortion at any cost, and I mean at any physical cost to a woman's mental stability or physical welfare, that abortion at any physical cost is not to be tolerated?
Those so called religious persons whom seem to feel there is no place for abortion under any circumstance, period.

Im not going to go into the fact that those very same persons support the denying of welfare to the needy.
Support the denying of food stamps to the needy.
Support the denying of affordable and available healthcare to the needy.
All the above of which they most typically, and most undenying do support their very not supporting of, once that child exits the womb.

What I want to know is, do those very same persons of so called fundamentalist religious convictions concerning abortion, do they also desire a woman who seeks an abortion to suffer, even unto her own death, as some sort of twisted perverted payback for aborting?
Do those persons also feel that any woman who should abort or seek to abort, should then deserve to die?

Watch (or re-watch) the movie REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, the one with Kate Winslet.
Note the ending.
The ending where this woman (played by Kate Winslet) was obviously lacking any mental stability to become pregnant, least we mention carry that pregnancy into full term.

Just because this woman, played by Kate Winslet in this particular film, looked quite physical healthy enough to become pregnant and to give birth, did not mean she was mentally stable enough to do so. Or I might add, should have ever attempted to have done so.

There are a lot of women out there in real life, just exactly like with this character in this film.

For a reason best known only to that woman in question, that woman should never become pregnant, first of all, and second of all, should never carry a pregnancy to full term with it ending in a birth.

Aborting, in this case, would have been saving the life of this woman.
Aborting in a doctors office, under a licensed doctor, capable of safely performing such a procedure.
Both mentally and physically saving her life by the aborting.
Unless... It would be preferred by "religious persons" that this woman indeed sacrifice her life for her attempts at aborting?

So i ask, I have to ask, is this their belief?

Their belief with this attitude that no-way no-how never under any circumstance, that we hear coming from those persons of so called divine religious spiritual guidance, their believing death is the payment required from any woman that would even seek aborting at any phase of the pregnancy including the prevention of pregnancy?

Because, I really want to know.....

Is this the same with a woman seeking birth control?
Using birth control?
A woman's desire for affordable health insurance including covered and paid for birth control?

Who the F@@K-ing hell do those persons of such divine religious spiritual convictions from far beyond feel they are to actually ask for, and expect from women, the ultimate sacrifice of any woman seeking birth control covered by any healthcare plan? Or with first to even question any woman's reasoning to seek not only aborting but also providing insurance covered birth control?

I really really do want to know.....

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Looks like someone ate too much alphabet soup yet again.

 

[werepossum]

I don't plan on getting drawn into the Spidey Vortex I have stuff to do so here it is. Yes Spidey you are correct it is not written in the constitution that workers get free birth control however it has been deemed law by our elected officials and if you feel this is not correct it is your civic duty to vote for other candidates.
Also if you want Viagra go to your doctor, describe what is happening. He will then help you get Viagra its essentially the same process women use to get birth control pills

Actually it has been deemed law by our UNELECTED officials. Is brave new world and government bureaucrats don't need no stinking laws.

 

[Texashiker]

hobby lobby, inc. doesn't have religious beliefs. the people that run it might, but the people that run it are not hobby lobby, inc. the court should not rule on whether the law is valid or not because it doesn't need to. it can say, the party before the court does not have religious beliefs so no first amendment question is at issue.

Lets take what you said and expand it a little bit.

Take the christus charity hospital network, they do not perform certain producers due to religious beliefs. For example they do not preform sterilization surgeries in their facilities.

If hobby lobby can be forced to carry insurance that provides the morning after pill, and other means of chemically abortions, could the christus charity hospital network be required to preform abortions, or handout those same medicines?

Hobby lobby loses at the supreme court.

Whats next? Someone sues the christus network for not providing a sterilization surgery, or for not proving the morning after pill?

The Christus network already said they would close before they provide abortion services or abortion medicines.

 

[TerryMathews]

A woman's desire for affordable health insurance including covered and paid for birth control?

Why is birth control more deserving of being paid for than truly life-saving medication? Nitro? Antibiotics? Antifungals?

I dont have an issue with women's birth control, I do have an issue with this attitude that it deserves a special status above other prescriptions.

 

[SlickSnake]

You know...

What I want to know is, what is this with abortion and those so called religious persons who think abortion at any cost, and I mean at any physical cost to a woman's mental stability or physical welfare, that abortion at any physical cost is not to be tolerated?
Those so called religious persons whom seem to feel there is no place for abortion under any circumstance, period.

Im not going to go into the fact that those very same persons support the denying of welfare to the needy.
Support the denying of food stamps to the needy.
Support the denying of affordable and available healthcare to the needy.
All the above of which they most typically, and most undenying do support their very not supporting of, once that child exits the womb.

What I want to know is, do those very same persons of so called fundamentalist religious convictions concerning abortion, do they also desire a woman who seeks an abortion to suffer, even unto her own death, as some sort of twisted perverted payback for aborting?
Do those persons also feel that any woman who should abort or seek to abort, should then deserve to die?

Watch (or re-watch) the movie REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, the one with Kate Winslet.
Note the ending.
The ending where this woman (played by Kate Winslet) was obviously lacking any mental stability to become pregnant, least we mention carry that pregnancy into full term.

Just because this woman, played by Kate Winslet in this particular film, looked quite physical healthy enough to become pregnant and to give birth, did not mean she was mentally stable enough to do so. Or I might add, should have ever attempted to have done so.

There are a lot of women out there in real life, just exactly like with this character in this film.

For a reason best known only to that woman in question, that woman should never become pregnant, first of all, and second of all, should never carry a pregnancy to full term with it ending in a birth.

Aborting, in this case, would have been saving the life of this woman.
Aborting in a doctors office, under a licensed doctor, capable of safely performing such a procedure.
Both mentally and physically saving her life by the aborting.
Unless... It would be preferred by "religious persons" that this woman indeed sacrifice her life for her attempts at aborting?

So i ask, I have to ask, is this their belief?

Their belief with this attitude that no-way no-how never under any circumstance, that we hear coming from those persons of so called divine religious spiritual guidance, their believing death is the payment required from any woman that would even seek aborting at any phase of the pregnancy including the prevention of pregnancy?

Because, I really want to know.....

Is this the same with a woman seeking birth control?
Using birth control?
A woman's desire for affordable health insurance including covered and paid for birth control?

Who the F@@K-ing hell do those persons of such divine religious spiritual convictions from far beyond feel they are to actually ask for, and expect from women, the ultimate sacrifice of any woman seeking birth control covered by any healthcare plan? Or with first to even question any woman's reasoning to seek not only aborting but also providing insurance covered birth control?

I really really do want to know.....

But I don't know. Something, something, abortions, something, something. Because I'm too confused by all the questions and statements to begin to answer.

So, Revolutionary Road is a good movie then, and you highly recommend it to others? And Kate Winslet is hot when she's pregnant and crazy? That's all I got out of this.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0959337/

 

[Incorruptible]

So your answer is "Yes", even though you say no, and even though the SCOTUS has upheld civil rights legislation in all its particulars.

You speak from the pulpit of the usual white male privilege & supremacy, as if your racist & sexist views still are even vaguely acceptable in this country anywhere outside the old realms of Jim Crow & his minions, of which you are an excellent example.

Hobby Lobby has no more right to reject this particular business requirement than any other, certainly not according to scripture, anyway. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, remember?

You're a miserable old man who is nothing but a racist and sexist who is still stuck in the 7th century with your jihadist buddies that you love.

Are you still angry that you got tea bagged? Still haven't washed out your mouth?

They are a private company you fucktard and if they don't want to pay for it then they don't have to.

 

[fskimospy]

Actually it has been deemed law by our UNELECTED officials. Is brave new world and government bureaucrats don't need no stinking laws.

The authority for that determination is derived explicitly from an act of Congress and the applicable section was written for the purpose of giving federal agencies this power.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Whole argument looks like this to me:

 

[werepossum]

The authority for that determination is derived explicitly from an act of Congress and the applicable section was written for the purpose of giving federal agencies this power.

That doesn't change the reality that our UNELECTED officials made this law.

 

[Incorruptible]

So your answer is "Yes", even though you say no, and even though the SCOTUS has upheld civil rights legislation in all its particulars.

You speak from the pulpit of the usual white male privilege & supremacy, as if your racist & sexist views still are even vaguely acceptable in this country anywhere outside the old realms of Jim Crow & his minions, of which you are an excellent example.

Hobby Lobby has no more right to reject this particular business requirement than any other, certainly not according to scripture, anyway. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, remember?

Still spouting nonsense because you have nothing. Your racist/sexist views are backwards and idiotic.

Run away you coward, that's all you're good at.

 

[umbrella39]

Pst... someone is having a hard time remembering what account they are logged into... must need better hand-eye juggling so many handles

 

[Jhhnn]

Still spouting nonsense because you have nothing. Your racist/sexist views are backwards and idiotic.

Run away you coward, that's all you're good at.

Yes, believing that civil rights trump your oh so precious property rights makes me a sexist & a racist. Your way, I could deny service to women & blacks just like back in the good old days of Jim Crow. Mah Propity! Mah Propity! Which wouldn't make me a sexist or a racist at all in your execrable estimation, right?

Just another good ole boy, standing up for God, Country, & White male privilege.

 

[Jhhnn]

That doesn't change the reality that our UNELECTED officials made this law.

As empowered by Congress, the Chief Executive & the SCOTUS.

You seem to have a problem with the duly authorized workings of govt, don't you?

 

[Incorruptible]

Yes, believing that civil rights trump your oh so precious property rights makes me a sexist & a racist. Your way, I could deny service to women & blacks just like back in the good old days of Jim Crow. Mah Propity! Mah Propity! Which wouldn't make me a sexist or a racist at all in your execrable estimation, right?

Just another good ole boy, standing up for God, Country, & White male privilege.

Keep making assumptions you fucktard. Are you still angry that you got your ass kicked and got tea bagged?

The business has the right to deny or accept service. I have always maintained that it's their right.

I never said that was the right thing to do and I never supported them. Businesses that do this would lose customers rightfully and would either have to shutdown or reverse their decisions which could be too late for them.

Using your idiotic arguments a black business owner should have to serve a racist like yourself. Why are you such a worthless, miserable racist piece of garbage? You are a liar and resorting to pulling the race card but that's typical of you scumbag.

The government doesn't own the business and it's up to the owners who they want to serve. And why do you think property rights are a joke? Because you're a scumbag.

 

[sandorski]

As empowered by Congress, the Chief Executive & the SCOTUS.

You seem to have a problem with the duly authorized workings of govt, don't you?

Hold on a second, don't be too quick to debunk his argument....think of the possibilities:

1) Subsidies, who TF Voted for them? Not all have been Voted by current standing Elected...

2) Laws, "............"

3) Constitution, ".............."

4) Declaration of Independence, "..........."

The possibilities are endless. Anarch must be jealous he didn't think of this.

 

[spidey07]

As empowered by Congress, the Chief Executive & the SCOTUS.

You seem to have a problem with the duly authorized workings of govt, don't you?

Lower courts upheld the ruling.

That's why it is to the SC. You paying attention liberal?

 

[Jhhnn]

Keep making assumptions you fucktard. Are you still angry that you got your ass kicked and got tea bagged?

The business has the right to deny or accept service. I have always maintained that it's their right.

I never said that was the right thing to do and I never supported them. Businesses that do this would lose customers rightfully and would either have to shutdown or reverse their decisions which could be too late for them.

Using your idiotic arguments a black business owner should have to serve a racist like yourself. Why are you such a worthless, miserable racist piece of garbage? You are a liar and resorting to pulling the race card but that's typical of you scumbag.

The government doesn't own the business and it's up to the owners who they want to serve. And why do you think property rights are a joke? Because you're a scumbag.

Paving the way for the Jimmie Crow comeback tour, huh?

WTF do you think was the basis for racial discrimination in the South for 100 years, anyway? Woolworth's had the right to segregated lunch counters, and the Montgomery bus company had the right to make blacks sit in the back.

Are you pining for the good ole days, when blacks & women knew their place & stayed to it for reasons of self preservation?

 

[SparkyJJO]

Whole argument looks like this to me:

1) Old Testament ceremonial law (don't eat this meat, don't wear that type of material, don't shave) do not apply to New Testament Christians and beyond. That is clearly mentioned.

2) It is painful to see how little Christians these days do care about the rest. Premarital sex = wrong. Homosexuality = wrong. Divorces (except in very specific cases) = wrong.

As for the OP - forcing someone to go against their conscience = WRONG. The government has no right doing that.

 

[sandorski]

1) Old Testament ceremonial law (don't eat this meat, don't wear that type of material, don't shave) do not apply to New Testament Christians and beyond. That is clearly mentioned.

2) It is painful to see how little Christians these days do care about the rest. Premarital sex = wrong. Homosexuality = wrong. Divorces (except in very specific cases) = wrong.

As for the OP - forcing someone to go against their conscience = WRONG. The government has no right doing that.

It isn't.

 

[Incorruptible]

Paving the way for the Jimmie Crow comeback tour, huh?

WTF do you think was the basis for racial discrimination in the South for 100 years, anyway? Woolworth's had the right to segregated lunch counters, and the Montgomery bus company had the right to make blacks sit in the back.

Are you pining for the good ole days, when blacks & women knew their place & stayed to it for reasons of self preservation?

Show me one post where I supported him you ignoramus. Again you're still angry that you got your ass kicked you miserable racist piece of garbage. Go back to supporting jim crow you fucktard.

Are you pining for the good ole days, when blacks & women knew their place & stayed to it for reasons of self preservation?

 

[1prophet]

It's going to result in more people dying because every business is going to claim it's against their religion to cover this and that for their employees.

The slippery slope argument, why is it always laughed at as fear mongering when conservatives use it but somehow a sound prediction of the future when liberals bring it up in support of their cause?