Dem senators urge justices to deny Hobby Lobby ObamaCare exemption

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
I find it interesting that Hobby Lobby objects so much to the contraceptive coverage in Obama Care but apparently has no problem selling items in it's stores from China, which is a country that practices forced abortions. :confused:


No different than democrats who supposedly champion unions, labor, environmental, other workplace regulations for American companies only to give those same companies a way out through outsourcing by signing off on free trade agreements, or turning a blind eye towards illegal immigration which is used to suppress wages of the lower classes.:whiste:
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
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?

What's your obsession with jim crow? Not once did I ever mention him yet you love to bring up your buddy because you're a racist scumbag.

Now run away coward like you always do.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
What's your obsession with jim crow? Not once did I ever mention him yet you love to bring up your buddy because you're a racist scumbag.

Now run away coward like you always do.

Yeh, just because you say "cat" instead of "feline" makes them different, I suppose. Well, at least you can claim that they are, right?
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
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?


Him?

A history lesson:

"Jim Crow was the name of the racial caste system which operated primarily, but not exclusively in southern and border states, between 1877 and the mid-1960s. Jim Crow was more than a series of rigid anti-black laws. It was a way of life. Under Jim Crow, African Americans were relegated to the status of second class citizens. Jim Crow represented the legitimization of anti-black racism. Many Christian ministers and theologians taught that whites were the Chosen people, blacks were cursed to be servants, and God supported racial segregation. Craniologists, eugenicists, phrenologists, and Social Darwinists, at every educational level, buttressed the belief that blacks were innately intellectually and culturally inferior to whites. Pro-segregation politicians gave eloquent speeches on the great danger of integration: the mongrelization of the white race. Newspaper and magazine writers routinely referred to blacks as ******s, coons, and darkies; and worse, their articles reinforced anti-black stereotypes. Even children's games portrayed blacks as inferior beings (see "From Hostility to Reverence: 100 Years of African-American Imagery in Games"). All major societal institutions reflected and supported the oppression of blacks.

The Jim Crow system was undergirded by the following beliefs or rationalizations: whites were superior to blacks in all important ways, including but not limited to intelligence, morality, and civilized behavior; sexual relations between blacks and whites would produce a mongrel race which would destroy America; treating blacks as equals would encourage interracial sexual unions; any activity which suggested social equality encouraged interracial sexual relations; if necessary, violence must be used to keep blacks at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. The following Jim Crow etiquette norms show how inclusive and pervasive these norms were:

  1. A black male could not offer his hand (to shake hands) with a white male because it implied being socially equal. Obviously, a black male could not offer his hand or any other part of his body to a white woman, because he risked being accused of rape.
  2. Blacks and whites were not supposed to eat together. If they did eat together, whites were to be served first, and some sort of partition was to be placed between them.
  3. Under no circumstance was a black male to offer to light the cigarette of a white female -- that gesture implied intimacy.
  4. Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.
  5. Jim Crow etiquette prescribed that blacks were introduced to whites, never whites to blacks. For example: "Mr. Peters (the white person), this is Charlie (the black person), that I spoke to you about."
  6. Whites did not use courtesy titles of respect when referring to blacks, for example, Mr., Mrs., Miss., Sir, or Ma'am. Instead, blacks were called by their first names. Blacks had to use courtesy titles when referring to whites, and were not allowed to call them by their first names.
  7. If a black person rode in a car driven by a white person, the black person sat in the back seat, or the back of a truck.
  8. White motorists had the right-of-way at all intersections."
http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Yeh, just because you say "cat" instead of "feline" makes them different, I suppose. Well, at least you can claim that they are, right?

I never supported him you worthless piece of garbage and unless you show me evidence then STFU.



Go back to hanging out with your jihadist buddies, you guys all share the belief women should be treated as property.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Him?

A history lesson:

"Jim Crow was the name of the racial caste system which operated primarily, but not exclusively in southern and border states, between 1877 and the mid-1960s. Jim Crow was more than a series of rigid anti-black laws. It was a way of life. Under Jim Crow, African Americans were relegated to the status of second class citizens. Jim Crow represented the legitimization of anti-black racism. Many Christian ministers and theologians taught that whites were the Chosen people, blacks were cursed to be servants, and God supported racial segregation. Craniologists, eugenicists, phrenologists, and Social Darwinists, at every educational level, buttressed the belief that blacks were innately intellectually and culturally inferior to whites. Pro-segregation politicians gave eloquent speeches on the great danger of integration: the mongrelization of the white race. Newspaper and magazine writers routinely referred to blacks as ******s, coons, and darkies; and worse, their articles reinforced anti-black stereotypes. Even children's games portrayed blacks as inferior beings (see "From Hostility to Reverence: 100 Years of African-American Imagery in Games"). All major societal institutions reflected and supported the oppression of blacks.

The Jim Crow system was undergirded by the following beliefs or rationalizations: whites were superior to blacks in all important ways, including but not limited to intelligence, morality, and civilized behavior; sexual relations between blacks and whites would produce a mongrel race which would destroy America; treating blacks as equals would encourage interracial sexual unions; any activity which suggested social equality encouraged interracial sexual relations; if necessary, violence must be used to keep blacks at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. The following Jim Crow etiquette norms show how inclusive and pervasive these norms were:

  1. A black male could not offer his hand (to shake hands) with a white male because it implied being socially equal. Obviously, a black male could not offer his hand or any other part of his body to a white woman, because he risked being accused of rape.
  2. Blacks and whites were not supposed to eat together. If they did eat together, whites were to be served first, and some sort of partition was to be placed between them.
  3. Under no circumstance was a black male to offer to light the cigarette of a white female -- that gesture implied intimacy.
  4. Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.
  5. Jim Crow etiquette prescribed that blacks were introduced to whites, never whites to blacks. For example: "Mr. Peters (the white person), this is Charlie (the black person), that I spoke to you about."
  6. Whites did not use courtesy titles of respect when referring to blacks, for example, Mr., Mrs., Miss., Sir, or Ma'am. Instead, blacks were called by their first names. Blacks had to use courtesy titles when referring to whites, and were not allowed to call them by their first names.
  7. If a black person rode in a car driven by a white person, the black person sat in the back seat, or the back of a truck.
  8. White motorists had the right-of-way at all intersections."
http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm

Alright you fucktard what does that have to do with my post?
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
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?

What's your obsession with jim crow? Not once did I ever mention him yet you love to bring up your buddy because you're a racist scumbag.

Now run away coward like you always do.

jhnn brought up jim crow in post 196, I then called him out in post 202. So how did I bring him up when I was addressing that fucktard?

Yeah, you are retarded.

No, You are a retarded partisan hack. The posts clearly show jhnn brought him up yet you attack me because you're an ignorant piece of shit.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,195
126
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?

It's not slippery slope, it's equal protection. If Christians employers are allowed to exclude parts of coverage based on their religious beliefs, than so are all the other employers.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,414
8,356
126
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.

oh no churches would sell their hospitals! whatever shall we do if the chruches aren't buying up hospitals so that they can de facto eliminate abortions?
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
197
106
oh no churches would sell their hospitals! whatever shall we do if the chruches aren't buying up hospitals so that they can de facto eliminate abortions?

One of the greatest movements in civil rights was a black lady sitting in the front of a bus. Before long the civil rights act was passed.

This march for abortion rights is designed to use small companies to set a legal precedent. Then those court decisions can be used against larger companies.


So what if Catholic based hospitals stop buying up other hospitals?

Go to rural america, go to a small town with a high poverty rate. You will not find a for profit hospital there. Chances are you are going to find a christus charity hospital providing services to the under-served.

So what if the Christus netwoork closes their doors? Who is going to step up to replace them in rural areas? It is not going to be for profit hospitals.

If hobby lobby looses, pro-abortion groups will use that victory to go after bigger fish.

It happened with the civil rights movement, and it is going to happen with the abortion movement. But in this case millions of people are going to lose the only access to medical care they have.
 
Last edited:

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
One of the greatest movements in civil rights was a black lady sitting in the front of a bus. Before long the civil rights act was passed.

This march for abortion rights is designed to use small companies to set a legal precedent. Then those court decisions can be used against larger companies.


So what if Catholic based hospitals stop buying up other hospitals?

Go to rural america, go to a small town with a high poverty rate. You will not find a for profit hospital there. Chances are you are going to find a christus charity hospital providing services to the under-served.

So what if the Christus netwoork closes their doors? Who is going to step up to replace them in rural areas? It is not going to be for profit hospitals.

If hobby lobby looses, pro-abortion groups will use that victory to go after bigger fish.

It happened with the civil rights movement, and it is going to happen with the abortion movement. But in this case millions of people are going to lose the only access to medical care they have.

But it's all perfectly OK if the Texas legislature recently passes draconian new laws making abortion clinics close and thus limiting a poor woman's access to female medical care facilities and abortions?

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/14/how_texas_abortion_law_scares_women_out_of_seeking_care/

So it sounds like your being a bit of a misinformed hypocrite there about hospitals and clinics closing because of abortion rights in relation to this Hobby Lobby story.

And the "march for abortion rights" concerning Hobby Lobby's bigoted religious viewpoint isn't exactly a recent thing. Roe V.Wade was in 1973, 40 YEARS ago, so I'm not sure what your really trying to sensationalize about there, either.
 
Last edited:
Feb 16, 2005
14,030
5,321
136
Talking about yourself again?



You need to learn to stop following me. Still angry I kicked your ass?

No, you hypocritical waste of flesh, I wasn't.

You kicked someone's ass? LOL. You are laughable, deplorable, pathetic, and best of all, a sad little troll that really no one gives a shit about.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,414
8,356
126
One of the greatest movements in civil rights was a black lady sitting in the front of a bus. Before long the civil rights act was passed.

This march for abortion rights is designed to use small companies to set a legal precedent. Then those court decisions can be used against larger companies.


So what if Catholic based hospitals stop buying up other hospitals?

Go to rural america, go to a small town with a high poverty rate. You will not find a for profit hospital there. Chances are you are going to find a christus charity hospital providing services to the under-served.

So what if the Christus netwoork closes their doors? Who is going to step up to replace them in rural areas? It is not going to be for profit hospitals.

If hobby lobby looses, pro-abortion groups will use that victory to go after bigger fish.

It happened with the civil rights movement, and it is going to happen with the abortion movement. But in this case millions of people are going to lose the only access to medical care they have.

the hospitals aren't closing. they're not taking a wrecking ball to the building.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
197
106
But it's all perfectly OK if the Texas legislature recently passes draconian new laws making abortion clinics close and thus limiting a poor woman's access to female medical care facilities and abortions?

Would you go to a doctor for a surgery who did not have admitting privileges at the local hospital?

Those "draconian laws" are there to protect women.


the hospitals aren't closing. they're not taking a wrecking ball to the building.

The local christus hospital is the only real hospital for 75 - 100 miles. If they close who is going to take their place?

Maybe some feminist group will open a charity hospital? Maybe some womens rights group will open a charity hospital?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Would you go to a doctor for a surgery who did not have admitting privileges at the local hospital?

Those "draconian laws" are there to protect women.

Oh, please. Admitting privileges are merely a formality. Does sending women out of state on the Greyhound protect women? Or are they better off staying in their own communities?

Or would we all be better off with black market abortions?

Rich women, of course, have no such issues. They just pop off for an unexpected holiday in England, stay at the spa for the aroma therapy, tanning beds & the right combination of psychoactive drugs to make 'em feel right as rain. So discreet, too.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
jhnn brought him up you ignorant piece of shit. Stop being such a hack you fucktard.

There is no *him*. That was the point of the 'history lesson' that I posted and which you obviously did not read.

I'll repeat, Jim Crow is not a person. Read what was posted and stop making such a fool of yourself.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,227
14,915
136
There is no *him*. That was the point of the 'history lesson' that I posted and which you obviously did not read.

I'll repeat, Jim Crow is not a person. Read what was posted and stop making such a fool of yourself.

Maybe a third person could explain it to him because I doubt he will get it this time.