Hobby Lobby victorious in SCOTUS ruling

Hobby Lobby did not object to birth control pills. It was specific forms of contraception -- e.g., the morning after pill, IUDs -- to which the plaintiffs objected.

 

Could you explain how these are equivalent?

 

Liberals making emotional arguments about contraceptives, and clutching their pears over "slippery slope" concerns.

Conservatives making legal arguments regarding religious liberty.

 

What legal arguments have you seen on this thread? Would that be the "millions of harpies" argument or the "cult of ignorance" argument?

 

Both are treatments that recognize and allow for sex as recreational, or as for something other than its natural God-intended purpose.

 

I am posting a thread about politics even though there is a no politics rule, because my side won and I am really interested in rubbing it in the nose of the side who lost.

 

Hobby Lobby's retirement plan invests in manufacturers of IUDs and morning-after pills. Religion is religion, but hey, bidness is bidness.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers

 

Sorry. SportsJournalists.com does not contain the totality of discussion on this subject.

Turn on a TV, read an article, take a look at twitter -- or read the decision and dissent.

The Conservative Justices follow the Constitution, so you get a 9-0 decision on something like the police searching a cell phone.

Only the extreme overreach of President Obama resulted in a 9-0 decision in the recess appointment decision.

In this case, the liberal justices acted like unelected legislators, voting for their constituents. Their worried about access to contraceptives, and the like. But, that wasn't what was in question. The legal question had to do with whether or not you lose your religious liberty when you incorporate.

The ruling simply says that in a closely held company, you do not.

 

The question of whether or not you lose your religious liberty when you accept a job evidently did not come up.

 

Corporations are religious people too.

 

They already do that by mandating chain-wide that stores be closed on Sundays. Presumably their workforce is not 100 percent Christian, or certainly not 100 percent fundamentally opposed to working on Sundays, so mandating store closures on Sundays for strictly religious reasons deprives those workers of potential hours.

Not to mention the closed-on-Sundays edict is stupid for a purely business reason: which day of the week is devoted to hobby activities far and beyond all others?

 

That didn't work real well in the case of the bakery who refused to bake a wedding cake for gays did it?

Look, people, all this does is drive home the fact that corporations can buck anything but small businesses can go screw themselves.