Leave it to the Satanists to fight for a woman's right to control her own body after the secular state clearly...
Leave it to the Satanists to fight for a woman's right to control her own body after the secular state clearly failed them.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/28/satanists-want-to-use-hobby-lobby-decision-to-exempt-women-from-anti-abortion-laws/#.U9begQzRXq0.google_plusone_share
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/28/satanists-want-to-use-hobby-lobby-decision-to-exempt-women-from-anti-abortion-laws/#.U9begQzRXq0.google_plusone_share
Comments
That was the case. So, the dumb-ass Satanists are going to get nowhere with their case because it has absolutely nothing to do with anti-abortion laws.
Sorry you bought into the stupid hype about this case, because it was all much ado about nothing.
That being said, the Satanists are using the same premise the SCotUS based their decision on to combat the GOP's war on women.
If a religious objection to contraceptives for a corporation is a valid argument, then the religious objection to forced -pre-abortion counseling is also valid.
As the dissenting opinion in the Hobby Lobby case stated, the court's decision allows private entities to claim religious objection to just about anything aside from taxes.
In the terms of the case the only thing they could actually combat if forcing privately owned companies to pay for pre-abortion counseling if they have a strong objection.
Sorry, this doesn't hold water. Just stupid grandstanding against a straw man.
"much ado about nothing"
I don't think that this is true. There's no reason why religion need come into the employer-employee relationship at all, and every reason why it shouldn't. Healthcare provision is part of an employee's remuneration package. There's no material difference between allowing the employer to dictate what kinds of medical treatment their employees can have and allowing the employer to dictate what employees can spend their money on.
As for a corporation not holding a religious view, that's also not the case in that the ruling only covers tightly held corporations. These are corps with private ownership and not ones that are public and have stockholders and the like.
The amusing Satanists are amusing in their typical manner, but their case is going to fall flat.
You're letting your knee-jerk anti-theism get the better of you again.
Hobby Lobby is making decisions on their employee's behalf based on their own religious principles. It's that simple. The 5 conservative justices claim Hobby Lobby, as a privately held entity, can enforce their own beliefs on their employees. Beliefs based on religious doctrine.
Women can indeed pay for their own contraception separately, but that just makes it more expensive for them than for anyone else (and it really can be a significant expense). I don't believe that Hobby Lobby are going to pay their employees more in return for giving them less healthcare. Are they? And it honestly doesn't matter if it's only four out of twenty if you happen to be a woman using an IUD, at which point it's one out of one. It's not like all contraceptives are the same, after all. You can slice it up whichever way you want, but the corporation's owners have simply made it significantly more difficult for their female employees to obtain some reproductive health products on the basis of their privately held individual religious beliefs. Which ironically makes their standing to make a "moral objection" to anything really quite shaky.
Take responsibility, even if that means gasp paying for your own shit.
Jason ON Nah, its pretty much just you and those whom are easy targets for having their chains pulled.
So again: no one is forcing any principles upon anyone and this whole thing is completely stupid.
And as I've lost count of how many times I've repeated this its obviously falling upon deaf ears. So I'm done here and will be sitting back to watch this all play out exactly as I've predicted it will.