HL Ruling Opens Up A Pandora's Box!

[PoliticalTorch]

People do not truly know and realize what they're in for with this ruling. The possibilities for denying services to citizens is almost endless. The Republican SCOTUS Majority knew that to begin with but went full steam ahead with it while the Democratic minority tried to stop it in order to preserve citizen's rights.

The Hobby Lobby Ruling Is Trojan Horse For All Businesses and Corporations

 

[crpravens82]

Businesses should be able to deny service to anyone they want for any reason. It's their business.

 

[PoliticalTorch]

Businesses should be able to deny service to anyone they want for any reason. It's their business.

In return, customers have the right to Boycott that business since that's also their business.

 

[crpravens82]

Businesses should be able to deny service to anyone they want for any reason. It's their business.

In return, customers have the right to Boycott that business since that's also their business.

Exactly

 

[The Rabbi]

Nobody is being denied any service.

Geez, I wish the libs would quit lying and demagoguing this issue.

 

[Avatar4321]

So pandora's box is now open because the koch brothers can claim to be following their libertarian beliefs to ignore law....?

You do realize that libertarianism isn't a religious movement, right?

 

[crpravens82]

Nobody is being denied any service.

Geez, I wish the libs would quit lying and demagoguing this issue.

Lying is all that Liberals do. What do you expect honesty?

 

[Avatar4321]

Businesses should be able to deny service to anyone they want for any reason. It's their business.

In return, customers have the right to Boycott that business since that's also their business.

No one claimed otherwise.

 

[Silhouette]

People do not truly know and realize what they're in for with this ruling. The possibilities for denying services to citizens is almost endless. The Republican SCOTUS Majority knew that to begin with but went full steam ahead with it while the Democratic minority tried to stop it in order to preserve citizen's rights.

The Hobby Lobby Ruling Is Trojan Horse For All Businesses and Corporations

The Windsor Ruling is also a trojan horse for states to reaffirm their constitutional right, retroactive to the founding of the country, to say "yes" or "no' to gay marriage via the broadest consensus of the governed in each respective state.

Personally, I believe the Hobby Lobby verdict is a sort of softening of the blow that is going to come from the Windsor decision. They want the looney fringe left liberals already crying in their beer over the loss before they lower the hammer on that one....so there won't be too many bitter and unexpected disappointments.

In other words, the writing is on the wall about all these gay marriage activist-judge appeals heading to the Supreme Court. Especially when you consider that in Utah, 2/3rds of that very religious state's voters rejected gay marriage and their objections stem from a faith-based mortal-sin mandate not to promote a culture of homosexuality within their sphere of influence [the physical borders of the state of Utah in this case].

 

[OriginalShroom]

I still fail to understand how anyone can claim that the H/L ruling is denying anyone their rights.

It simply doesn't.

It just says that other people can't be forced to pay for your abortion if they have religious objections to it.

If its "your body, your choice", then it is also your responsibility. That includes financing what you want to do with your body.

Your employer is no more responsible for paying to support your right to an abortion than they are responsible to pay to support my right to own a firearm.

 

[Silhouette]

I still fail to understand how anyone can claim that the H/L ruling is denying anyone their rights.

It simply doesn't.

It just says that other people can't be forced to pay for your abortion if they have religious objections to it.

If its "your body, your choice", then it is also your responsibility. That includes financing what you want to do with your body.

Your employer is no more responsible for paying to support your right to an abortion than they are responsible to pay to support my right to own a firearm.

I think the SCOTUS also said in their Ruling that Uncle Sam could step in and pay for the morning after pills. And this is also part of the Pandora's Box that the far looney right apparently failed to notice. Seems to me a good attorney should be able to argue from there [at least to Justice Kennedy's ear] that instead of requiring employers to provide this or that coverage, Uncle Sam ought to; or at least is within it's Court-supported rights to.

This is how Obamacare failed...not because it didn't do something good, but because it failed to take it all the way down the home stretch. In his Kumbaya penchant to always always ALWAYS compromise on healthcare especially, his lack of zeal to see single-payer across the home plate actually hurt his entire botched substitute.

In other words, it looks like we have a US Supreme Court "hinting broadly" that they are OK with a canadian-style healthcare system.

[And BTW, how morning-after pills work is they prevent an egg from implanting in a woman's uterine lining by making the lining too hostile temporarily to receive the egg. So a woman who uses a morning-after pill to good effect has never been pregnant in the first place. So there has been no abortion by definition. One would think that's a legal-definition at the very least. For the purposes of arguing abortion, we should at least agree that if a woman has no fetus implanted in her body, drawing off her blood, she is not legally pregnant and anything she does cannot be considered an abortion.]