What if Hobby Lobby was run by Muslims imposing Sharia law on workers?

[hazlnut]

What if Hobby Lobby was run by Muslims imposing Sharia law on workers?

Former Star Trek actor George Takei blasted Monday’s decision by the Supreme Court allowing the craft store Hobby Lobby to opt out of the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act.

In a post on the website for his new play, Allegiance, the openly gay Takei called Monday’s decision “a stunning setback for women’s reproductive rights.”

“The ruling elevates the rights of a FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION over those of its women employees and opens the door to all manner of claims that a company can refuse services based on its owner’s religion,” Takei wrote.

He referred to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s blistering 35-page dissent to the decision, saying, “Think about the ramifications: As Justice Ginsberg’s stinging dissent pointed out, companies run by Scientologists could refuse to cover antidepressants, and those run by Jews or Hindus could refuse to cover medications derived from pigs (such as many anesthetics, intravenous fluids, or medications coated in gelatin).”

“(O)ne wonders,” he said, “whether the case would have come out differently if a Muslim-run chain business attempted to impose Sharia law on its employees.”

DOH!


Sulu corners the far-right tea brains with LOGIC!!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yeah, comparing apples to cinder blocks is a real gotcha.

 

[rightwinger]

What if Hobby Lobby was run by Muslims imposing Sharia law on workers?

Former Star Trek actor George Takei blasted Monday’s decision by the Supreme Court allowing the craft store Hobby Lobby to opt out of the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act.

In a post on the website for his new play, Allegiance, the openly gay Takei called Monday’s decision “a stunning setback for women’s reproductive rights.”

“The ruling elevates the rights of a FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION over those of its women employees and opens the door to all manner of claims that a company can refuse services based on its owner’s religion,” Takei wrote.

He referred to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s blistering 35-page dissent to the decision, saying, “Think about the ramifications: As Justice Ginsberg’s stinging dissent pointed out, companies run by Scientologists could refuse to cover antidepressants, and those run by Jews or Hindus could refuse to cover medications derived from pigs (such as many anesthetics, intravenous fluids, or medications coated in gelatin).”

“(O)ne wonders,” he said, “whether the case would have come out differently if a Muslim-run chain business attempted to impose Sharia law on its employees.”

DOH!


Sulu corners the far-right tea brains with LOGIC!!

If it was, you would not see a 5-4 Supreme Court defending their rights

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Um, how about just don't work there?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How about businesses run by Jews that close early for Shabbat?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

How exactly is imposing religious belief onto people in anyway comparable to what the employer covers for healthcare? You guys are so stupid your brain leaks quickly form your ears daily.

 

[Stephanie]

man this is driving them insane

good

 

[hazlnut]

yeah, comparing apples to cinder blocks is a real gotcha.

fail #1 -


under the 1st amendment - they are both equal.


Try again.

 

[hazlnut]

man this is driving them insane

good

fail #2

steph's got nothing.


Big surprise...

 

[dilloduck]

man this is driving them insane

good

They are not used to being told no.

 

[mudwhistle]

Sulu hates religion.

His problem is with God.

He spends his life feeling everyone hates him because he's gay. Not just gay, but flaming.

Hypocrisy is rampant on the left. They attack people that just want to worship God without religious persecution and liberals hate them for it. Yet liberals support Muslims, who would put every one of them to the sword if given the opportunity.

It just makes no sense, which is what liberalism is. Senseless.

 

[hazlnut]

how exactly is imposing religious belief onto people in anyway comparable to what the employer covers for healthcare? You guys are so stupid your brain leaks quickly form your ears daily.

did you not read the quote in the piece?


It was very specific about which med scientologists and hindus wouldn't have to cover.


Fuck, people, read or don't post in my thread.

 

[Zmrzlina]

Yeah, comparing apples to cinder blocks is a real gotcha.

How is this hypothetical different? They both involve a closely held corporation's religious views being reflected in their business practices. Or is there some sort of religious chauvinism going on on your part?

 

[hazlnut]

Sulu hates religion.

His problem is with God.

He spends his life feeling everyone hates him because he's gay. Not just gay, but flaming.

Hypocrisy is rampant on the left. They attack people that just want to worship God without religious persecution and liberals hate them for it. Yet liberals support Muslims, who would put every one of them to the sword if given the opportunity.

It just makes no sense, which is what liberalism is. Senseless.

Fail #3

muddy comes up empty.

 

[mudwhistle]

How exactly is imposing religious belief onto people in anyway comparable to what the employer covers for healthcare? You guys are so stupid your brain leaks quickly form your ears daily.

You don't understand yet you say we're the ones who are stupid?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

yeah, comparing apples to cinder blocks is a real gotcha.

fail #1 -


under the 1st amendment - they are both equal.


Try again.

You're farkin' stupid, fella. You actually think that an employer has the right to force a religious belief onto people, and that this compares with an employers legal responsibility to provide items that are in direct opposition to the companies belief? No one from Hobby Lobby is stopping people from getting those items if they want them at the employee level. They simply will not cover it. Yet you, the liberal left, actually think that this compares with forcing sharia law onto employees?

Brain leaking from the ear type stupid.

 

[jon_berzerk]

man this is driving them insane

good

They are not used to being told no.

it has happened quite a bit recently

 

[TakeAStepBack]

How exactly is imposing religious belief onto people in anyway comparable to what the employer covers for healthcare? You guys are so stupid your brain leaks quickly form your ears daily.

You don't understand yet you say we're the ones who are stupid?

I'm going to assume you quoted me in error here.

 

[rightwinger]

If the Hobby Lobby was run by Muslims, the Supreme Court never would have taken the case

 

[jon_berzerk]

How exactly is imposing religious belief onto people in anyway comparable to what the employer covers for healthcare? You guys are so stupid your brain leaks quickly form your ears daily.

You don't understand yet you say we're the ones who are stupid?

yeah, comparing apples to cinder blocks is a real gotcha.

fail #1 -


under the 1st amendment - they are both equal.


Try again.

You're farkin' stupid, fella. You actually think that an employer has the right to force a religious belief onto people, and that this compares with an employers legal responsibility to provide items that are in direct opposition to the companies belief? No one from Hobby Lobby is stopping people from getting those items if they want them at the employee level. They simply will not cover it. Yet you, the liberal left, actually think that this compares with forcing sharia law onto employees?

Brain leaking from the ear type stupid.

You actually think that an employer has the right to force a religious belief onto people

certainly not in this opinion by the SC