Will USSC next rule that private indivs can't be forced to pay Obamacare due to relig

[Little-Acorn]

Will the Courts next rule that private individuals also cannot be forced to pay their Obamacare premiums if it's for a policy that has contraceptions methods they object to on religious grounds?

They can't rule until a case is brought, of course. But if/when one is, will this be the next step?

The Supremes just ruled that certain employers cannot be forced by government, to pay for an "insurance"policy for their employees, if it has contraception methods that violates the employer's religious beliefs.

When will that decision be extended to the obvious place: Not forcing Obamacare on private individuals to pay for it themselves, if it contains those contraceptive methods that violate the private individual's religious beliefs?

Employers aren't the only ones paying for this white elephant of an "insurance" scheme. The people getting the insurance, have to pay, too.

And while the Supremes have ruled that the penalty written into Obamacare that fines you for not signing up, isn't a penalty but a tax, that desn't mean it's not coercive anyway. It's just another method the Fed govt is using to force you to do things against your bgetter judgment.

If some employers can't be forced to do that, then private individuals with religious objections shouldn't be forced to, either. The ban on such govt cercion, should be even stronger for private individuals than for employers.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The Supremes ruled that a company can have religious scruples too, as long as the company is basically a few individuals running the whole thing.

If a company that is like an individual, can be protected against government forcing them to pay for contraception that violates their religious beliefs....

....then why can't a private individual who REALLY IS an individual, also be protected against that?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The multitude of lawsuits that are coming could be avoided if the mandate was dropped.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The multitude of lawsuits that are coming could be avoided if the mandate was dropped.

The multitude of lawsuits that are coming could have been avoided if Obama had obeyed the Constitution's ban on his schemes, instead of trying to evade and ignore the document.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The multitude of lawsuits that are coming could be avoided if the mandate was dropped.

The multitude of lawsuits that are coming could have been avoided if Obama had obeyed the Constitution's ban on his schemes, instead of trying to evade and ignore the document.

True, I just thought that was implied.

 

[Zander]

Obamacare is going to end up in the trash heap where it belongs.

It's unsustainable, expensive, and ridiculously complex. Keep the "preexisting conditions" clause, and toss the rest.

When the Republicans control the Senate (2015) and White House (2017) , they will repeal it with a simple majority. Whining Democrats won't be able to do a damn thing about it...except whine.

 

[Agit8r]

The Supremes ruled that a company can have religious scruples too, as long as the company is basically a few individuals running the whole thing.

If a company that is like an individual, can be protected against government forcing them to pay for contraception that violates their religious beliefs....

....then why can't a private individual who REALLY IS an individual, also be protected against that?

The opinion of the court was that Hobby Lobby should be treated in the same manner as the Little Sisters of the Poor where they could sign a provision to opt-out of paying directly for contraception:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf

An individual would merely need to not use said services for themselves