Hobby Lobby S.C. Case. "Religious Liberty at Stake"

[Jeanie]

Interesting case definitely. Curious to see how it all plays out.

[Trina]

Update...White House Response to Supreme Court ruling.

[cricket246]

This reminded me of that scripture that says unless you have the mark of the beast you cannot buy or sell...Wouldn't it be interesting if Satan used this to maneuver businesses into having full control over their workers? Could they possibly start refusing to give Jehovah's Witnesses vacation days to go to their conventions/assemblies because they don't agree with our beliefs?

[trottigy]

Yes, this continues the "corporations are people" mantra already started. They can vote (give HUGE sums to elect ones) and now they can excercise "religion". I wonder when a KKK owned company refuses services to all black poeple if that is just an "excercise of their religion"? Or a "muslim" owned company wont serve women not FULLY clothed - as an excercise of its religion? Where does it end?

 

Wait ---- I know the answer to this one - the NEW system 

 

Oddly, a company can excerise ITS "religious" righhts MORE than an individual. It can refuse to provide medical care that is against its religion, but an individual can't refuse to do something against his religion - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/07/supreme-court-gay-wedding-photography_n_5104699.html

 

 

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday from a studio that refused to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony, letting stand a New Mexico high court ruling that helped spur a national debate over gay rights and religious freedom.

Edited July 1, 2014 by trottigy

[cricket246]

Wow just read http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/30/opinion/wydra-hobby-lobby-wins-court/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 I didn't realize Hobby Lobby had actually won the case.... O.O I must admit I didn't really think they would....Yikes...

[Trina]

What I keep thinking about was the case in Nevada where the governor made a decision not to allow business owners to decide not to do business with, or for certain people based on religious beliefs. The case was started with a situation where a man refused to be the photographer for a gay wedding because it went against his beliefs. Doesn't this Supreme Court ruling make that case decision moot? What do others think on this?

[trottigy]

Yes, this continues the "corporations are people" mantra already started. They can vote (give HUGE sums to elect ones) and now they can excercise "religion". I wonder when a KKK owned company refuses services to all black poeple if that is just an "excercise of their religion"? Or a "muslim" owned company wont serve women not FULLY clothed - as an excercise of its religion? Where does it end?

Wait ---- I know the answer to this one - the NEW system

Oddly, a company can excerise ITS "religious" righhts MORE than an individual. It can refuse to provide medical care that is against its religion, but an individual can't refuse to do something against his religion - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/07/supreme-court-gay-wedding-photography_n_5104699.html

It was New Mexico and I was thinking of the dichotomy of it and this as well . Just 2 posts before yours I posted a link showing the Supreme Court did not negate that decision. Odd how an individual doesn't have the same right as a company has, eh?

What I keep thinking about was the case in Nevada where the governor made a decision not to allow business owners to decide not to do business with, or for certain people based on religious beliefs. The case was started with a situation where a man refused to be the photographer for a gay wedding because it went against his beliefs. Doesn't this Supreme Court ruling make that case decision moot? What do others think on this?

[Trina]

Yes, we should all incorporate ASAP!!, lol...

[cricket246]

Oh wow! They don't want to pay for insurance that pays for contraceptives but they will use 401Kplans that actually support the companies that make them....

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/01/investing/hobby-lobby-401k-contraception/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

Talk about getting caught red handed - they will not comment on this to CNN.....   Lol

[JayMusicGirl]

Kind of reminds me of the Chick-Fill-a thing a few years back. It's a "Christian" company and I believe the CEO said something like he didn't support gay marriage or something along those lines, somehow it all related to the franchise (or maybe not). The worldly media and people online started acting like he said he hated puppies and there were Chick-Fill-a boycotts and "kiss-ins" where homosexuals kissed at different locations. Pretty disgusting, really. I don't think there was any legal action taken but this Hobby Lobby thing reminded me of it. Really shows where the world is heading.

Edited July 2, 2014 by JayMusicGirl

[Stavro]

Kind of reminds me of the Chick-Fill-a thing a few years back. It's a "Christian" company and I believe the CEO said something like he didn't support gay marriage or something along those lines

 

To be entirely fair, the actual offense was that a portion of all sales go to re-education camps where people are essentially kidnapped (signed in by their families against their will) and put through "lessons" that sometimes border on torture.