Wednesday, March 26, 2014


The U.S. Goes AFter the Religious…

I watched as the protestors in front of the Supreme Court of the United States framed their (public) arguments, and gagged.

The issue: Can the U.S. government require, by mandate, that business owners be required to provide (pay for or rather, pay for insurance that covers) medical services which violate the religious principles of the business expressed via the religious principles of the primary owners.

The specific cases:  Several privately held corporation who’s owners follow strict versions of the Catholic faith, are suing not to have to pay for an employee insurance plan that includes abortion coverage and contraception coverage – both of which are prohibited by their religion.  Strengthening case 1, the owners operate two business divisions, one of which is a christian book store chain. 

In a second case, a charitable religious non-profit corporation that is clearly identified as a religious organization and provides elderly and hospice care (it’s run by nuns – can’t get more religious than that), is similarly suing not to have to pay for an employee insurance plan that includes abortion coverage and contraception coverage – both of which are prohibited by their religion.

The government’s response: If it’s not a church / synagogue / mosque, it’s not a religious organization and gets no exemption from Obamacare requirements.  Or in other words, religion’s place is limited to home and place of worship.

The (for the government’s position) protestor’s position: THEY’RE TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHT TO CONTRACEPTION AND ABORTION!  TRYING TO LOCK WOMEN AWAY AND STRIP THEM OF THEIR RIGHTS.  And corporations and businesses are not people, they have no rights (like freedom of religion).  And if a corporation wants to limit what it has to provide it’s employees, that’s either racist or sexist (sexist even if it’s a bunch of nuns, and racist even if it’s a black church run company).

The (against the government’s position) protestor’s position: Since when is it ok for the government to tell you that you have to violate your religion???  Company’s are made up of people, and since when are people required to leave their religious principles outside the company door?

Our position – rights are options you may exercise and protections upon which others may not impinge.  There is no “right to a job”, though there may be a “right not to be discriminated on the basis of xxxx when being considered for a job”.  There is no “right to internet access”, though there may be a “right that all customer’s requesting a service be treated equally.”

If the government wishes to provide free or low cost fertility control services / medication / devices / procedures to it’s citizens, it certainly may do so.  BUT REQUIRING others to do so is a violation of every right and freedom that democracy holds dear.

That some want to protest that their rights are being denied is sick.  Their “right” for free stuff?  Nobody sees a societal problem with this???


  1. I think the main reason why people are opposed to Hobby Lobby's "religious exemption" clause is because of the precedent it would set. Refusing to provide insurance for birth control may not seem extreme, but it sets a dangerous precedent for more extremist religions.

    - Scientologists do not believe in the existence of mental illness. Is it acceptable for a Scientologist-owned company to refuse to provide insurance for treatment for their employees' mental illnesses?

    - Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in blood transfusions, even to save their own lives. Is it acceptable for a Jehovah's Witness-owned company to refuse to provide insurance for blood transfusion operations in hospitals?

    - Followers of "Christian Science" believe that illness is a spiritual illusion, and believe that to seek any medical treatment besides prayer is to go against G-d. Is it acceptable for a Christian Scientist company to refuse to provide their employees with any health insurance at all?

    If Hobby Lobby is allowed to not provide birth control because of their religious views, then it sets a dangerous precedent that can be used by other corporations to essentially deny employees life-saving treatment. Regardless of your opinions on birth control, this is surely against the Jewish principles of saving lives at any cost.

  2. You have it backwards, and even one of the more liberal members of the SCOTUS demonstrated this the other day:

    "Justice Samuel Alito raised the issue of kosher and halal slaughterhouses during the oral arguments. It hasn’t generated much press attention, but it made for a fascinating exchange. Alito wondered what would happen if Congress passed a law modeled on a regulation in Denmark’s, which requires butchers to stun animals before killing them — which is contrary to Jewish dietary laws. When Verrilli danced around Alito’s question, he found himself pressed to answer by Justice Stephen Breyer:
    “Take five Jewish or Muslim butchers, and what you’re saying to them is if they choose to work under the corporate form, which is viewed universally, you have to give up on that form the Freedom of Exercise Clause that you’d otherwise have.” Breyer went on: “I need to know what your response is.”
    Verrilli essentially confirmed the Obama administration’s view: A kosher butcher who incorporates would forfeit his free-exercise claims against laws and mandates that violate his religious beliefs and may mean the loss of his livelihood.
    Justice Breyer clearly believes this argument absurd. We would only add: and a radical departure from a long American tradition of respect for and accommodation of the religious practices of our citizens."

    And, you don't have to work for a company who doesn't wasn't to provide coverage for treatments that go against the owners beliefs.

    And furthermore I DONT WANT TO PAY FOR INSURANCE MANDATED BY COMMUNIST twits that insist my carrier covers your sex change operations and abortions on demand.


Welcome to Mystical Paths comments. Have your say here, but please keep the tone reasonably civil and avoid lashon hara. Due to past commenting problems, all comments are moderated (this may take a few hours.)

Your comments are governed by our Terms of Use, Privacy, and Comments policies. We reserve the right to delete or edit your comments for any reason, or use them in a future article. That said, YOU are responsible for YOUR comments - not us.

Related Posts with Thumbnails