Mr. Newell of the Guardian is in charge of liveblog coverage of the Supreme Court discussion of sluts and their irresponsible quest for birth control.
#SCOTUS' women DOMINATED the questioning at today's #HobbyLobby args, asking if employers could also refuse to cover vaccines, HIV drugs etc
— Alice Ollstein (@AliceOllstein) March 25, 2014
Answer from corporate America: “We hope so! That shit costs money, yo.” As many of you in the comments have noted, and I’ve said before, this is all fun and games until some clever corporation decides that they’re Christian Scientists.
Ecks
Or Jehovah’s Witnesses. Why, was that a blood transfusion you were wanting? That could be expensive. Oh my, do you look pale though.
JPL
This would suck…from the guardian
scav
Isn’t annointing things with oil also some sort of Reeeligious blessing? BP is just doing the Lord’s work by annointing Lake Michigan with some unknown amount of chrism from its Whiting Indiana Blessing Refinery..
Villago Delenda Est
Any compensation of employees has a negative impact on profits, not to mention the bonuses for executives. Let’s get real here, homeboys!
Boots Day
Or Scientologists, who could decide that they’re not paying for any sort of mental health coverage, including treatment for things like autism.
Cacti
Verrilli seems to be doing a pretty good job of slapping down some of the more spurious arguments of Hobby Lobby et al.
From the WSJ liveblog:
metricpenny
Sluts should pay for their own reproductive medicines and devices just as their male co-workers do. Insurance doesn’t pay for their impotency drugs and devices …
Oh forget it. Even snarking doesn’t alleviate my anger.
CONGRATULATIONS!
If HL wins it will turn this entire nation into the shitstorm of all shitstorms. Because my religion is explicitly antiwar and anti-violence, and I’m not paying that portion of my fucking taxes to keep supporting the war machine if I don’t have to.
Sad_Dem
Have you seen a picture of David Green? He looks exactly like the boss with the flat top haircut who thinks he’s cool. So now we know where Johnny Paycheck got his inspiration.
Gypsy Howell
@Cacti:
My guess is Roberts, Scalia et al think it only matters what Hobby Lobby and Conestoga “believe;” scientific fact, federal and state law and the employees’ beliefs be damned.
Feudalism Now!
A compromise… We find for the plaintiff, but not for companies completely unlike the plaintiffs. They use that word, but I don’t think it means what they think it means.
Belafon
All people who believe in a God should go pray to him/her. The rest of us can get health care.
BobbyThomson
@Cacti: If by slapping that shit down, you mean accepting ludicrous framing, then yes.
Who gives a shit whether emergency contraception is abortion? Roe v. Wade is still good law, at least until this opinion comes out.
And how the hell does the SG concede that corporations have religious beliefs? Jesus fucking Christ on a stick.
Elizabelle
More proof the founders knew what they were doing with separation of Church and State.
I am guessing Hobby Lobby will lose this case, no matter how the oral arguments sound at this time.
And I wonder if they’ll see a downturn in their sales in years to come. We don’t have them in the DC area, to my knowledge, but I would not buy anything there if you paid me to do so.
PS: Do you think Chief Justice Roberts wants to give Democrats and other supporters of women’s rights and comprehensive healthcare a loss on this five months before the midterms? Plus a loss would ignite the base past 11, where it always is anyway. Apoplectic losers.
BobbyThomson
@Elizabelle:
Like they’ll do anything about it. It’s called the stupid party for a reason.
GregB
Time to turn my personal business into a Quaker oriented personal business and object to taxes paying for aircraft carriers.
Villago Delenda Est
@CONGRATULATIONS!: These assholes NEVER THINK THROUGH the crap they’re trying to push on the entire country because of their fucked up beliefs in an invisible sky buddy.
FSM is going to do some smiting with meatballs and Alfredo if they don’t back off.
Baud
@BobbyThomson:
More likely, the reporter didn’t paraphrase his argument correctly.
Belafon
@Cacti: Once again, it’s about forcing men to have abortions, probably gay ones.
Cacti
Why I think a decision recognizing broad corporate religious rights won’t come out of this:
In other words, petitioners concede that SCOTUS would have to throw open the doors to a raft of litigation about which parts of the US Code and Code of Federal Regulations infringe on which corporation’s “religious beliefs”, to be decided on a piecemeal basis.
If there’s anything the SCOTUS hates, it’s making more work for itself.
catclub
I sure wish I knew that 10 years ago Hobby Lobby’s group health insurance covered birth control.
Not as a no co-pay service, but as a service nonetheless. Given the number of Catholic hospitals which had that for their employees, in the past, I would suspect Hobby Lobby to have done so as well. It is only the shitstorm in response to the ACA which has made them come out against it now.
boatboy_srq
@Boots Day: THAT explains antiVaxxers in a way I understand.
hoodie
@JPL: I had the feeling that Roberts would go this direction, but I hope Breyer doesn’t buy into that bullshit. They’re still using the corporate limited liability form, which allows an asshole like Green to amplify his voice with limited personal risk. If he was just some sole proprietor (BTW, probably exempt from ACA), it would be less of an issue.
shelly
I forget how long the lag is between hearing arguments and a ruling finally coming down. Will we have to wait till May?
Elizabelle
@BobbyThomson:
I don’t think Roberts is stupid. The finest Chief Justice 21st century robber barons can have, yes.
Allowing states to opt out of Medicaid expansion was a poison pill that’s been very effective.
Giving with one hand, damaging the gift badly with the other.
BobbyThomson
@Baud: Doubtful. This is the same guy who screwed the pooch in the ACA argument.
Cacti
@BobbyThomson:
Scalia doesn’t care, but Roberts actually does care about his legacy as a Chief Justice. He blinked on the sheer partisan hackery of declaring the ACA unconstitutional in toto.
Elizabelle
@shelly:
Believe ruling’s expected in June?
Hill Dweller
Here is another in a long line of creative ‘apologies‘ from a racist:
KG
@JPL: if they come down for Hobby Lobby, that’s the way I think they’ll do it. I’m not a big fan of that outcome. But it’s going to make things interesting down the line for closely held corporations – like, if they claim a religious exemption based on the shareholders’ beliefs, is that sufficient to pierce the corporate veil?
BobbyThomson
@Elizabelle: Roberts is part of the evil party. Democrats are the stupid party.
catclub
@shelly: Possibly as late as July. Then summer break for the court.
slag
@BobbyThomson: Agreed. This kind of thing is why they go after contraception in the first place. It’s, once again, moving the conversation in the direction of crazy town. And since there doesn’t seem to be much of a penalty (http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/03/chart-day-republicans-stick-together-no-matter-what-kind-district-they-represent) for going there, to crazy town they will happily go!
Personally, I think this kind of framing: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/the-coat-hanger-around-my-neck-is-a-symbol-of-history is more effective for us.
Belafon
@Hill Dweller: So, if I visit Israel, that makes me a nigger? Some how I doubt it.
Aardvark
@catclub: Hobby Lobby did provide coverage for birth control before the advent of the ACA. I believe Anne Laurie had the link earlier.
burnspbesq
@shelly:
June is more likely.
PaulW
Anyone getting SSL warnings about Facebook?
catclub
@Aardvark: Thanks!
CONGRATULATIONS!
@Hill Dweller: I gotta say, that’s the ultimate non-apology apology. Utterly perfect. Makes me weep to behold its sheer perfection.
Cacti
@KG:
That’s another reason why I think Roberts/Kennedy might refrain from coming down for Hobby Lobby. The whole purpose of a corporation is to protect the principals from personal liability. If the primary shareholders in closely held corp are able to have their religious beliefs transfer to the separate legal entity, you’ve ruled implicitly that there is little, if any actual separation between the two.
Another Holocene Human
@Hill Dweller: Makes you wonder, so how rude is “shvartse”?
ruemara
Dog whistle? More like Canine Air Raid Siren. Warning, huffpo link. Donald Rumsfeld says a “trained ape” would do better at foreign policy than Obama.
Mandalay
@Hill Dweller: Speaking of racists, the other Donald is running his yap:
A very carefully selected dog whistle phrase.
ETA I see ruemara just beat me to it.
Villago Delenda Est
@CONGRATULATIONS!: I swear, these guys have as their life’s mission the rehabilitation of Reinhard Heydrich.
Villago Delenda Est
@Mandalay: You missed all the discussion of this in the last thread. Yup, von Rumsfailed needs to go the way of Jodl and Keitel.
Cacti
I think Roberts is also mindful that it would be pretty terrible optics for the SCOTUS if he got Breyer to join his “limited 1A rights for closely held corps” and the 3-dissenters were the women of the Court, especially considering his favorite party’s problems in attracting female voters.
Mandalay
@Another Holocene Human
“schwarze” is German for black. I have heard it used by Jewish Americans, but I have no clue whether it is offensive.
cokane
getting so fucking sick of religious privilege. i don’t understand the logic of religious exemption on healthcare coverage. why can an employer discriminate based on religious feelings but not have the same rights to discriminate based on any other philosophy? it’s an attempt to win special rights. needs to be shut the fuck down.
Ash Can
As if Donald Fucking Rumsfeld would know anything about successful foreign policies of any kind.
KG
@Cacti: not just that, there’s a long line of cases that say that the corporate veil is supposed to be a shield, not a sword. Hobby Lobby’s position is trying to turn the corporate veil into a sword. That’s the sort of thing that can drastically change large swaths of the law.
Also, very interestingly, was reading up on this case and noticed the Hobby Lobby corporation is actually owned by a (presumably, family) trust, in which the family members are beneficiaries. So, they’re actually asking for two piercings to assert their personal religious beliefs. Because, technically, the family members don’t even own the corporation. That may give Roberts an out – “sure corporations are people and have (some) First Amendment rights, but we haven’t applied that principle to trusts, so in this case, we cannot find that a Free Exercise right has been violated.”
geg6
@CONGRATULATIONS!:
I want every penny I pay in taxes that goes to anything explicitly or implicitly religious back. I’m an atheist and any person or entity that gets federal tax dollars while having any mention whatsoever of religion or spirituality on its premises or in its operations violates my First Amendment rights. Every fucking cent. The local school district just put on “Godspell” as its spring musical. I want my school taxes back. That’s what I want.
catclub
@cokane: “why can an employer discriminate based on religious feelings but not have the same rights to discriminate based on any other philosophy?”
RFRA. religious freedom. Not philosophical freedom.
Villago Delenda Est
@geg6: All real properties owned by religious bodies should be subject to property tax. They use the services paid for though property taxes just like everyone else in the community.
This farce has gone on long enough. Time to get serious and crack down on this obvious loophole that dishonest schmucks have been using for years.
geg6
@Cacti:
Yup, that’s the slippery slope they (or, really, their corporate masters) really, really, really want to avoid. It’s the only reason I have any hope on this.
srv
I’m just wondering if the Reality-Based Community wailing about Nate’s Senate projections is still Reality-Based or if Nate is.
Incongruence!
geg6
@Villago Delenda Est:
I couldn’t agree more. Hell, Duquesne University says they get to keep their adjuncts on the verge of homelessness and refuse to let them organize because of their religious beliefs (I’m not sure how Pope Frank feels about that). I’d love to see them pay property taxes on all that property there on the Bluff here in the ‘Burgh.
Come to think of it, I want Duquesne to pay me back my personal percentage of all of the state and federal tax dollars they get. If they want to claim all this religious privilege, they should at least stand on principle, like Grove City College, and refuse federal and state aid of any kind.
Punchy
If they do indeed rule for HoLo, couldn’t HoLo then legally fire any unwed mothers, divorcees, and atheists? Basically, completely sidestep discrimination law? IANAL, but I fail to see how a ruling in their favor doesn’t give them a literal Get Outta Jail Free card for most employment law…
Can they suddenly claim their religion doesn’t allow for minimum wage and overtime? The potential bullshit is limitless.
Villago Delenda Est
@ruemara: The only apology Obama should entertain from von Rumsfailed is a Captain Needa apology.
Villago Delenda Est
@srv: Well, given that we’re months away, and lots can happen over the intervening months, it’s a bit early to make any predictions based on data. Now, on preference, the Village has already spoken, as have such luminaries as Kkkarl “The Math” Rove.
OzarkHillbilly
@Hill Dweller: “The choice of the word ‘niggers’ was inappropriate and I apologize. I, of course, meant to say “forced busing”.”
FTFHim
ruemara
@Villago Delenda Est: There are times when it would be easier if Obama, or myself, were a Sith Lord.
Cacti
@Punchy:
Broad corporate religious rights would allow for precisely that.
That’s why in United States v. Lee, the SCOTUS told an Amish employer to kick rocks when he argued that witholding Social Security payroll taxes violated his free exercise rights.
mellowjohn
@Mandalay:
it is.
old joke: an african-american cleaning lady picks up the phone. the voice on the other end askes, “is mrs. tannenbaum there?” the cleaning lady replies, “no, ma’am. this is the schvartse.” from leo rosten’s book, “the joys of yiddish.”
David in NY
@Mandalay: “Schwartze” is not polite — my wife’s grandfather claimed he went selling stuff in South Africa around the turn of the century-before-last and was successful because “the schwartzes would buy anything.”
David in NY
And I wonder about this religious statute thingy. There was another such thing, the voting rights act, enacted under authority of § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. And the Supreme held that Congress could not enact things that were not mandated by the Fourteenth Amendment itself. So, why, in this case, can the Religious Nutcase Rights Act, extend the reach of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause? I don’t thing anybody things Hobby Lobby has an actual First Amendment case.
Now a number of things I said above may not be true (though I kinda think they are, and if not, please say so), but if they’re reasonably close, I’m not sure about the validity of the statute extended to this degree.
Also, if this is limited to S corps., etc., why is Citizens’ United wider?
Ed: Really cancel this last — speech clause, no statute involved …
Belafon
@Punchy: ending anti-discrimination laws would be seen as a plus by Roberts and the others. Like someone said above, the reason they’ll rule against Hobby Lobby is that ruling in favor will cause more work for them.
Anoniminous
How in the hell does this not violate the separation of Church and State?Never mind, Anoniminous. It’s Gopertown.
dmsilev
TPM wins today’s “No shit, Sherlock” headline contest: “Female SCOTUS Justices Hammer Birth Control Challengers”. Ya think?
Punchy
After the chicanery they pulled on the ACA case, there’s NO WAY I’m going to believe they’ll rule against HobLob. I sense Scalia will completely ditch his prior rulings to invent a new line of thought for this one.
rikyrah
What happens when an ATHIEST decides to stop stuff based on non-religious reasons
Schlemizel
@Belafon:
Its like John Lennon sang, foreigners are the niggers of the world
Mustang Bobby
@Mandalay: When I’ve heard it used by Jewish speakers, they weren’t using it as a compliment.
kindness
@CONGRATULATIONS!: If Hobby Lobby wins this case I say we break out the guillotines and start with those Supreme Assholes who vote for Hobby Lobby. (and then move on to Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Nickleback)
scav
Rhyming Free-Market Religious-Inspired FreeeDom!! Bible-Beliving update: Christian School Tells Eight-Year-Old Girl She Looks Too Much Like A Boy
On the upside, the grandparents seem to have pulled her from the school, so she may actually get an education. Still, leaving everything to all-powerful Free-Market Religio-Corporate Complex is really not the way to go.
Schlemizel
@Mandalay:
Because of the way it has been used its about an 8 on a 1-10 scale. He might have gotten away with it in Israel but not in Manhattan.
? Martin
Has the Solicitor General pointed out that the employers aren’t paying for the contraception coverage, the insurer is? The mandate isn’t on the employer, it’s on the insurance company.
And I thought the whole point of corporations was to shield the executives from liability. I guess things don’t work both ways for our job creators.
Jay C
@Hill Dweller:
Nice near-Talmudic distinction in Mayor Sasson’s non-apology: “I didn’t mean to call black people “niggers”, I just meant to call all foreigners “niggers”!
Good job, Motti: that’s SO much better….
@Mandalay:
Let’s put it this way: “shvartser” isn’t usually considered complimentary…..
Roger Moore
@Cacti:
Unless you’re willing to be an asshole and claim that the transfer is only one way, so it’s possible to create a corporation to do your dirty work and not have any of the dirt wind up on your hands. At this point, I wouldn’t put anything past the corporatists.
Zippity
If anyone wants a preview of how low the republicans will sink if Hillary wins the nomination, just read some of the comments on the editorial written by Sandra Fluke in the WAPO. I’m sick to my stomach just thinking about breathing the same air as these people.
Scott S.
I’m starting a religion, and I sincerely believe that butchering Anthony Kennedy with a fireaxe is a holy sacrament. Who wants to be liturgist next Sunday?
JPL
@Scott S.: If you need money, I might suggest you visit kickstarter.
I haven’t read the oral statements yet and probably won’t but why is this in the court. Hobby Lobby is a corporation that sells cheap imported products. Why can they tell me when life begins? I used an IUD and found it convenient. A lot of people have trouble with birth control pills. Shouldn’t this be decided by a woman and her doctor?
raven
@Mandalay: I beat you all to it hours ago.
catclub
@Zippity: Others are posting that such a display of the vile will be a huge win for Democrats. I am not sure.
Roger Moore
@Scott S.:
I have some serious qualms about your religion. Any religion that would target Kennedy before Scalia, Thomas, and Alito is obviously crazy.
the Conster
Has “corporation” been defined? Is it the majority shareholder’s view on birth control that counts, or the chairman of the board? The CEO? What if it’s a subsidiary – is it the chairman of the board of the parent, or the board of the ultimate parent? What if it’s publicly traded? Is this issue going to be part of a proxy solicitation? How the fuck can anyone looking for a job do due diligence? They can’t ask you what your religious affiliation is in a job interview, but you’re supposed to ask your interviewer what the religious beliefs are of the board and the CEO to see what kind of insurance they provide? What could possibly go wrong?
? Martin
@catclub: I’m sure. Ms Martin is a reliable but apathetic voter. If the vile is unleased, she will volunteer daily for Dems and I will be hard pressed to keep her from dumping the kids college funds into ActBlue. She’s already ramping up. My coworkers are similarly ramping up.
Prop 8 pissed her off and energized her. We didn’t win that fight, but we won it locally, and that was unexpected. Obama also won locally. This is OC.
The tea partiers are defeated here. The women around me are much more engaged than I’ve ever seen them. Bring it.
Roger Moore
I’ll believe that Hobby Lobby is a good Catholic when it tithes 1/10 of its gross receipts.
Cacti
@the Conster:
I think Roberts and Kennedy will want to carve out an exception for the Hobby Lobbies of the world, but as your post shows, it’s going to be a pretty tough needle to thread. As was mentioned upthread, the family’s ownership interest in Hobby Lobby is held in a Trust rather than by them directly. So then you have another question of does it go by the purposes of the Trust or the personal beliefs of the Trust beneficiaries.
I don’t see an easy way for them to come down in favor of corporate religious rights.
hrumpole
There is a narrow way that this could get unfavorably resolved. RFRA refers to a “person” and in the ordinary use of that word in most federal statutes, it applies to corporations. (The fact that it was enacted to overrule the court’s decision in Smith, which is a pure free exercise case can be explained by the fact that Congress knew what the word “person” generally meant when they used it).
RFRA is a dumb law, enacted by one of many dumb republican congresses. But it’s a law and it’s not unconstitutional. So the “narrow” conservative position would be that the word “person” in the statute applies to corporations. Under that standard, the obamacare contraceptive regulation fails. If Congress wants to change the statute, they are free to do so. But given the importance of the lady-hating-theocrats to the republican party, it will be impossible to pass an amendment for at least 2 to four years (see cruz, ted, boehner, jon), or until the next redistricting. This way, corporations don’t get first amendment rights, but religious freedom is protected.
The up side is that such a ruling will cost the R’s the next presidential election, and, barring a colossal f-up, possibly several more.
bemused
@Zippity:
I rarely read comments other than here. Reading what rightwingers are up to is bad enough. I don’t need the aggravation of reading ignorant, holier than thou scolds who have no capability of empathizing or reasoning. I think karma has a funny way of catching up with a lot of them throwing the first stones.
Anyone see the HBO Maria Shriver doc, Paycheck to Paycheck? 30 yr old hard working, caring single mom struggling to raise her 3 kids working in a nursing home on $9.49 an hour. She’s been trying so hard to get ahead and doing all the responsible things one would expect. In an interview with her she was asked how the reaction to the doc has been. She said people who knew her didn’t realize how hard she was working while others said she shouldn’t have gotten tattoos or started dating a guy. Moralistic scolds just miss the forest for the trees.
JPL
@hrumpole: That would still open the door for other suits, though.
Poopyman
@? Martin:
I’m thinking you misspelled “enraged”.
Nora
It seems to me — as a lot of other people have mentioned already — that if the Supreme Court finds that any kind of corporation, even a Subchapter S corporation, has religious rights, the whole concept of a corporation goes down the drain. There is simply no way of saying that there’s a corporate veil that protects stockholders when the corporation acts in a business capacity but at the same time there is no corporate veil that prevents the same stockholders from using the corporation to express their religious beliefs. Whether someone like Scalia is thinking about this or not, I have to believe Roberts — or his clerks — at least is looking at that possibility with horror.
WereBear
Oh, yeah. The increase in one’s income by taking these steps is simply phenomenal!
catclub
@? Martin: “dumping the kids college funds into ActBlue.”
lol
Gordon, the Big Express Engine
@mellowjohn:
Cf. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2HH-GLn4CU4
catclub
@Nora: “kind of corporation, even a Subchapter S corporation, has religious rights”
we can write this, but as soon as you get to details, it becomes absurd. Do corporations get religious holidays? What happens if 2/3rd or 55% of the stockholders claim some religious belief? Is it partly believed? The stuff about actually the Trust owning the shares that control the company, makes it even stranger. When Warren Buffet takes over a company, do the religious beliefs of the shareholders of BRK get polled, to determine the religious beliefs of the corporation?
Madness.
bemused
@WereBear:
lol, they are total idiots. Too many people in this country have a “she shouldn’t have worn that short skirt” mind set about everything.
gwangung
@Roger Moore:
I’ll believe it when Hobby Lobby shows up for church and gets baptized.
JPL
@catclub: Donating to Act Blue can be considered an investment for the future of our country.
IMO
Origuy
@bemused: So she shouldn’t be dating, but they probably think she should be married. Presumably to someone chosen by her religious leader, if not her father.
catclub
@gwangung: Evangelicals. Total immersion – every single store.
Citizen Alan
@Punchy:
If they do indeed rule for HoLo, couldn’t HoLo then legally fire any unwed mothers, divorcees, and atheists?
Depending the state, they can probably do that now for unwed mothers and divorcees (atheists would be protected by Title VII). The whole point of the Pregnancy anti-discrimination act was to prevent the currently legal practice of firing pregnant women for no reason except that you find them icky.
JPL
@catclub: Does their mdse come from companies that practice the same belief?
Bokonon
@Nora: Some corporations are more equal than others.
bemused
@Origuy:
It didn’t get into her parents or her religious background but I did read that her dad was rooting for her doing the doc. She was married but her husband got hooked on prescrip meds hence struggling on her own after she separated from him.
Mandalay
@Schlemizel:
So schvartse would be closer to “n-clang” (presumably at least 10 on your scale) than “colored” (around 5 or 6 on your scale?) in terms of offensiveness? I had no clue.
Elizabelle
Since this is an open thread:
more photoshops of the Kim and Kanye Vogue cover.
I still like James Franco and Seth Rogen’s the best.
GregB
Well, this may open the door to allow Prince Al Aweed, top shareholder at Newscorp to demand the female talking heads at Fox News to dress more modestly.
burnspbesq
LMAO. I can’t think of anything the O’Connell campaign could have done to alienate more dumbfuck, hayseed Kentuckians than this.
Elizabelle
@burnspbesq:
I know what that’s going to be without even looking.
And I know why you are particularly interested in it.
Please proceed, Mr. Minority Leader.
burnspbesq
@Mandalay:
In the context in which it is normally used, hell yes it’s a racial slur.
Roger Moore
@hrumpole:
Except for the question of how a corporation can have a sincere religious belief. The whole thing only works if Hobby Lobby is legally separate from its shareholders at their convenience.
burnspbesq
Nothing about plaintiffs’ position in Hobby Lobby makes a lick of sense. And yet, the Tenth Circuit fell for it. Go figure.
Roger Moore
@Roger Moore:
Oops. Looks as if Hobby Lobby is the only plaintiff in one of these suits that isn’t claiming to be Catholic. In any case, I won’t believe that a corporation can be Catholic until Pope Francis writes an encyclical saying that corporations have souls.
cokane
I don’t care if it’s a corporation or a small business owned by one man. Claiming that you can dictate healthcare exemptions based on religious beliefs when no one would allow for these exemptions based on any other philosophical or moral beliefs is asking, nay demanding, special rights. People need to stop getting caught up in the corporate/LLC angle of this case.
Anoniminous
@? Martin:
Women I know could power a small city with the energy they are starting to bring. Even Republicans are tired of being a political punching bag for having lady parts. Anecdotal isn’t data, YMMV, & all that yet this election is shaping in an interesting direction: a 1% increase in female participation and a 2% swing of the trend-GOP middle to Dem would keep the Senate and flip the House
IowaOldLady
I may have to stop reading about this case. I’m incredulous and furious and this is only the first day of arguments.
Mandalay
@burnspbesq:
Well I may have to recalibrate my opinions of a couple of people I know. They use the word very freely in normal conversation, and I (very naively) was just literally translating the word from German when they used it.
Toddlers are similarly clueless when they repeat swear words they hear from their parents, but (unlike me) they are not old enough to know better.
raven
@Mandalay: And when you hear mulignan perk up your ears too.
Roger Moore
@cokane:
Complain about the RFRA, then, since that’s the law that gives religious beliefs a special status not accorded to other kinds of belief. I’ll happily agree that it’s an awful law that never should have been passed, and in my fantasy world Hobby Lobby would result in it being struck down for violating the establishment clause (I’d like a pony unicorn while I’m at it), but it is the law of the land.
Mandalay
@Zippity:
Both the good news and the bad news is that she has shown that she can sink pretty low herself.
cokane
@Roger Moore: ugh such revolting bs. frankly violates 14th imo too.
geg6
@IowaOldLady:
Yeah, I’m with you. I’m absolutely infuriated by the whole thing. I don’t even have words for how maddening I’m finding this case.
Mandalay
@raven: You just taught me a new word. I must lead a very sheltered life.
BobbyThomson
Meh. Kennedy and Roberts are going to sign onto this atrocity in an opinion written by Kennedy that makes no sense. People will be pissed off about it for about a month until the next shiny object. Republicans will win a huge majority in the House and take back the Senate. Wishing these things away won’t prevent them.
GregB
Half of the morons I know will buy into this hellacious corporate soul ownership gambit.
Elizabelle
@BobbyThomson:
Really? I don’t think so. At all. Why do you say this stuff?
There, there, if you need a hug because you’re depressed, but why the Eeyorism? What does that ever get anyone?
IowaOldLady
I truly don’t get the whole attack on contraception. It gives women control over their lives, true, but it also gives men some control over when and whether they have children. Some huge percentage of the population uses it. Catholics use it in the same proportions as everyone else. Where’s the market for denying it?
GregB
@raven:
Shortened to moolie.
Mnemosyne
@GregB:
Ask them if they’re okay with their Jewish or Muslim boss demanding that they pull down their pants and prove they’re circumcised before they get hired. If not, why not?
And, frankly, this is where, even if the worst happens, the whole thing collapses and Republicans start begging the Supreme Court to reverse themselves: it never, ever occurs to conservatives that freedom of religion applies to non-Christians. Republicans in Louisiana flipped the fuck out and refused to support school vouchers anymore once somebody clued them in that Muslims would be allowed to use them to send their kids to Islamic schools.
hrumpole
@Nora: This is exactly right, and I’ll bet it starts to show up in some judicial opinions.
JoyceH
I was just looking at Hobby Lobby’s website, and if 90% of their clientele aren’t women, I’ll eat my best bonnet. If they get this atrocious ‘exemption’, women should just stop shopping there. Let God support them, we won’t.
Then when they go belly-up, there’s all that commercial real estate just waiting for a nice craft chain that treats their female employees like autonomous human beings.
PurpleGirl
@IowaOldLady: That’s it: it gives women control over their lives. That’s what the cons don’t want.
IowaOldLady
@JoyceH: I’ll never set foot in one of their stores, but most people don’t pay attention unless the issue hits home to them personally. They still think Sandra Fluke just wanted free birth control.
hrumpole
@Roger Moore: I think that’s the point–in order for this to occur, “sincerity” can be tested in the context of a corporation’s ownership structure and b whether it affects lady parts. If either test is passed the regulation will be sincere.
(Of course, since you can build a corporation to do anything you want, all that needs be done is to establish the right parameters in the org docs, and voila–you’re the profit making church of rooby do). I am not sure which way they will go, but if they invalidate it, it’s best to kick the issue back to Congress–they don’t need to reach the constitutional question in this case and I doubt that even Roberts wants to. He cares about public perception. Scalia and Thomas don’t.)
Additional footnote: the fact that the federal government can’t require contraception does not necessarily mean that the states can’t require such coverage (if the ACA allows states to require more than the minimum–which it probably doesn’t). The conservatives have struck down RFRA as applied to state law as a federal overreach (Boerne v. City of Flores).
bemused
@IowaOldLady:
Inexplicable to anyone with working brain cells.
@Mnemosyne:
They don’t understand cause and effect No matter how many times their actions come back to bite them hard, they never learn to look before they leap.
The Ancient Randonneur
@Mnemosyne: I personally hope the Nation of Islam (headed by Louis Farrakhan) opens a school in every state that has a voucher program.
Roger Moore
@The Ancient Randonneur:
What does the Reformed Church of Satan have to do to get some love around here?
burnspbesq
Transcript of oral argument.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-354_5436.pdf
James Parente
@Schlemizel: I’ll bet you he has roots in Williamsburgh.
Kyle
@Mnemosyne:
If Hobby Lobby wins, poetic justice would have them being taken over by some Rmoney/Bain-type vulture capitalists from Dubai, who demand that everyone pray to Mecca daily and women wear hijab to work. On the plus side, health insurance would cover up to four wives.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Roger Moore: What you want is a unicorn pony – that’s a unicorn measuring not more than 14.2 at the withers as certified by a licensed steward with a USEF approved stick while supervised by a veterinarian. IOW a unicorn that’s pony sized. Everyone knows there are no pony unicorns, though it’s a common semantic mistake.
Bobby Thomson
@Elizabelle:
Because it’s true.
Much more realistic forecasting.
Bobby Thomson
@Mnemosyne:
Put another conservative or two on the SCOTUS and no it doesn’t, either.
Bokonon
@Kyle: No problem. They think that this won’t happen … and if it does, they will turn around on a time, claim a different kind of victimization, and seek protection from the ever-willing and ever-gratifying government. And I am sure this particular Supreme Court could also find a deep, previously unconsidered but very wise way to find their way to a totally contrary ruling.
You know … kind of like Justice Scalia is now doing regarding his previous ruling that people couldn’t go around doing peyote buttons with total freedom because of their religious beliefs. Because … that would be chaos! And that case was about drug use, and this is about abortion!! Yes! And allowing corporations to adopt their own religious beliefs that trump federal law won’t be disruptive at all! It is all about liberty! Religious liberty must be protected! Yes!!
Elizabelle
@Bobby Thomson:
Hello there.
Watch out for foretold events that turn out not to be. I’d rather be in Democrats’ position, with the Presidency and Executive branch, and sanity. And we may very well keep the Senate, tough as it looks now.
It is a challenge to get casual voters out, but it can be done.
tybee
@catclub:
i like it. reminds me of an old joke: the only thing wrong with baptism is that they don’t hold them under the water long enough.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
I’m converting to Thuggeeism. We believe sacrificing the rich to Kali is a holy act, and since that’s a religious belief, we should be allowed to get away with it.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
@IowaOldLady: I truly don’t get the whole attack on contraception. It gives women control over their lives, true, but it also gives men some control over when and whether they have children. Some huge percentage of the population uses it. Catholics use it in the same proportions as everyone else. Where’s the market for denying it?
Sluts HAVE to be punished, IOL.
There’s a wonderful quote from this blog (I think Cole wrote it):
“The salient fact of American politics is that there are fifty to seventy million voters each of who will volunteer to live with his family in a cardboard box under an overpass and cook sparrows on an old curtain rod, if someone would only guarantee that the black, gay, Hispanic, liberal, whatever in the next box over doesn’t even have a curtain rod or a sparrow to put on it.”
Mayken
@scav: Jeebus H Christ on a pogo-stick! I actually got asked not to return to a Catholic school when I was in first grade for exactly the same reason – well, they didn’t have the term gender identity then but yes, I “dressed like a boy instead of a girl as God wills” or some such BS. Amazing how 30+ years later some things have.
Gosh, cannot imagine why I’m not a Catholic today.
liberal
@ruemara: it’s not racist. As Billmon pointed out, he’s clearly referring to Bush.
Pat
Attempt to exempt ACA by cosely held corporations under freedom of religion by overturning Roe v Wade in disguise should be met by Abstention Doctrine, and Congress should immediately withdraw religious exemption for all under theory of not granting conscientious objector status, or its equivalent, by application, to American laws because it doesn’t exist outside of war. Women’s contracaptive rights is not a war except for those trying to obliterate their autonomy with right to require submission to their demands. Obviously unconstitutional to preference religious rights over human rights, collective rights over individual rights. This is a wrongful use of majority rule to deprive others of personal autonomy, a.k.a. Corporate/group rights over individual rights. complete misapplication of Constitutional law in protection of the person, saying protect us, not them, protect our rights as superior to their rights – fascism and totalitarianism – to place Supreme Court as the one with the sword to slash through the weeds of individual Constitutional rights! How shocking!