It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hobby Lobby and the supreme court.

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Thanks for sharing with us that sad story. Good luck to you and yours!




posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
to make sure that everyone is "faithful" to thier convictions...


again, if you do not believe in abortions, then I am sure you have adopted no less than 25 of the children that are homeless... I mean after all, if they aren't aborted and come to be born,,, somebody has to take care of them right?


Again... this case was based on religious beliefs... I, for one, DO NOT believe that a company or corporation can have "religious beliefs". People can, corps and companies can not.

And yes, I do wholeheartedly agree with abortion after conception. My Grandchild was born with HLHS... the doctors were stunned that the defect wasn't caught by pre-natal screening, which it should have been, not to mention the abnormal heartbeat.

She is now 7.... her medical bills are past 1.4 million at this point and her future very much remains in doubt. She is on medicare so every taxpayer is footing her medical bills and will continue to do so for a long long time. No child should have to go through what she has been through and still yet has to go through.



I find it odd you should even have an opinion on abortion you don't even have the ability to have a child. Why do you have anything to say about it one way or the other. Secondly who are you to determine what my belief system should be. You can't even have a child, you are in effect a monetary consigner and thats it. It's her body you have nothing to say. Yet you're going to decide what a private company should and should not do. You my friend are guilty of the same thing, they decide on religious beliefs, and you decide on opinion. I think that fits the definition of hypocrisy.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
to make sure that everyone is "faithful" to thier convictions...



Pshh. If everyone remained faithful to their convictions then usury and torture would be illegal and Presidents that claim to be Christian would wouldn't be murdering people.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

My opinion is that it is the woman's decision... its her body.. her decision....up until the moment of birth.

A lot of people don't agree with that, but that's the way I see it.


Regardless of the side tracking, I still believe that companies/corporation CAN NOT have religious beliefs.... only people.

and I find it very odd that you as someone unable to have a child that you have an opinion on my opinion based on the fact that I can't have a child... we could play this all day long. Hypocrisy at its best, you said it.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: windword
A fertilized egg/embryo is not a child!

I said ... conceived child. And an abortificant does indeed kill it.


No it doesn't. Until the egg implants it is not considered a pregnancy and there is no guarantee that the egg will implant. HL's entire case is based on belief not scientific fact.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



My opinion is that it is the woman's decision... its her body.. her decision....up until the moment of birth.

Isn't it funny how people complain about the government sticking their noses int people's lives but have no problem with religion sticking their noses into peoples lives? They have no problem with big brother running their lives as long as it's their big brother of choice.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: buster2010


HL's entire case is based on belief not scientific fact.


The case was based on Constitutional law issues.

The government stuck their noses into the religious issues first.

And they were very arrogant with their attitudes and outward criticisms.

They got their ears pinned back.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace




. You can't even have a child, you are in effect a monetary consigner and thats it. It's her body you have nothing to say. Yet you're going to decide what a private company should and should not do.


Wait? What? Can a private company have a baby? I'm confused!

How come all these men think that their opinion is valid? They can't have a baby either?



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen





The case was based on Constitutional law issues.



No it wasn't. Come on. You should know that! It was based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I am sorry, but anyway you look at this, it was based on religious beliefs.... its states it right there in the pdf of the SCOTUS transcripts: based on religious beliefs

All I want to know is when did companies/corporations become conscious entities with the ability to intelligently conceive the concept of religion?? Or conceive anything for that matter? (Pun intended)

Religion is a 100% purely human concept.........Corporations/Companies are not human,,, they are human owned, but not human. I would have tossed it out the window before it ever got as far as it did.

No Sir, Your Honor, I wasn't speeding..... you see Sir, it is against my car's religious beliefs to violate the law, so therefore I could not have been speeding. Honest. Ask that invisible man in the sky who watches you shower naked everyday. Yeah that guy.

I am done with this topic.... it's craziness.

edit on R382014-07-02T18:38:06-05:00k387Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R382014-07-02T18:38:37-05:00k387Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R382014-07-02T18:38:53-05:00k387Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R392014-07-02T18:39:24-05:00k397Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R402014-07-02T18:40:16-05:00k407Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R402014-07-02T18:40:51-05:00k407Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: MarlinGrace




. You can't even have a child, you are in effect a monetary consigner and thats it. It's her body you have nothing to say. Yet you're going to decide what a private company should and should not do.


Wait? What? Can a private company have a baby? I'm confused!

How come all these men think that their opinion is valid? They can't have a baby either?



I think the point was, his deciding for me what my belief system should be, while forcing me to accept his. You are right I can't have a baby, I can be part of it's creation, but after that I am only a financial asset to the mother. I have no say in it's life or it's death.

I don't think it's about a company having a baby, it's about a privately owned company deciding based on it's owners religious convictions what it is willing to pay for. Amazingly enough they have always been willing to pay for contraception but that wasn't good enough, now you have to pay for the women's indiscretions as well, at the expense of a child's death which is a separate argument in itself. I don't have any issues with it, after all it is their business. If you don't think its fair start your own business, then you to can decide when the government has reached to far, and you can go to the highest court for a decision. Which they did, they followed the laws of the land played by the rules, and won. Something as it turns out the government didn't do. The Obama Care law gave unprecedented power to HHS Mrs. Sebelius and she added this without the necessary legal research.

Our fearless dictating leader gave the same dictatorial power to the head of HHS in the Obama Care law.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
So Hobby Lobby's owners are so dead set in their religious beliefs that they felt it was necessary to go to the SCOTUS, because they felt it was against their beliefs to have to be forced to provide employees with birth control.


Is that the same Hobby Lobby that offers their employees 16 different types of birth control or is it a different Hobby Lobby?

Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: opethPA


see above: done with this topic.


But answer this one question for me: Is it of your esteemed opinion that companies/corporations have the self conscious ability to understand religion and have religious beliefs without outside human influence?

Can Walmart become self conscious and suddenly decide that it, as a corporation, has decided the follow the Muslim faith without outside human influence?

Answer that question.

Tell me once again how companies/corporations can use "religious beliefs" as a legal argument either for or against.

edit on R222014-07-02T20:22:02-05:00k227Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R242014-07-02T20:24:10-05:00k247Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
But answer this one question for me: Is it of your esteemed opinion that companies/corporations have the self conscious ability to understand religion and have religious beliefs without outside human influence?


Personally I feel that a private company has a the right to run their business however they want as long as it is within legal means.

If they were saying they banned birth control, if they were saying they wouldn't pay for any or most of it, that if you are on it you can't work here then I would be right on board saying this is wrong ,this specific company is not.

They are offering 16 other birth control methods of which 13 are for women. None of that screams of "womens rights being infringed on" like I am reading on the web.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: opethPA


All I am saying is that I would have personally tossed the case as soon as it became evident that the term "religious beliefs" were being applied to a non-human entity. It's just not logical, or even possible for a non-sentient company/corporation to have religious beliefs.

I still call a BS flag on the whole deal.

The ruling affects me exactly 0% and I could really careless about anything to do with it other than Companies/Corporations having "religious beliefs". That is what I have major heartburn with.

The whole thing can be side tracked 50 million times about pro-life, pro-abortion debates. It still doesn't get around the fact that it is technically impossible for a Company/Corporation to have "religious beliefs".

edit on R372014-07-02T20:37:04-05:00k377Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R402014-07-02T20:40:19-05:00k407Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   
i hear you on that..
my concern is that it could certainly be a slippery slope and probably sets a dangerous precedent.

I think the people claiming HL are taking away womens rights are wrong..that is aware my disagreement with this ends.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: opethPA


All I am saying is that I would have personally tossed the case as soon as it became evident that the term "religious beliefs" were being applied to a non-human entity. It's just not logical, or even possible for a non-sentient company/corporation to have religious beliefs.

I still call a BS flag on the whole deal.

The ruling affects me exactly 0% and I could really careless about anything to do with it other than Companies/Corporations having "religious beliefs". That is what I have major heartburn with.

The whole thing can be side tracked 50 million times about pro-life, pro-abortion debates. It still doesn't get around the fact that it is technically impossible for a Company/Corporation to have "religious beliefs".


You realize to use your logic that means they are not a healthcare related business but have to provide healthcare related items. They do hobby related items not planned parenthood. It might be a stretch but in the end it is your opinion versus their opinion and the court sided with theirs.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace


one more time Marlin:

Is it of your esteemed opinion that companies/corporations have the self conscious ability and sentient awareness to understand religion and have religious beliefs without outside human influence?



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: MarlinGrace


one more time Marlin:

Is it of your esteemed opinion that companies/corporations have the self conscious ability and sentient awareness to understand religion and have religious beliefs without outside human influence?


You can't play it that way because under that premise they can understand nothing at all, including healthcare and abortion. Without human influence its not even a business. Its a peice of paper.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: MarlinGrace


one more time Marlin:

Is it of your esteemed opinion that companies/corporations have the self conscious ability and sentient awareness to understand religion and have religious beliefs without outside human influence?


Just out of the blue this morning it occurred to me that the argument could be made.

Corporations have been accused of being evil, even Satanic. There is even a current thread about the Starbucks logo being a pagan goddess. Disney has been accused of being anti-semitic. Corporations have things like "mission statements" and "values" in their charters. Corporations have been accused of being racist and sexist. All of these things we associate with a human mindset. Even the Vatican City and the Catholic Church are incorporated.

And that was before my morning coffee.




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join