It's Supreme Court day! Hobby Lobby VS Obamacare.

[Kujako]

So the Court is in session today, hearing a number of items but of course the big one on everyones mind is the Hobby Lobby VS Obamacare case where they claim that corporations have freedom of religion based on the previous Citizens United ruling and thus can deny females in their employment full health care coverage.

My thoughts on this are fairly simple. If the Court rules in Hobby Lobbies favor, expect all corporations to declare themselves Christian Scientists and drop health insurance all together. Secondly, if corporations are people, owning stock should be illegal under the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution.

Bottom line, believe and worship what you want. But your beliefs do not get to be enforced on your employees (IMHO).

Now, let the yelling... I mean debate, commence!

[Masark]

Hobby Lobby - Desperately struggling to bring back Cuius regio, eius religio.

[Blueobelisk]

Obamacare will win.

There should be a poll.

[Hyve]

Sorry, are we in 2014 or 1714?

[Kujako]

Obamacare will win.

There should be a poll.

I'd add a poll, but I fear it would come off as too sarcastic. I got as far as "Hobby Lobby will win, cause keep your guberment hands off my medicare" as an option before I stopped.

On more serious note, it will be interesting to see what Antonin Scalia based on his past rulings on religion vs law. Granted, that was for native american religions, not "real" faiths. So I expect him to be hypocritical and side with Hobby Lobby here.

[Gheld]

Wait...what?

There's actually people trying to argue that religious freedom is grounds to deny women access to health care ?

Free speech: you get what you pay for.

[Jaxi]

I'd add a poll, but I fear it would come off as too sarcastic. I got as far as "Hobby Lobby will win, cause keep your guberment hands off my medicare" as an option before I stopped.

Then you could try not being sarcastic, and put a straight-forward poll up.

[Kujako]

Wait...what?

There's actually people trying to argue that religious freedom is grounds to deny women access to health care ?

Free speech: you get what you pay for.

To be fair, it's contraception coverage specifically and only things like Plan-B. However it is only targeting female contraception, which is required to be covered because it is related to non-sexual health issues as well.

[Gheld]

Actually this is kind of exciting.

Theoretically all of the language is in place for the SCOTUS to rule that universal access to health care is a human right.

[Stir]

Wait...what?

There's actually people trying to argue that religious freedom is grounds to deny women access to health care ?

Free speech: you get what you pay for.

"I'm not free unless I can dictate how others must live."
"The only way to escape being dominated is to dominate."
"The only way to shake off my shackles is to put them on someone else's wrists."

It's MY freedom that matters. Everyone just has to shut up.

[Hyve]

Theoretically all of the language is in place for the SCOTUS to rule that universal access to health care is a human right.

Sadly, I doubt that would happen, but I think (Excuse my American Political History knowledge if this is in-correct) this is the first time it's really been on the table as a possibility.

[Naxere]

Should religious institutions be required to provide contraceptives?

[Kujako]

Should religious institutions be required to provide contraceptives?

In my opinion? Yes, so long as it is part of the law. I can not claim that my religion requires me to jaywalk and get out of a ticket. The law needs to apply to everyone. As soon as we start making exceptions, everyone will want one.

[Masark]

Should religious institutions be required to provide contraceptives?

It's a craft good store, not a church.

[Tastyfish]

I really wish we would take sexual/reproductive health for both men and women and just cover it all, From ED pills and Birth control to PrEP, and just call it a day.

[Eviscero]

Should religious institutions be required to provide contraceptives?

Yes, because believing that the only reason people should have sex is for procreation is archaic, closed-minded, dangerous, anti-science, anti-society, fear-based nonsense.

[Reeve]

Yes, because believing that the only reason people should have sex is for procreation is archaic, closed-minded, dangerous, anti-science, anti-society, fear-based nonsense.

While not necessarily false, calling the deeply held beliefs of like two thirds of the country "archaic, closed-minded, dangerous, anti-science, anti-society, fear-based nonsense" is not exactly helpful to the debate.

[DEATHETERNAL]

Hopefully the Supreme Court can use the religious freedom excuse (which actually is bogus) to preserve an iota of economic liberty. Sadly, given their track record up to date of shredding economic liberty, I am not hopeful.

[Naxere]

It's a craft good store, not a church.

Really? I thought it was the Church of Hobby Lobby. My point was, I think it should be all or nothing. Either you force churches and businesses to provide contraception against their religious beliefs, or you allow any business/church to opt out of providing contraception coverage.

[Nobleshield]

I'm against Obamacare period, but arguing against it on the grounds of "against my religion" is pretty silly as a reason.