Hobby Lobbyist
By Mitch Berg
Hobby Lobby won its case – to not be forced to provide contraception – 5-4:
The justices’ 5-4 decision Monday is the first time that the high court has ruled that profit-seeking businesses can hold religious views under federal law. And it means the Obama administration must search for a different way of providing free contraception to women who are covered under objecting companies’ health insurance plans.
Look for an escalation of “War on Women” rhetoric in 3…2…1…
June 30th, 2014 at 10:02 am
The remarkable thing about the HL decision and the home healthcare worker decision is that you had four justices — the four liberals — vote against the bedrock American values of freedom of religion and freedom of association.
June 30th, 2014 at 10:29 am
Shocking, I know.
June 30th, 2014 at 10:29 am
If I were Roberts, Alito, Thomas or Scalia I would start advertising for food tasters.
June 30th, 2014 at 10:56 am
Pow, kind of like the gay wedding thing. Every society on Earth has had the same definition for 3,000+ years. Now, over the last 15 years, the “liberals” have succeeded in changing the definition of marriage to include homosexual marriages. Fine.
But if you are an artist, say a photographer, they are using the full power of the government to force you to particapate in homosexual marriage ceremonies. If you don’t, they may take your business away from you. How is that liberal?
If 10 years ago, you gave money to support the traditional 3,000 year old defiinition of marriage, you can get fired from your job today. How is that liberal?
June 30th, 2014 at 11:00 am
Now hopefully the Supremes will also rule that Mr. Obama has no business forcing nuns to pay for contraception…..and Stink, I’m thinking that Geiger counters (think Russians with polonium) might be in order, too.
(not to be a conspiracy theorist, but Roberts’ nonsensical ruling for the Health Insurance Deform Act suggests strongly to me that someone in the White House got to him with a threat)
June 30th, 2014 at 11:17 am
Chuck, the ultimate goal of today’s liberals is to eliminate all mediating institutions between the individual and the State. Freedom of association is their enemy. Freedom of religion is their enemy. They hate the institution of marriage not because it discriminates against certain people, but because it preceded the state and existed outside of the state. The state recognized marriage, it did not create marriage.
That’s how it was until last year, anyway.
Liberals want the most important relationship in your life to be the one between you and the State. Remember the “Julia” commercial? http://www.barackobama.com/news/meet-julia/
The state does not love you. To the state your existence is not a miracle to be celebrated, your existence is a problem that must be managed from the moment you are conceived until the time your remains are safely disposed of.
June 30th, 2014 at 11:26 am
Bubba: At the Frank Marshall Wing of the NSA they discovered some old photos of a college spring break Roberts attended in Cancun. That could be it!
June 30th, 2014 at 12:24 pm
That’s it – Roberts was wearing white shoes before Memorial Day.
June 30th, 2014 at 12:51 pm
There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth here. Kinda fun.
June 30th, 2014 at 1:09 pm
John Yoo on the Hobby Lobby and NLRB decisions:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381570/what-hobby-lobby-shows-about-obamas-fundamental-abuse-executive-power-john-yoo
This seems right. Obama is acting the part of a despot not to further national goals, but to force his supporters ideology on the American people. It’s one thing to use the IRS improperly to go after, say, al Qaida terrorists, it’s quite another to use the IRS improperly to attack domestic political opponents. It’s the Chicago way.
June 30th, 2014 at 1:18 pm
A Liberal told me the majority ruled for Hobby Lobby because forcing the company to pay for rubbers wasn’t the ONLY way the government could achieve its objective; the government could pay for rubbers itself. He viewed this was the Supreme Court’s green light for single payer so this decision is a victory for him.
June 30th, 2014 at 1:33 pm
PM I don’t think I need to tell you that you are on an NSA watch list already.
June 30th, 2014 at 1:45 pm
“He is relying on extreme interpretations of his powers to play small-ball politics and win for ideological supporters.”
I suggest that like a street thug (or three-year-old), He’s pushing the boundaries inch by inch to see how far He can get before making the big move. A street criminal doesn’t announce his/her evil intent from a block away. They might bump into the victim, try to intimidate him, demand a cigarette, change, etc. This softens-up the victim in a non-criminal fashion and shows just how far the victim will go to avoid a confrontation. I think this behavior is also common among predators in the animal world, too.
I’m sure He’ll swing for the stands soon enough. Particularly once He drains His current position of all that He thinks He can wring out of it. If forced, I’d put my money on the Second Amendment/ NRA as His first victim. They had the audacity to stand up to Him and defeat Him on the issue (so far). In His MPLS. speech, even His “logical” explanation for such power abuses made little to no sense “They (congress, etc.) won’t go along with Me.” He probably did this because He feels no obligation to explain His absolute power to those who He’s about to, once again, unleash it it upon …
June 30th, 2014 at 2:16 pm
Joe Doakes wrote:
“He viewed this was the Supreme Court’s green light for single payer so this decision is a victory for him.”
Your friend is delusional. The barrier to single payer is legislative, not the SC.
I know that many liberals believe that the American people want single payer. Maybe they even say so in polls. What they won’t do is permit their legislators to vote for it.