US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27

Thread: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

  1. #16
    whatever Mako's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Republic City
    Posts
    20,269
    Blog Entries
    693
    Add Mako on Facebook
    Follow Mako on Tumblr

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenicks View Post
    (I have never understood why cheap birth control is an employer's responsibility. If someone physically can't practice abstinence, I imagine they have far more dangerous problems that birth control won't solve.)
    The pill has many health benefits besides contraception. It isn't a matter of "not being able to practice abstinence."

  2. #17
    Where the Shadows lie Phoenicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    4,539
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Quote Originally Posted by Jabberwocky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenicks View Post
    (I have never understood why cheap birth control is an employer's responsibility. If someone physically can't practice abstinence, I imagine they have far more dangerous problems that birth control won't solve.)
    The pill has many health benefits besides contraception. It isn't a matter of "not being able to practice abstinence."
    "finding that women who regularly use contraception tend to have more years of education under their belt and greater economic stability—and they also form romantic partnerships that are more solid when compared to women who aren't contraception-covered. "

    (From your third source, which implies that women who take the pill don't represent the general population. Possible sampling bias?)

    Mind, this doesn't help me understand one iota. There are many health products with many health benefits that aren't considered an employer's responsibility. The pill is only a subset of the kinds of contraception employers are required to cover. I observe that there are many women living healthy lives without it. Probiotics have wonderful health benefits, but they aren't covered on my insurance.

    (And my comment on abstinence is only that, if birth control is the only way a woman can avoid pregnancies, this implies something unfortunate about her, i.e., that she's having non-consensual sex. I assume that, if this is the case, that hypothetical is outside this topic's scope.)

  3. #18
    Of your Imagination Evil Figment's Avatar Vice-Webmaster
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Lurking in dark corners
    Posts
    13,852
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Lots of atrocious laws were highly popular in congress when passed, Nick.DOMA cleared the house at 342-67 and senate at 85-14 not long after. dADT was adopted as a directive to counter a house vote to make the gays ban in the military federal law


    Popularity in congress is no sign of reason.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mintaka and Hurristat
    He's an evil director / He'll give out infractions / Do something wrong / And he takes direct actions
    Then what'll he do?/ He'll permaban you / You find your name slashed / With a message, 'Adieu'
    Sooooo...watch out!
    "It is said that the federal government, if it was in charge of the Sahara, would run out of sand in five years. Private enterprise, being more efficient, would do it in half the time - and they'd make money off the bridges." - me.
    "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world." - Jack Layton's last letter. Rest in peace, Jack.

  4. #19

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Figment View Post
    Lots of atrocious laws were highly popular in congress when passed, Nick.DOMA cleared the house at 342-67 and senate at 85-14 not long after. dADT was adopted as a directive to counter a house vote to make the gays ban in the military federal law


    Popularity in congress is no sign of reason.
    The problem is that the RFRA isn't exactly a horrible law, it sets out to add protection to the First Amendment so that the Government cannot forceably violate a person's religion. If you are mad at anything it should be the 1871 Dictionary Act which states "The words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals."

  5. #20
    Where the Shadows lie Phoenicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    4,539
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Figment View Post
    Popularity in congress is no sign of reason.
    And I agree. And the Sherbert test strikes me as very reasonable and uncontroversial (no matter that Congress doesn't have the authority to legislate the Supreme Court's rulings). 21 years ago, that's how it struck a large number of legislators.

    Now I see legislators moving to strike the RFRA, i.e., exorcise the Sherbert Test, apropos only of this ruling. I'm all for hearing why the Sherbert Test is onerous or a bad rule. But from the party politicians, I hear that the RFRA is bad because it means the government can't force religious groups to pay for abortifacients. (Or however a party politician might phrase the same.)
    "The inward skies of man will accompany him across any void upon which he ventures and will be with him to the end of time." -- Loren Eiseley

  6. #21
    Of your Imagination Evil Figment's Avatar Vice-Webmaster
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Lurking in dark corners
    Posts
    13,852
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Fair enough, and I agree that as phrased the law isn't exactly some kind of abomination (if anything, it's a general principle that should be expanded to all forms of discrimination and rights violation, and that should be treated as implying the opposite, eg legitimizing affirmative action*). Just popularity in congress is a useless measuring stick

    Also, I do have an issue with applying that notion only to religion, and consider THAT part of it a bad law.

    (And if we're specific my problem isn't with the notion of corporations as persons - that is a legal necessity - but with the notion that corporate persons can have sincerely held beliefs)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mintaka and Hurristat
    He's an evil director / He'll give out infractions / Do something wrong / And he takes direct actions
    Then what'll he do?/ He'll permaban you / You find your name slashed / With a message, 'Adieu'
    Sooooo...watch out!
    "It is said that the federal government, if it was in charge of the Sahara, would run out of sand in five years. Private enterprise, being more efficient, would do it in half the time - and they'd make money off the bridges." - me.
    "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world." - Jack Layton's last letter. Rest in peace, Jack.

  7. #22
    I'm World Class Yang Xiao Long's Avatar Forum HeadModerator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    35,039
    Blog Entries
    580

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    I would just like to point out that every time I see this thread (due to the cut off of the title) I keep thinking that they rejected his birth certificate (#birthers #Kenyan #Benghazi) and every time I'm like WHATTTTTTTTTTTTTTT before realizing what the thread topic actually is.

    And now back onto the topic. I agree with Figgy about the fact that corporations shouldn't be able to have 'sincerely held' beliefs. Corporate entities only have one sincerely held belief, that being the idea that more profit is good and less profit is bad (Greed is good, the old Gordon Gekko ideal).
    Quote Originally Posted by Ariel
    Everyone has had a crush on Hips. :B

  8. #23

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Quote Originally Posted by Mako View Post
    And now back onto the topic. I agree with Figgy about the fact that corporations shouldn't be able to have 'sincerely held' beliefs. Corporate entities only have one sincerely held belief, that being the idea that more profit is good and less profit is bad (Greed is good, the old Gordon Gekko ideal).
    So you would say that Chick Fil A as a company does not have sincerely held beliefs other than greed. Despite the fact that they close every Sunday to allow their employees to go to church and not break the sabbath even though they are giving up a very popular weekend slot that would turn over a lot of profit each week?

  9. #24
    Of your Imagination Evil Figment's Avatar Vice-Webmaster
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Lurking in dark corners
    Posts
    13,852
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    How would a business sincerely believe anything?

    It's obvious that the beliefs of the owners/administrators will affect the company, and not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether the beliefs of these owners should be considered the beliefs of the company/corporation.

    And to that, my answer is a flat-out, unequivocal no. You cannot, on the one hand, demand to be treated as a completely separate entity from the company in fiscal terms, but then turn around and say that where religious beliefs are concerned your beliefs are the company's beliefs. Either you have one or the other. Trying to have it one way when it benefits you and the other when it doesn't is not okay.

    In short, your beliefs can and will color your company's policies, and that,s fine. But they're no the beliefs of the company, and should only color your company's policies within the limits of the law, not enable you to claim violation of the non-existent religious rights of the company.
    Last edited by Evil Figment; 25th July 2014 at 08:33 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mintaka and Hurristat
    He's an evil director / He'll give out infractions / Do something wrong / And he takes direct actions
    Then what'll he do?/ He'll permaban you / You find your name slashed / With a message, 'Adieu'
    Sooooo...watch out!
    "It is said that the federal government, if it was in charge of the Sahara, would run out of sand in five years. Private enterprise, being more efficient, would do it in half the time - and they'd make money off the bridges." - me.
    "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world." - Jack Layton's last letter. Rest in peace, Jack.

  10. #25
    I'm World Class Yang Xiao Long's Avatar Forum HeadModerator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    35,039
    Blog Entries
    580

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Figment answered that better than I would have (don't tell him I admitted that however, I'll never hear the end of it!) and I guess I'll try to clarify a bit. As he said the administrators / founders / whatever have beliefs (and that's fine, you know first amendment, second amendment all that jazz). In the case of Chick-fil-A, if I recall correctly the founders of the company were passionate about their faith (thus the closing on the Sabbath / the stands against gay marriage we've seen from the company).

    The difference between Chick-fil-A and Hobby Lobby is that one of them tried to claim that their religious rights (as a COMPANY, not as John Smith, CEO of XYZ Corp) were being violated. If Chick-fil-A (again, the COMPANY, not the people who run the company) claimed their rights were being violated in a court of law, the conversation would be very different.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ariel
    Everyone has had a crush on Hips. :B

  11. #26
    Where the Shadows lie Phoenicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    4,539
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Figment View Post
    (if anything, it's a general principle that should be expanded to all forms of discrimination and rights violation, and that should be treated as implying the opposite, eg legitimizing affirmative action*).
    I would live in this society and enjoy it. But I will laugh at you, Figment, for saying that it's a

    Quote Originally Posted by Mako View Post
    And now back onto the topic. I agree with Figgy about the fact that corporations shouldn't be able to have 'sincerely held' beliefs. Corporate entities only have one sincerely held belief, that being the idea that more profit is good and less profit is bad (Greed is good, the old Gordon Gekko ideal).
    Shouldn't, or can't?

    If Churches, Governments, Schools, Tribes, and Parties can have group beliefs, I don't understand the border that separates Businesses off into a different realm. Are businesses uniquely self-interested?

    Now, whether society should or not -- well, I'm not upset that the government can't force businesses to pay for abortifacients.
    "The inward skies of man will accompany him across any void upon which he ventures and will be with him to the end of time." -- Loren Eiseley

  12. #27
    Of your Imagination Evil Figment's Avatar Vice-Webmaster
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Lurking in dark corners
    Posts
    13,852
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Re: US Supreme Court Rejects Obamas Birth Control Mandate

    Churches exist to promote certain specific beliefs, so I,d argue that we can recognize that churches have religious beliefs because it's their specific nature to have them - the whole reason why we have them.

    Most of these other groups, to my mind, should not be admitted as having sincere religious beliefs. Political parties have sincere political beliefs (but that's not a religion), as they exist to advocate certain beliefs.

    Native American groups are something of a gray zone, largely on the ground that they occupy a unique legal/constitutional/diplomatic place that cannot be compared with any of the others.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mintaka and Hurristat
    He's an evil director / He'll give out infractions / Do something wrong / And he takes direct actions
    Then what'll he do?/ He'll permaban you / You find your name slashed / With a message, 'Adieu'
    Sooooo...watch out!
    "It is said that the federal government, if it was in charge of the Sahara, would run out of sand in five years. Private enterprise, being more efficient, would do it in half the time - and they'd make money off the bridges." - me.
    "My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world." - Jack Layton's last letter. Rest in peace, Jack.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •