Hobby Lobby or How I Chose God Over Country

[Hoss]

Could be ironic if they did comment.... bet you didn't know there was an agenda to make the US into a theocracy, did ya?

And undo what the Founders wanted.  I've been watching with great sadness how many of the Republicans complain about the lack of religious freedom...that is, until it doesn't affect them (and affects the non-Christians).  Some saying things like that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Muslims.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

I'm waiting for Guido and the GOP to complain about activist judges granting for profit corporations religious beliefs, something that has never been done in the history of the world.  Think about it - a business entity formed for the purpose of making money while shielding owners from liability has religious beliefs and it can enforce those beliefs on others.

Hobby Lobby, Inc., has religious views that it can enforce against its employees and use to defeat federal law.  This is terrifying.  When the sovereign wealth fund of Dubai purchases another major american corporation, can it enforce Sharia law on employees, refuse to hire Jews, or not render taxes to the Great Satan on religious grounds?  Do corporations now have a fiduciary duty to shareholders to adopt the most profitable religion?  Can a for-profit corporation owned by a Muslim refuse to hire non-muslims?  Can religions that believe being black is the mark of Cain refuse to hire black people?

A new law was made today.  It will take a decade to really know what it means.  Must read opinion.

From what I understand from the news I have been seeing and reading, that they are doing this for "Closely held/Family run" corporations, which I take as privately held and not traded on the stock exchange. This is a lot of corporations, and at first I kind of chuckled about what CF posted, but it does open that door to allow discrimination for other religious beliefs.

[Conan71]

The corporate veil is designed to insulate the owners from liability arising from acts of the corporation, correct?

Doesn't the corporate veil also exist to insulate the corporation from the personal acts or beliefs of the owners?

[heironymouspasparagus]

And undo what the Founders wanted.  I've been watching with great sadness how many of the Republicans complain about the lack of religious freedom...that is, until it doesn't affect them (and affects the non-Christians).  Some saying things like that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Muslims.

Chastise moment;  Sense and knowledge of history....  This country was NOT founded on any ideal or desire for religious freedom!  It was founded in the largest part, by religious minorities in England who were being persecuted.  So, they came HERE so they could set up their own theocracies and persecute anyone in their area who did not adhere to their beliefs.  (Witches burning... Salem...Puritans....Quakers....etc)

That all started early 1600's by corporate ventures endorsed by James, such as the Charter of the Virginia Company of London and the Plymouth company.  The people who came worked out a different plan and after just a few years, it became an effort to use the company to advance their theocracy.  For a couple hundred years.  Today, we see like minded religious zealots of may widely different faiths attempting to take us back to the "good old days" of theocracy.  The big problem I can see with that is, what if Theocracy A wins out over B, C, or D.  Then we will have a repeat of Shiite versus Sunni like we are seeing in the middle-east these days.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The corporate veil is designed to insulate the owners from liability arising from acts of the corporation, correct?

Doesn't the corporate veil also exist to insulate the corporation from the personal acts or beliefs of the owners?

Supreme Court has answered that question in HUGE, massively intrusive reactionary ways in the last couple years.  Citizen's United and today's ruling both say no to your second question.  Corporations are now people, as defined in the US Constitution and have all the rights therein.  Does this not send a chill down your spine?? 

In fact, part of today's ruling - the part that counts - specifically says that this covers corporations whose owners are so closely tied to the corporation by their beliefs.  Apparently not companies that have more diverse ownership.  Makes sense, doesn't it??   In a Bizarro-Murdochian Fantasy World....

[guido911]

I'm waiting for Guido and the GOP to complain about activist judges granting for profit corporations religious beliefs, something that has never been done in the history of the world.  Think about it - a business entity formed for the purpose of making money while shielding owners from liability has religious beliefs and it can enforce those beliefs on others.

Hobby Lobby, Inc., has religious views that it can enforce against its employees and use to defeat federal law.  This is terrifying.  When the sovereign wealth fund of Dubai purchases another major american corporation, can it enforce Sharia law on employees, refuse to hire Jews, or not render taxes to the Great Satan on religious grounds?  Do corporations now have a fiduciary duty to shareholders to adopt the most profitable religion?  Can a for-profit corporation owned by a Muslim refuse to hire non-muslims?  Can religions that believe being black is the mark of Cain refuse to hire black people?

A new law was made today.  It will take a decade to really know what it means.  Must read opinion.

Think about this CF.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=20403.0

I guess the loving of an independent judiciary is a good idea as long as its "independence" is in line with your thinking/liking.

[guido911]

I would hope that everyone would calm down about this, but given that pro-abortion is such a popular position for the left, I am reduced to just piling on.

As for me, I am heading out to celebrate "Christians are special peoples" Day.

[Hoss]

Chastise moment;  Sense and knowledge of history....  This country was NOT founded on any ideal or desire for religious freedom!  It was founded in the largest part, by religious minorities in England who were being persecuted.  So, they came HERE so they could set up their own theocracies and persecute anyone in their area who did not adhere to their beliefs.  (Witches burning... Salem...Puritans....Quakers....etc)

That all started early 1600's by corporate ventures endorsed by James, such as the Charter of the Virginia Company of London and the Plymouth company.  The people who came worked out a different plan and after just a few years, it became an effort to use the company to advance their theocracy.  For a couple hundred years.  Today, we see like minded religious zealots of may widely different faiths attempting to take us back to the "good old days" of theocracy.  The big problem I can see with that is, what if Theocracy A wins out over B, C, or D.  Then we will have a repeat of Shiite versus Sunni like we are seeing in the middle-east these days.

So how is that not wanting religious freedom?  If you're saying they came here to escape the religious persecution wouldn't that be seeking freedom from that persecution, and by proxy seeking religious freedom?

I guess my teacher didn't summarize it very well?

[heironymouspasparagus]

So how is that not wanting religious freedom?  If you're saying they came here to escape the religious persecution wouldn't that be seeking freedom from that persecution, and by proxy seeking religious freedom?

I guess my teacher didn't summarize it very well?

They wanted the freedom to impose their religion on their neighbors....I guess that IS religious freedom, too.

[Townsend]

It's a strong volley back in the "War on Christ".

Not sure there's anything to do about it.  Don't buy your craft materials from Hobby Lobby I guess.

[Cats Cats Cats]

So if Religious beliefs are above the law where does it stop?

[Townsend]

So if Religious beliefs are above the law where does it stop?

Where do you see it progressing?

[heironymouspasparagus]

So if Religious beliefs are above the law where does it stop?

They aren't as a general principal - only specific beliefs for members of the club that can afford their own reactionary judiciary.  As example; Mormons cannot legally be polygamists again.  Native Americans cannot legally use their traditional religious symbols in their sacraments.

[guido911]

So if Religious beliefs are above the law where does it stop?

Try starting with:  "The law should not interfere with religious beliefs".  That way, you will feel better. And be in line with the constitution rather than spitting out some bullsm!le meme.

[cannon_fodder]

You gave me nothing to think about Guido.  

I was attempting to point out the hypocrisy of complaining about an "activist" judiciary when you don't like what they do, but saying nothing when there is truly activist rulings. Activist define as changing things that have always been - and analyzing the logic underpinning that decision.  So you linked me to a thread whereby I state the same thing?  Kudos!

Here's the deal:  Hobby Lobby has never gone to church.  It has never been baptized.  It doesn't fight with temptation.  It not only has no belief in God, it has no beliefs at all.  Its entire purpose for existing is to make money while shielding its owners from liability.  It is legally a separate and distinct entity from its owners - THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT OF A CORPORATION.  I utterly do not understand the logic behind the ruling and I have not heard anything that sounds logical about it.

Don't celebrate too much Guido.  This ruling does NOT say that liberal Christian views rule (Catholics are relatively liberal Christians), it says corporations can have religious beliefs.  Muslims, Fundamentalists, whomever get the same rights to force their religious beliefs through their corporations.


Conan:

Corporations are now for-profit enterprises that can not die, can not be imprisoned, can spend infinite to influence politics and can adopt "religious beliefs" such that they can ignore whatever Federal laws they want.   I hereby declare myself a pacifist and wish to NOT pay the portion of income taxes that goes to the military, spying, or the police state? Cool?

Hey GM... I hear you admit to negligently killing at least 13 people and hiding it for ten years - I assume you will be going to jail for the rest of your life?  Come on... Corporations are people too!  

Again, I need to review the the opinion itself to see what the logic is and what the actual impact will be.  I will withhold further comment until I have read the opinion.