General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Rude Pundit: Random Observations on the Hobby Lobby Decision
1. Everything you really need to know about the decision made a five-man majority on the Supreme Court in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is in this paragraph on page 46 of Justice Samuel "Is my wife crying again?" Alito's opinion: "In any event, our decision in these cases is concerned solely with the contraceptive mandate. Our decision should not be understood to hold that an insurance- coverage mandate must necessarily fall if it conflicts with an employers religious beliefs. Other coverage require- ments, such as immunizations, may be supported by different interests (for example, the need to combat the spread of infectious diseases) and may involve different arguments about the least restrictive means of providing them."
In other words, the Supreme Court's majority was too punkass to do anything other than prevent women from having their insurance pay for contraception at roughly 90% of American corporations. However, the implication of its decision is, more or less, "Fuck, yeah, go crazy, you nutzoid religious freaks." (Oh, and they will. Floodgates open, motherfuckers.) The majority refused to say that because attacking women and icky women parts is totally cool. But immunizations? Shit, that means we might get diseases.
It even goes against the logic that the Court used to make its decision. As an example, Alito cites a case where a store with devout Jewish owners who closed on Saturday and wanted to open on Sunday, which, at the time, Pennsylvania law did not allow. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which the justices used to rule for Hobby Lobby and the rest, that store would have been able to open. So if that's cool, why do the justices even attempt to say that their decision can't be extended to other things? It's a fuckin' lie. Just go for it, assholes.
1a. The RFRA was a bullshit piece of legislation passed in a heated panic after the Supreme Court ruled in 1990 that it was fine to fire two Native Americans who "ingested peyote" as part of a religious tribal ritual. Writing for the majority in the case, Antonin Scalia said ruling for the two men "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." Yes, you read that correctly. Yes, it's accurate.
In other words, one can assume now, they weren't Christians. And Antonin Scalia, who voted with the majority for Hobby Lobby, is a repulsive hypocrite. (Read the Smith decision. It's nauseating in contrast to today's.)
2. Probably the most breathtaking aspect of the majority's opinion is how it just doesn't give two shits about women. Alito's decision doesn't take into account, even for a line or two, how a ruling for "religious liberty" is a ruling against women, dismissing that notion outright, in fact. This is all about making sure that butthurt Christians can do what their specific sect believes will please an invisible sky wizard, which includes, for some, making sure that women have those goddamn babies. The majority just ignores that there's real women with real lives who this decision really affects.
It's up to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissent to bring the noise, spending the first part demonstrating that this whole thing is about women and their bodies and their value as more than just baby carriers (Christ, are we really still talking about this? What the fuck is wrong with us?) and that contraception is used for more than stopping baby-making. Ginsburg notes, for instance, "the disproportionate burden women carried for comprehensive health services and the adverse health consequences of excluding contraception from preventive care available to employees without cost sharing." Obviously, though, making sure that rich people don't offend their great googly-moogly in the clouds is more important.
3. This is not just a victory for religious intolerance. It's also a victory for faith and politics over science. "The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients," writes Alito. Well, fuck what your religion tells you about medicine. The contraceptive methods do not cause abortions. In fact, they would lower the rate of abortions if people would stop being such blind believers in the bullshit their religious leaders shoot into their brains with a cross-shaped hypodermic. The earth revolves around the sun, and your fucking pope ain't gonna change that.
Alito says that it would obviously be a "severe burden" because "If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions." And that might be worth arguing if the belief wasn't based on a complete mountain of garbage, most of which has come from conservative political groups whose existence is predicated on tricking the shit-eating yahoos into thinking that "birth control" equals "abortion."
Waxing romantically about the plaintiffs, Alito writes, "Norman and Elizabeth Hahn and their three sons are devout members of the Mennonite Church, a Christian denomination. The Mennonite Church opposes abortion and believes that '(t)he fetus in its earliest stages . . . shares humanity with those who conceived it.'" Except now we're not arguing over whether life begins at conception. We're arguing over what "conception" is. You see, children, you aren't born just because a tiny sperm makes sweet love with a big ol' egg. Oh, no. You need implantation. That is, those lovers gotta have a uterus bed to lay in or nothing's happening. No pregnancy. Again, that shit's science. (And it's how pregnancy is defined under federal law.)
You prevent implantation, like the morning-after pill does, you prevent pregnancy. You prevent pregnancy, and you prevent abortion.
3. Substitute the word "Muslim" for "Christian" and see if it bugs you even a little, dear ignorant Jesus lovers. "The owners...have sincere Muslim beliefs" or "David and Barbara Green and their three children are Muslims who own and operate two family businesses." Or how about: "Hobby Lobbys statement of purpose commits the Greens to '(h)onoring Allah in all (they) do by operating the company in a manner consistent with Quran-based principles'"? Maybe: "The businesses refuse to engage in profitable transactions that facilitate or promote alcohol use; they contribute profits to Muslim organizations; and they buy hundreds of full-page newspaper ads inviting people to say, 'Allahu akbar'"?
You're cool with that? Fuck you, you're lying.
4. The only positive way to read this decision is that the Court has opened the door for a justification for universal health care. The government can pay for this, the majority said, and we don't have problem with it. Says Alito, "The most straightforward way of doing this would be for the Government to assume the cost of providing the four contraceptives at issue to any women who are unable to obtain them under their health-insurance policies due to their employers religious objections."
Of course, don't worry. If that ever came before this court, they'd find a way to shut it down and then call it "justice."
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2014/06/random-observations-on-hobby-lobby.html
BootinUp
(47,207 posts)Orrex
(63,247 posts)K/R
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Some are beginning to come around because it's become somewhat cooler to notice that women get a lot of shit dumped on them, but The Rude Pundit's educated us on misogyny since before it was even noticed by anyone (except feminists) .
Fucking hell, I hope the Naughty Word Police have a pole-up-the-ass induced case of tonsilitis if they read this. (Which is not to confuse the NWP with the Grammar Nazis, who have a worthwhile complaint, and among whom I count myself. )
toddwv
(2,830 posts)vagina, women's rights, secular application of laws, freedom from religious oversite etc.
malaise
(269,239 posts)Fuck those activist RW judges!
rurallib
(62,471 posts)lapfog_1
(29,234 posts)we need to establish a women's health insurance co-op... completely funded by donations...
to provide abortions to any woman that wants one (including travel to a location where it can be provided), and, especially to provide contraception (free) to anyone over the age of 14 (male or female) just by showing up and asking for it.
What would that cost?
lapfog_1
(29,234 posts)18 is too late, imho.
pick another age if you like.
broiles
(1,370 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)11 is common, 10 is maybe a little unusual, but not off the charts.....even 9 happens occasionally.
Couple that with rape by a family member.........
calimary
(81,557 posts)How about headphones as standard equipment for every woman who has to approach these clinics and women's health establishments? How about some sort of way to encapsulate prospective patients and their guards as they attempt to enter?
How about figuring out other options for entrances to these places?
How about finding some Muslim organization that has a "religious objection" to something and then helping that case along til it makes its own way to the Supreme Court? Hey! Religious here!
How about working on it in DIFFERENT ways:
EVERY anti-choice measure that comes up, whether it's in the House of Reps, or your local city council or state house, has, irrevocably attached, a partner provision that would equally govern and regulate the male genitalia? (That "taste of their own medicine" thing.)
EVERY anti-choice measure that comes up in the insurance realm - Viagra and Cialis and whatever-the-hell else Big Pharma or Madison Avenue chooses to name it - is subject to the SAME constraints and regulations as contraception does.
How about let's beef up the reversal of Citizens United and ANY OTHER restriction that is based on corporate "personhood"?
We have to start thinking really creatively and ruthlessly. And then we have to act on it. On this pro-choice issue, we actually have NO choice at all. We HAVE TO ACT. Unless, of course, you're okay with your boss deciding what you can do with your body. Heck, many state governments have already appropriated for themselves that decision-making right. Why not the corporations too? THEY own you now, too, don't they, ladies?
YOU SAID IT
genwah
(574 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)Have the licensed gun-toters be accompanied by women and children (as was done at Bundy Ranch).
Everybody just walk in together.
Bickle
(109 posts)How about security guards whose religious beliefs I clude the need to taser and pepper spray god out of violent, insane, irrational fundies instead?
ChazInAz
(2,575 posts)If they're still around, hire some Kali-worshipping Thugs to serve as bodyguards for all entrants into PP clinics. They took their religious duties pretty seriously.
calimary
(81,557 posts)Let's fight them THERE, too! Looks like sometimes we taxpayers have to pick up the tab. So let's make it COMPLETELY possible again. Hell, they're trying to undo all OUR laws. Let's undo some of THEIRS!
Taste of their own medicine. See how they like it.
Dersam
(2 posts)Such a co-op would have to stoop to christian morals by misleading publicity--e.g. "Pregnancy Crisis Centers" that shame and terrify women, even if they only want a pregnancy test.
.
What would be a good name?
Zygote Insurance
Insurance that doesn't kid you.
.
I'll welcome more suggestions.
myrna minx
(22,772 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)I guess these same idiots picture one of these cute WHITE MALE puttos bouncing back and the other puttos saying, "Hey Carl! I thought you were outta here. What happened?"
calimary
(81,557 posts)It's rapidly getting to the point where I'm starting to feel as though he's the only one who does, anymore.
renate
(13,776 posts)On what legal basis can the Supreme Court pick and choose which medical procedures or products or treatments are to be included in this decision? I'm obviously not a lawyer but this just seems... questionable.
colinmom71
(653 posts)They help cut down communicable disease outbreaks where the disease is spread through casual contact. But where the disease is not easily spread amongst the public at large (for example, the HPV vaccine), it would not be a required immunization but rather one the individual chooses for themselves.
bullwinkle428
(20,631 posts)or any other thing that is clearly inhibited through the implementation of widespread vaccination.
IOW - pure self-interest.
joshcryer
(62,280 posts)That's it.
GeorgeGist
(25,326 posts)and answer to the POPE.
Retrograde
(10,170 posts)although as a female Catholic she may not count as a whole person
catrose
(5,075 posts)These good Muslim employers require all employees to bow to Mecca& pray 5 times/day. Why not?
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)According to the glorious Quran, taking interest is a sin that incurs severe Divine punishment. The punishment for usury as mentioned in the Quran is far more severe than the punishment for other sins.
I would like to see a case wherein a Muslim founder of a corporation gets to receive money interest free from the bank(s) of their choosing. It would make for a rather funny case with this SC as they love banks more than the average Joe.
catrose
(5,075 posts)Retrograde
(10,170 posts)If a company wants to give up business because selling alcohol (or any other product) that's its affair: there's no US law that says they have to sell or otherwise provide it. It's once they start requiring other people to follow their beliefs which go counter to the spirit of the law that problems arise.
I'd boycott Hobby Lobby, but there isn't one within 50 miles.
The Wizard
(12,552 posts)tightwad employers to pay for the contraception.
olegramps
(8,200 posts)Well, elections indeed have consequences. Imagine what will happen if the Puks control the senate because Democrats won't get off their asses and vote. The nation is going to hell in a hand basket and I really can't seem to muster to much sympathy for those who because of their own apathy will let their rights and livelihood be taken away.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)their ass.
Rockyj
(538 posts)People need to QUIT buying Chinese junk from Hobby Lobby! Where they force females who have one child to have abortion if they get pregnant again!
Dersam
(2 posts)How much of the population really gives a damn? Whenever I brought up the subject, few of my acquaintances knew what I was talking about, let alone what how a SCOTUS decision would have any affect on their lives.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)mnhtnbb
(31,410 posts)but as always, 100% correct.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Well done, Rude Pundit!
Fuck those religious freaks. Especially repulsive hypocrite, Scalia.
Mr. Evil
(2,861 posts)hire any women that currently work for Hobby Lobby if they so choose to change employers. My feeling is that Hobby Lobby would lose several hundred if not thousands of employees. I would also like someone to explain to me how an employer can tell a health insurance company what they can or can't provide to their customers. Being a middle aged male, what if I demanded that health insurance companies provide Viagra, Cialis and Levitra free of charge to all male employees because my religious beliefs (I'm atheist, btw) are such that men should be able to sow their seeds at will?
This is such a dangerous can of worms that this corrupt and completely out of touch supreme court has opened. I also totally agree with the Rude Pundit. If these people were Muslims instead of Christian we wouldn't be here discussing this travesty.
renate
(13,776 posts)His point #3 (to be specific, the second #3) should be in neon lights. I'd still be against this decision, of course, but there's no way that this would have been the Supreme Court's decision if this had been a Muslim-owned company, and no way AT ALL that the right wing would be celebrating if it were, and the right wingers are too stupid to even recognize their hypocrisy.
Skittles
(153,254 posts)he gets it
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)wyldwolf
(43,870 posts)Cha
(297,888 posts)emsimon33
(3,128 posts)BlueinOhio
(238 posts)What would now keep a corporation of coming up with it's own religion? They could say they do not believe in this or that. For example They could think people should have no health care at all because God will heal them if he wants them to live.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom