Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
188. You mean the court just codified into law that it's okay for an organization
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 12:20 PM
Jul 2014

to treat people differently based on their race or gender?

If you aren't hysterical, you aren't paying attention! quinnox Jul 2014 #1
"Hysterical"? Really? Quantess Jul 2014 #11
that is standard from that corner. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #20
Yep. SSDD redqueen Jul 2014 #42
The defenders of Rome have come out in full force theHandpuppet Jul 2014 #43
I am really curious about the "Defenders of Rome" descriptor. Laelth Jul 2014 #149
I see cwydro Jul 2014 #107
Things often become "standard" for very good reason. merrily Jul 2014 #135
This kind of shit is STILL way too common. nt redqueen Jul 2014 #184
Exactly. merrily Jul 2014 #185
Check this out REP Jul 2014 #199
Word police? It's a perfectly fine word. quinnox Jul 2014 #21
You're accusing ME of being one of the "word police"? That is laughter inducing. Quantess Jul 2014 #32
meh quinnox Jul 2014 #34
Well, it WAS passive-agressive! Quantess Jul 2014 #47
Because sometimes a little word like "meh" sums up my opinion of a post quite succinctly quinnox Jul 2014 #52
Fine. If you you don't care that you appear wimpy and passive aggressive, then neither do I. Quantess Jul 2014 #56
That was funny. seaglass Jul 2014 #70
I can't tell anymore... Zenlitened Jul 2014 #78
And you are perfectly aware of its origin and the offense it causes intaglio Jul 2014 #136
Except when it isn't. Please see Reply 135. merrily Jul 2014 #138
FYI Tetris_Iguana Jul 2014 #24
Thanks to the four jurors who believed in freedom of expression! quinnox Jul 2014 #27
No kidding yeoman6987 Jul 2014 #30
Yep, if there is one thing that sucks, it is word police quinnox Jul 2014 #41
You come across as irrational. Hysterical even. A little bit shrill, too. LanternWaste Jul 2014 #73
Lantern Waste, you so and so. merrily Jul 2014 #139
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #33
It wasn't me who alerted, just so you know. Quantess Jul 2014 #36
You know something, quinnox....I want you to know something about me. msanthrope Jul 2014 #82
I will meet you halfway, since you asked politely, and edit my post quinnox Jul 2014 #99
Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #137
Little fool? Really? Given the post and the edit, I might delete "little" and replace it merrily Jul 2014 #140
"Overweening" is the type of word that might be involved in a Seinfield episode. Quantess Jul 2014 #192
Well done. merrily Jul 2014 #195
It was only "well done" if we can agree Quantess Jul 2014 #197
I can agree that you were talking about Quinnox. merrily Jul 2014 #198
Your deliberate use of the word "hysterical" is obvious, MineralMan Jul 2014 #168
BB says it best here: Bobbie Jo Jul 2014 #191
Our country was founded precisely to prevent this religious-goverment bullshit. tridim Jul 2014 #2
Me, too. Louisiana1976 Jul 2014 #104
But not founded for the benefit of women. merrily Jul 2014 #141
bad for workers, bad for women, bad for a secular society Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #3
.. redqueen Jul 2014 #5
I think it's all those things Enrique Jul 2014 #19
Everything's really only about Obama? merrily Jul 2014 #143
The Harris ruling was all of those things as-well... Chan790 Jul 2014 #29
i agree Enrique Jul 2014 #38
Oh, I think that was intentional on the part of the conservative bloc of SCOTUS. Chan790 Jul 2014 #50
So, how many OPs did you start about Harris? merrily Jul 2014 #146
Thank you for your posts in this thread. redqueen Jul 2014 #186
You're most welcome, but I deserve no thanks for merrily Jul 2014 #187
Right to work is not clearly partisan, but birth control is? WOW. merrily Jul 2014 #173
And what do you think that proves? merrily Jul 2014 #144
+1 Starry Messenger Jul 2014 #71
But notice ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #84
Yep--and, in the long run, bad for religion, too, as merrily Jul 2014 #142
What I think you don't get is the court handed upaloopa Jul 2014 #4
That's right. Louisiana1976 Jul 2014 #105
I welcome my new theocratic overlords,... er...bosses. MohRokTah Jul 2014 #6
Nuttin new about old religious men, some celibate (supposedly) merrily Jul 2014 #158
with one stroke, gone, is the separation of church and state. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #7
He's not JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #14
I was afraid of that. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #17
not true Enrique Jul 2014 #22
now, you are conflating non-profit with churches. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #26
i suspect that's the reason many are going along with the outrage Enrique Jul 2014 #31
Well, speaking for myself, I'm going along with the outrage because I'm outraged. kickitup Jul 2014 #62
Then, you clearly must fine-tune your ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #89
"Going along with the outrage." You're kidding, right? Here's why you suspect the reaction Squinch Jul 2014 #72
Thank YOU! smirkymonkey Jul 2014 #108
This right here JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #153
Wrong on that, too. You're 0 for about 20 so far. Keep going. merrily Jul 2014 #177
^this is so true^ JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #39
Obama's Compromise RobinA Jul 2014 #69
It has power, but is not binding legal precedent. merrily Jul 2014 #180
We've never had separation of church and state and the merrily Jul 2014 #174
Very good question. nt BootinUp Jul 2014 #176
um, not really snooper2 Jul 2014 #25
seems I am listening to one now. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #28
You are using your smart phone in pews again! snooper2 Jul 2014 #35
and you are showing your true colors. but, no one is laughing. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #46
my colors run deep! I didn't know I was trying to hide something snooper2 Jul 2014 #51
did you just play the race card with me? Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #59
LOL I have no clue what tone you are... snooper2 Jul 2014 #61
Why would you post a non-sequitor like that unless you meant it in a passive-agressive way? Quantess Jul 2014 #64
I'm starting to get lost here LOL, I responded directly to a post saying "showing your true colors" snooper2 Jul 2014 #66
Go ahead and take an extra job at Hobby Lobby, then, Quantess Jul 2014 #8
I can't even formulate a reply to you Skidmore Jul 2014 #9
Yeah, I feel the same way frazzled Jul 2014 #16
Interestingly, it is males who are doing the "there, there, calm down" bit. Arugula Latte Jul 2014 #44
Duly noted and deeply resented. Skidmore Jul 2014 #49
I'm with you. This is disgusting. Squinch Jul 2014 #76
But you are missing the point ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #92
Yeah, I coulda figured the OP would find a way to "Thanks Obama".. lol Cha Jul 2014 #112
That's transparently clear ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #114
It's the DU Pretzel faction. Cha Jul 2014 #115
Of course it is, and just because they post here doesnt mean they are at ALL liberal randys1 Jul 2014 #79
wrong ibegurpard Jul 2014 #125
Cool. (Has she ever been wrong? If so, I missed it.) merrily Jul 2014 #183
I guess I should have phrased that differently. Arugula Latte Jul 2014 #200
purportedly being the operative word there VanillaRhapsody Jul 2014 #55
+1000 smirkymonkey Jul 2014 #110
Okay ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #90
boston bean formulated the only appropriate reply... cyberswede Jul 2014 #172
So, it doesn't matter to you that the women in your life Ilsa Jul 2014 #10
this has nothing to do with Burkas Enrique Jul 2014 #23
No, it's worse than burkas. Wearing or not Ilsa Jul 2014 #45
Some of these men here remind me of the five criminals on the SC when asking randys1 Jul 2014 #81
Like Rushbag thinking birth control pills were like condoms Ilsa Jul 2014 #85
Look, for at least five of ten years I lived under Skidmore Jul 2014 #102
Same mentality as requires Burkas resents women's merrily Jul 2014 #179
Fertile men who enjoy sex with women are also affected. merrily Jul 2014 #181
Absolutely... Ilsa Jul 2014 #193
The court legalized discrimination mcar Jul 2014 #12
codified sexism is what I call it too VanillaRhapsody Jul 2014 #57
You mean the court just codified into law that it's okay for an organization hughee99 Jul 2014 #188
Where we once had religious non-profits & for-profit corporations Zambero Jul 2014 #13
fuck me sharp_stick Jul 2014 #15
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #18
Good point Vattel Jul 2014 #37
This is only the beginning theHandpuppet Jul 2014 #40
So they are trying to destroy ACA and separation with one swoop randys1 Jul 2014 #86
Thanks for the link to becketfund JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #156
As a female and a non-christian I find this ruling frightening Marrah_G Jul 2014 #48
I don't think I even knew about ohheckyeah Jul 2014 #53
We no longer have a Constitution! get the red out Jul 2014 #54
My hair isn't on fire, ohheckyeah Jul 2014 #58
I think this is a very good OP cali Jul 2014 #60
That I think is what's bothering me about the entirety of yesterday. Chan790 Jul 2014 #63
I wish you'd post that as a an op. really well said. cali Jul 2014 #65
I, for one, ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #94
Two things. Chan790 Jul 2014 #106
I respectfully do not agree angrychair Jul 2014 #120
We will have to disagree then. Chan790 Jul 2014 #124
It that because you value economic security over bodily integrity? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #93
no. because I think the ramifications- including for women- are even greater. cali Jul 2014 #111
So your answer is ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #113
Not happy with the Harris decision, but kcr Jul 2014 #96
I am still upset about the Shelby County decision that gutted the Voting Rights Act Gothmog Jul 2014 #201
Do you really have no idea what the potential implications of this ruling are? etherealtruth Jul 2014 #67
Maybe there is a bit of male-pattern baldness on this issue? Generic Other Jul 2014 #68
So in effect, we have a male telling women affected by the decision to calm down. LanternWaste Jul 2014 #74
i'm actually envisioning men as the people i'm addressing Enrique Jul 2014 #75
So you wrote this OP just for the guys? You just keep digging deeper here, don't you? Squinch Jul 2014 #77
*groan* smirkymonkey Jul 2014 #109
With "allies" like this, who needs enemies? Squinch Jul 2014 #148
Yup. I love when they are all like, "Well, I *was* on your side, but if you're going to be a bitch PeaceNikki Jul 2014 #151
Oh, yes! Their feminist convictions are so deeply held that if someone is mean to them on a message Squinch Jul 2014 #152
In your opinion? Rider3 Jul 2014 #80
why didn't that happen when Obama made his compromise? Enrique Jul 2014 #83
Obama making a compromise and 5 men on the highest court going out of their randys1 Jul 2014 #88
And more (and for accuracy's sake) ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2014 #95
Why are you asking all these questions?? KarenS Jul 2014 #98
This message was self-deleted by its author Adam051188 Jul 2014 #87
Exactly, as I have said, these 5 justice, 4 for certain, are bought and paid for randys1 Jul 2014 #91
That's cool -- you might feel differently when your employer can get between you and your doctor. Brickbat Jul 2014 #97
I'm assuming you're not a woman lunatica Jul 2014 #100
it would have been progress Enrique Jul 2014 #101
The Canadian health care system does not cover drugs period laundry_queen Jul 2014 #132
Why does it bother you so much if other people get outraged over Rex Jul 2014 #103
because the issue isn't bullshit Enrique Jul 2014 #118
coincidentally...Right Winger Jennifer Rubin had the same idea BootinUp Jul 2014 #119
that's a separate point, but a decent one Enrique Jul 2014 #121
She covers both I believe. BootinUp Jul 2014 #122
You are using this issue to do a little Obama bashing? ismnotwasm Jul 2014 #150
No but in essence that is what you are saying to a lot of outraged people. Rex Jul 2014 #123
And again, you dig deeper. Women who have had their rights hijacked, because they don't see this Squinch Jul 2014 #155
The Citizens United decision is 100x more repulsive than the Hobby Lobby one. Calista241 Jul 2014 #116
they are two of a kind ibegurpard Jul 2014 #126
Are you a guy? Lex Jul 2014 #117
People have had enough Rosa Luxemburg Jul 2014 #127
I will not call you a sexist misoginist pig bluestateguy Jul 2014 #128
Then you're a better person than I. n/t JTFrog Jul 2014 #145
Perhaps my hair is on fire onecaliberal Jul 2014 #129
well said, onecaliberal Skittles Jul 2014 #130
Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #133
Exactly. Yeah. That does tend to set my hair on fire, whether Enrique thinks that is Squinch Jul 2014 #147
Thanks onecaliberal Jul 2014 #169
I am too! JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #160
. myrna minx Jul 2014 #190
My hair is on fire because... DeadLetterOffice Jul 2014 #202
No one cares what you think RainDog Jul 2014 #131
Saying corporations have religious beliefs that the 1st Amend. protects merrily Jul 2014 #134
He's not really that blind JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #154
I had a suspicion, hence the comment in my post merrily Jul 2014 #157
The "but what about me" mentality JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #159
On your part, it was just a general observation. merrily Jul 2014 #162
They are pretending JustAnotherGen Jul 2014 #163
I usually operate on the assumption that it doesn't merrily Jul 2014 #164
I am German, and we have all that "socialist" healthcare. OldEurope Jul 2014 #161
that's interesting Enrique Jul 2014 #166
Interesting? It's a false equivalency. merrily Jul 2014 #175
You don't have free bc only because your law did not give it to you. merrily Jul 2014 #167
I happen to disagree with you Shankapotomus Jul 2014 #165
And you are wrong. A corporation was given religious status, and that is seriously 6000eliot Jul 2014 #170
why you should be worried DonCoquixote Jul 2014 #171
The precedent for basing this on religion is as phony as a three dollar bill nolabels Jul 2014 #189
excuse me DonCoquixote Jul 2014 #196
He never stated of being unable understand why people were angry, but even acknowledged it nolabels Jul 2014 #204
Thanks for reminding me to put you on Ignore. nt valerief Jul 2014 #178
So what if it is "hair on fire"? Who cares? Raksha Jul 2014 #182
Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #194
Maybe you had to be there... ljm2002 Jul 2014 #203
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»why I suspect reaction to...»Reply #188