Wednesday, July 16, 2014

SCOTUS "Ruling Class"

More from Hobby Lobby fallout:

My responses to "The 8 Best Lines From Ginsburg's Dissent"
(I'll do these rapid-fire!)

"The exemption sought by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would…deny legions of women who do not hold their employers' beliefs access to contraceptive coverage"
  • Nope. Not even close. These women can still get 16 of the 20 mandated contraceptives from Hobby Lobby. They can also choose to work elsewhere. 

"Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community."
  • True. That's why, if they don't like the health insurance offerings, they can choose to work for another company!

"Any decision to use contraceptives made by a woman covered under Hobby Lobby's or Conestoga's plan will not be propelled by the Government, it will be the woman's autonomous choice, informed by the physician she consults."
  • Yep. That's why we don't need to mandate what the company's health insurance does and does not provide. 

"It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month's full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage."
  •  Indeed. That's why we need to end the FDA. That's why we need to eliminate the minimum wage (so workers can earn higher pay to afford more stuff!). And that's why workers have a freedom of choice for jobs!

"Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah's Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today's decision."
  •  Possibly so... and that's why it is a "free" country, where a worker may select his/her own place of employment.

"Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be 'perceived as favoring one religion over another,' the very 'risk the [Constitution's] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude."
  • This statement is accurate, but has no bearing on the issue ruled on. 

"The court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield."
  • Wouldn't be the first time. Though this time, freedom won the day. 


No comments:

Post a Comment

Your comment will be displayed after approval.
Approval depends on what you say and how you say it.