Christianity & Hobby Lobby

The Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision which gives companies religious "freedoms" adds another means for companies to squeeze their employees. I'm not saying Hobby Lobby is some sort of evil company, they treat their employees quite well actually. But not every company can be trusted to be so (as the owner of Hobby Lobby stated) "Christian".

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
This is the "Religion Clause" of the 1st amendment. First part should make it impossible to give companies religious "freedoms" but the second part is where Hobby Lobby argued that paying for female contraception limits their "free exercise" of their chosen religion. Christianity.

The Establishment Clause is a limitation placed upon the United States Congress preventing it from passing legislation respecting an establishment of religion. The second prohibition inherent from this specified prohibition is no preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another; an aim desired by the Founding Fathers necessary to accommodate all of the many denominations in the United States. The Establishment Clause prohibits Congress from preferring or elevating one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious domain to make accommodations for religious observances and practices in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause.

Here in where lies the problem, if Hobby Lobby was a predominately Muslim company well this would've never made it close to the Supreme Court. If it had somehow, those 5 catholic men wouldn't have voted in their favour. Seperation of Church and State isn't in the constitution. However it is a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson as well as James Madison. So enough of this founding fathers wanted a christian nation crap. In the late 1700s in the Treaty of Tripoli it is written:
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..."

This Supreme Court decision has a dangerous potential for corruption. Similar to the Citizens United ruling stating companies are people and therfor can donate indirectly and directly to political candidates. This decision places the CEO's religion, or whom ever holds the majority of shares, as a religion which their employees must adhere to whether they are part of their religion or not. Of course they're not forcing employees to pray and follow a religion, that would be ridiculous. But they are imposing the company's religious views into the employees personal/private health insurance plan. By the way there was a clause for companies that did not want to pay for contraceptives, that they pay a fee to give employees a third party of some sort to buy contraceptives. This decision was about not paying that fee to opt out on the grounds of religions "freedom".

I place "freedom" between quotes because it's a christian freedom. What happens when the billionaire oil king who's started a Sharia Law experiment in his country decides to impose as much Sharia Law as is legally possible in all his Los Angeles hotels. Also the idea of banning Sharia Law in those southern states would go against this new ruling. This court decision has placed christianity over other religions, as if they needed help lol. Using the best of moral and ethical values from religion and applying it to your workplace is a nice idea. But it's disrespectful to any and all who don't follow their religion.

I'm NOT an atheists. Atheist activists piss me off as they say quite a lot of stupid sh*t. But I believe that religon and the workplace should be seperated. Houses of worship are for those who seek faith in religion, companies are for those who seek money. Churches are non-profit community organizations, a place for worship. Both churches and some companies raise funds for charities and have programs to help the homeless and poor. The church does it for moral and ethical reason. Most companies do it for good public relations.

If you support the Hobby Lobby decision as a christian than let me lay something out for you. Church is for the worship of God. Companies are for the accumulation of money for their members. By adding religion to companies you are mixing God and money.

As Jesus said:

You cannot serve both God and money

So... what are you saying?

Christians shouldn't have political opinions?

Christians shouldn't own corporations?

Christians shouldn't shop at Hobby Lobby?

Christians shouldn't shop at all?

I don't get it.

I read what you are saying, but I don't agree. How you conduct yourself in your life, including your business activities, is an extension of who and what you believe.

Now, I personally believe in God, but am not religious, however, I do see where Hobby Lobby is coming from. They are a family business that happens to have the corporate designation under the tax code. I do see a distinction between a Microsoft and a Hobby Lobby. I think the SCOTUS decision was reasonable.

a reply to: NthOther

I didn't say any of that lol. Where are you getting this from?...Christians shouldn't be lifted higher than other religions and no company should be able to force their religious views onto your personal health care plan.

originally posted by: GokuVsSuperman0

I didn't say any of that lol. Where are you getting this from?...Christians shouldn't be lifted higher than other religions and no company should be able to force their religious views onto your personal health care plan.

Ah. So an owner's religious views should in no way be reflected in the policies of the owner's company. Is there now a "wall of separation" between corporation and religion?

Starting a new business? Leave your values at the door, please.

And we wonder why no one wants to do business here anymore...

a reply to: NthOther

Again where are you getting this from?...an owner with religious values can reflect those values in the way he runs his company. But he's not a king, he can't demand that his subjects follow the same religion. More than half the US is women, this ruling just made every company be able to control whether or not female workers can have access to contraceptives in their health care plan. Whether the owner is Christian or not, it would be foolish for a company to not save the money and so women across the country will soon not be able to have access to contraceptives, whether they're religious or not.
PS: No one wants to do business in the US because it costs too much, not whatever fairy tale reason you were thinking of.

Fyi hobby lobby owns shares in medical companys that produce the said contraception pill, bunch of hypocrites.

Its already been posted on ats.

originally posted by: GokuVsSuperman0

Again where are you getting this from?...an owner with religious values can reflect those values in the way he runs his company. But he's not a king, he can't demand that his subjects follow the same religion. More than half the US is women, this ruling just made every company be able to control whether or not female workers can have access to contraceptives in their health care plan. Whether the owner is Christian or not, it would be foolish for a company to not save the money and so women across the country will soon not be able to have access to contraceptives, whether they're religious or not.
PS: No one wants to do business in the US because it costs too much, not whatever fairy tale reason you were thinking of.

This ruling did not give control over access to general contraception to the corporations. It addressed abortifacients and implants specifically, if I'm not mistaken. Female Hobby Lobby employees still have access to the daily pill (and other common forms of contraception) if they want it. I'm surprised this isn't common knowledge by now.

The threat of the theocratic CEO has been completely overblown by the positivists and the feminists, seeking any in-road they can find in their pursuit of destroying religion.

You may not be implying this at all, but it's what I see when I read the rhetoric of the anti-Hobby Lobby people:

Should secularism be a condition of obtaining a business license?

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but it seems like that is the only thing that will keep the positivists happy, and is indeed what they are working toward.

But what do I know?

a reply to: NthOther

I think that's the biggest problem with the SCOTUS ruling. Only Christians can hold these views. Only closely held companies can hold these views.

The SCOTUS ruling doesn't apply to Muslims, atheists, Jews or anyone else of faith (or lack thereof). It also doesn't apply to anyone who doesn't own a corporation or who owns a corporation that's not 'closely held'. SCOTUS has said that the owners of Hobby Lobby are special. Only wealthy Christians can defy the mandate. Everyone else has to comply.

originally posted by: links234

The SCOTUS ruling doesn't apply to Muslims, atheists, Jews or anyone else of faith (or lack thereof). It also doesn't apply to anyone who doesn't own a corporation or who owns a corporation that's not 'closely held'. SCOTUS has said that the owners of Hobby Lobby are special. Only wealthy Christians can defy the mandate. Everyone else has to comply.

How does this not apply to Muslims, specifically?

a reply to: [post=18138775]dukeofjive696969[/p
AH no it's the right to follow religious belief without intrusion of the masses into the protected culture.

Don't buy from them, quit if you don't like them if they want to proclaim their faith by halting late abortion.
You know freedom of speech and all that other stuff you think is bourgois.

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

I agree with you completely. The owners should have their religious opinions and their political opinions. They should not, however, force their employees to behave in accordance with their beliefs.

You may enjoy my thread: Are Laws that Favor One Religion over Another a Violation of the First Amendment?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: NthOther

Christians shouldn't have political opinions?

Is that a slip of the fingers? What "political opinion" is at stake here? I thought this case was based on a RELIGIOUS belief... See why there should be a separation of church and state? Religious belief becomes political opinion...

I think this entire lawsuit was because of a political opinion. An anti-Obama opinion. Religion was just the vehicle used to get what they wanted.

a reply to: NthOther

Except Plan B is not an abortifacient nor an implant and yet that was disallowed. Also, as Ginsberg pointed out, this has farther reaching consequences than just this one case.

a reply to: NthOther

It only applies if they oppose birth control. If they find any other religious objection, it does not apply. Blood transfusions, vaccinations, etc. do not apply as a religious exemption.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: NthOther

I think that's the biggest problem with the SCOTUS ruling. Only Christians can hold these views. Only closely held companies can hold these views.

The SCOTUS ruling doesn't apply to Muslims, atheists, Jews or anyone else of faith (or lack thereof). It also doesn't apply to anyone who doesn't own a corporation or who owns a corporation that's not 'closely held'. SCOTUS has said that the owners of Hobby Lobby are special. Only wealthy Christians can defy the mandate. Everyone else has to comply.

I might be mistaken, but I don't recall any Muslims, atheists, Jews, or anyone else of faith, or lack thereof, filing a lawsuit against the contraception mandate. Anyone of these groups could have tried to join with Hobby Lobby, or filed a lawsuit regarding their interests. Hobby Lobby is not special. ALL closely held corporations can utilize this ruling. If this ruling doesn't fit their agenda or need, file a lawsuit and fight it all the way to the SCOTUS. I feel it's a waste of money to be required to contraceptive coverage to my wife and I. She can't have kids anymore, and I obviously don't need it. My older kids will not need it anymore, as they have had all the kids they want and have fixed the problem. My two youngest, 3 yr old boys, don't need it. But that dadburn mandate means we are covered, and pay for it, but will never use it.

originally posted by: links234

It only applies if they oppose birth control. If they find any other religious objection, it does not apply. Blood transfusions, vaccinations, etc. do not apply as a religious exemption.

Muslims don't oppose birth control?

I guess the Jehovah's Witnesses are screwed, though.

But I seriously doubt you're looking for equality among the various religions.

Don't know why people care so much about Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision. Do you work for that company. Last i check they pay full time employee's well above minimum wage. If any employee cares so much about having abortion coverage. they can find a insurance provider and pay for it out of their own pocket.

a reply to: Echo007

According to the IRS, 90% of US corporation are "Closely Held", including WalMart, McDonalds' supplier Cargill and Koch Industries.