If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Semicolons could prove Obamacare unconstitutional thanks to Citizen's United. Next up: collusion is corporations peaceably assembling   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 180
    More: Asinine, Citizens United, obamacare, collusion, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Kaiser Health News, Hobby Lobby, Paul Clement, strict scrutiny  
•       •       •

3833 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Mar 2014 at 11:36 AM (35 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



180 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-21 10:59:45 AM  
Because the Supreme Court doesn't pay attention to commas?
 
2014-03-21 11:00:39 AM  
Since the Citizens United case gave corporations the same free speech rights as people, the argument states that corporations should have the same free religious exercise rights as people, too,  and they should be able to opt out of Obamacare.

1.  Corporations are not people
2.  If they opt out like people, don't they have to pay a fine based on income?  Not profits, income.
 
2014-03-21 11:03:12 AM  

EvilEgg: Since the Citizens United case gave corporations the same free speech rights as people, the argument states that corporations should have the same free religious exercise rights as people, too,  and they should be able to opt out of Obamacare.

1.  Corporations are not people
2.  If they opt out like people, don't they have to pay a fine based on income?  Not profits, income.


Oh and people can opt out of covering themselves, not others.  So if Hobby Lobby Co. has no need for health insurance, it being an abstract concept.  The employees of Hobby Lobby do.
 
2014-03-21 11:15:47 AM  
What is the religion of a corporation? Is it the majority shareholder? What if a group of minority shareholders can, combined, form a majority stake with different beliefs? Why should a minority shareholders beliefs be meaningless, since they have stake in the company?

If the Supreme Court upholds this, Congress should pass a law saying that any company that abstains from purchasing health insurance on religious grounds has to raise their employees salaries by an amount equivalent to what they would have spent in insurance. After all, since this is about sincerely held beliefs, and not about getting out of paying for health insurance, they should have no problem with that, right?
 
2014-03-21 11:21:24 AM  
If Hobby Lobby is okay with increasing the general misery of people, it's hard to understand why it views itself as Christian.

/was taught differently
 
2014-03-21 11:39:34 AM  
This shiat is farking infuriating.
 
2014-03-21 11:39:37 AM  
Once again, the conservative position requires you to equate money with fundamental rights.  So sick of having this argument.
 
2014-03-21 11:39:59 AM  
Here is a lesson in creative writing. First rule: Do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college.
 
2014-03-21 11:40:38 AM  
Rather than a mandate, the Affordable Care Act offers employers a choice. Companies with at least 50 full-time employees (small companies are not covered by the law) can either provide health insurance to their full-time employees, which must meet various minimum standards, including the full range of contraception options, or make a payment to the Internal Revenue Service. In other words, Lederman argues, it's a tax.
 
2014-03-21 11:40:45 AM  
the paper the bill is printed on has a gold fringe therefore the bill only applies in the intermediate offshore zone and intercoastal waterway and furthermore
 
2014-03-21 11:42:07 AM  
Inventive.  Most inventive.

1.bp.blogspot.com

It will properly fail in court, but A for effort.
 
2014-03-21 11:43:03 AM  
So if a corporation's product kills someone can they be prosecuted for murder? Because that's how stupid this shait has gotten.
 
2014-03-21 11:43:08 AM  

Jackson Herring: the paper the bill is printed on has a gold fringe therefore the bill only applies in the intermediate offshore zone and intercoastal waterway and furthermore


sir i am not in puget sound

my person is but i am not
 
2014-03-21 11:45:24 AM  
Next up: Corporations are counted in the Census, resulting in Delaware having 314 representatives in the House after 2020.
 
2014-03-21 11:46:29 AM  
John Jay was a grammar Nazi.

Alexander Hamilton used to write a giant lower case f instead of an s, as was the custom of the time. What could THAT mean for Obamacare?
 
2014-03-21 11:48:33 AM  
nmrsnr:
If the Supreme Court upholds this, Congress should pass a law saying that any company that abstains from purchasing health insurance on religious grounds has to raise their employees salaries by an amount equivalent to what they would have spent in insurance. After all, since this is about sincerely held beliefs, and not about getting out of paying for health insurance, they should have no problem with that, right?

Well the Republicans in congress will probably pass that that any company that abstains from purchasing health insurance on religious grounds has to lower their employees salaries in order to cover the cost of the penalty that the corporation will have.
 
2014-03-21 11:48:58 AM  
In other words, the semi-colon argument holds that the free exercise of religion and free exercise of speech are linked. Since the  Citizens United case gave corporations the same free speech rights as people, the argument states that corporations should have the same free religious exercise rights as people, too,  and they should be able to opt out of Obamacare.

24.media.tumblr.com
"I rest my case your honors."
 
2014-03-21 11:49:51 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-21 11:51:18 AM  

Cowboy Bebop at His Computer: Next up: Corporations are counted in the Census, resulting in Delaware having 314 representatives in the House after 2020.


If corporations are people, and people can vote, then I can just create 300 million dummy corporations and do whatever the f*ck I want. Right?

I swear we are headed toward an election cycle where everyone just texts their vote to 90909.
 
2014-03-21 11:51:36 AM  

EvilEgg: Corporations are not people


I think we've hit the important points today, done in two.
 
2014-03-21 11:52:26 AM  

nmrsnr: What is the religion of a corporation? Is it the majority shareholder? What if a group of minority shareholders can, combined, form a majority stake with different beliefs? Why should a minority shareholders beliefs be meaningless, since they have stake in the company?

If the Supreme Court upholds this, Congress should pass a law saying that any company that abstains from purchasing health insurance on religious grounds has to raise their employees salaries by an amount equivalent to what they would have spent in insurance. After all, since this is about sincerely held beliefs, and not about getting out of paying for health insurance, they should have no problem with that, right?


Actually Hobby Lobby just wants to buy insurance that doesn't cover birth control. Such insurance is identical in price to ones that do. Several churches have gotten exceptions Hobby Lobby hasn't because they are a legal corporation not a legal church. Members of the church's can purchase extension plans to add birth control for just a few dollars.
 
2014-03-21 11:53:06 AM  
This is like the town that wants to get rid of a strip club by looking at a law from the 1800s where any place people gather must have someplace for people to tie their horses.
 
2014-03-21 11:54:04 AM  
Citizens United dies not, contrary to the majority opinion of Fark, bestow magical powers upon corporations.

An individual person cannot just opt out of laws because Jeebus, therefore an incorporated group of people cannot, either.
 
2014-03-21 11:54:36 AM  
Can we just start executing these sons of biatches already?
 
2014-03-21 11:55:11 AM  
Under Obamacare, Americans will only have enough money for half a colon.  Thanks, Obama.
 
2014-03-21 11:55:35 AM  

Fart_Machine: So if a corporation's product kills someone can they be prosecuted for murder? Because that's how stupid this shait has gotten.


And executed!
 
2014-03-21 11:58:48 AM  

BMFPitt: Citizens United dies not, contrary to the majority opinion of Fark, bestow magical powers upon corporations.

An individual person cannot just opt out of laws because Jeebus, therefore an incorporated group of people cannot, either.


Except that's ex-farking-zactly what the Hobby Lobby suit is trying to do.
 
2014-03-21 11:59:45 AM  

EvilEgg: 1. Corporations are not people

1. Corporations are not people
1. Corporations are not people
1. CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE GODAMMIT!!!
 
2014-03-21 12:02:55 PM  

Triple Oak: EvilEgg: Corporations are not people

I think we've hit the important points today, done in two.

Corporations are Aggregate Persons, as are unions, trusts, incorporated communities, etc. As such, they are not Natural Persons (sapient beings), who are the only entities to possess Inherent and Unalienable Rights of Personhood. Aggregate and Estate Personhood are legal fictions designed to enable organizations comprised of groups of Natural Persons acting together, and the estates left by deceased Natural Persons, respectively, to participate on an equal footing with individual Natural Persons in contract and civil tort law. As such, they are granted Powers which mimic certain Rights such as property rights.

The very word "corporation" derives from the Latin corpus meaning "body," as in "corporeal punishment," "corpse," "habeus corpus," "corpus delecti," etc. This was intended to show that, in certain legal matters and on a legal fictional basis only, they are indeed Persons.

Where Citizens United went wrong was to extend these pseudo-Right Powers to matters not required for enabling corporations (and Aggregate Persons in general) to act as equals to Natural Persons in matters of civil tort and contract law. Freedom of Speech and of Religion are not included in such pseudo-Rights. Owning property including intellectual property is an example of such a pseudo-Right that is valid for corporations.

/IANAL
 
2014-03-21 12:03:10 PM  
This is the kind of thing that should have been flatly dismissed.
 
2014-03-21 12:04:11 PM  
FTA:
"Appellants also argue that Citizens United is applicable to the Free Exercise [of religion] Clause because ―the authors of the First Amendment only separated the Free Exercise Clause and the Free Speech Clause by a semi-colon, thus showing the continuation of intent between the two," said circuit judge Robert Cowen in the Conestoga Wood appeals court decision. "We are not persuaded that the use of a semi-colon means that each clause of the First Amendment must be interpreted jointly."
In other words, the semi-colon argument holds that the free exercise of religion and free exercise of speech are linked. Since the Citizens United case gave corporations the same free speech rights as people, the argument states that corporations should have the same free religious exercise rights as people, too,  and they should be able to opt out of Obamacare.


Now let's check http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.h t ml .  The only thing I did was bold some words and the semicolons.  You can verify this through the link I provided.

Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights."

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


I count two semicolons.  One that separates the clauses relating to religion from the ones relating to free speech and free press, and the other that separates the free speech and free press clause from the right of people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances clause.  In fact, to me, it appears that the semicolon was used to actually separate clauses that seemed not to be too related to each other.
 
2014-03-21 12:04:36 PM  
I'll believe that Hobby Lobby has religious beliefs when I see it walk up to the front of the congregation and get dunked in the baptismal pool.
 
2014-03-21 12:05:33 PM  

nmrsnr: What is the religion of a corporation? Is it the majority shareholder? What if a group of minority shareholders can, combined, form a majority stake with different beliefs? Why should a minority shareholders beliefs be meaningless, since they have stake in the company?

If the Supreme Court upholds this, Congress should pass a law saying that any company that abstains from purchasing health insurance on religious grounds has to raise their employees salaries by an amount equivalent to what they would have spent in insurance. After all, since this is about sincerely held beliefs, and not about getting out of paying for health insurance, they should have no problem with that, right?


The religion of a corporation is clearly stated in the Articles Of Incorporation and can also be found by doing a corporate entity search on the secretary of state site in which it is registered.
 
2014-03-21 12:05:54 PM  

Fart_Machine: So if a corporation's product kills someone can they be prosecuted for murder? Because that's how stupid this shait has gotten.


I maintain corporations will not truly be people until we execute one.

/I nominate Bank of America
 
2014-03-21 12:06:18 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: EvilEgg: 1. Corporations are not people
1. Corporations are not people
1. Corporations are not people
1. CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE GODAMMIT!!!


Corporations are people! They're Peeeeepulllll!
encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2014-03-21 12:06:31 PM  

Arkanaut: Under Obamacare, Americans will only have enough money for half a colon.  Thanks, Obama.

/vibrates miniature clenched hand

Was just about to make a snark about semicolon-abusers having to remove ½ of their large intestines as punishment.
 
2014-03-21 12:07:22 PM  

SilentStrider: Because the Supreme Court doesn't pay attention to commas?


Who cares if the highest court of the land has ruled on this by following Constitutional procedure, some derper with an internet GED in law is making a blog post! Totes worth considering
/wished the Internet was consistently good for things other than gaming, porn, and warez
//thankful for online gaming, porn, and warez
 
2014-03-21 12:08:02 PM  
...I also maintain I should refresh threads before I comment in them.
 
2014-03-21 12:08:53 PM  

sprawl15: Jackson Herring: the paper the bill is printed on has a gold fringe therefore the bill only applies in the intermediate offshore zone and intercoastal waterway and furthermore

sir i am not in puget sound

my person is but i am not


Officer P. Barnes is pointing his taser at you; he frowns on such shenanigans.
 
2014-03-21 12:09:27 PM  

Bloody William: BMFPitt: Citizens United dies not, contrary to the majority opinion of Fark, bestow magical powers upon corporations.

An individual person cannot just opt out of laws because Jeebus, therefore an incorporated group of people cannot, either.

Except that's ex-farking-zactly what the Hobby Lobby suit is trying to do.


And as I recall, this premise has been rejected in every court on the way up.
 
2014-03-21 12:09:27 PM  

47 is the new 42: Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I count two semicolons. One that separates the clauses relating to religion from the ones relating to free speech and free press, and the other that separates the free speech and free press clause from the right of people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances clause. In fact, to me, it appears that the semicolon was used to actually separate clauses that seemed not to be too related to each other.


If someone thinks that the semicolon means corporations get religious freedom rights along with free speech, then I have to ask "Why didn't the founders use a comma like they did between free speech and free press.
 
2014-03-21 12:09:59 PM  
In that case, I should sue the IRS for not charging me the corporate tax rate.
 
2014-03-21 12:11:18 PM  

BMFPitt: Bloody William: BMFPitt: Citizens United dies not, contrary to the majority opinion of Fark, bestow magical powers upon corporations.

An individual person cannot just opt out of laws because Jeebus, therefore an incorporated group of people cannot, either.

Except that's ex-farking-zactly what the Hobby Lobby suit is trying to do.

And as I recall, this premise has been rejected in every court on the way up.


And yet it's still going to court and still being argued, so I think we're pretty reasonable to want to still talk about it and make sure the trend of rejections don't change as the courts go higher.
 
2014-03-21 12:11:25 PM  

COMALite J: /IANAL


Neither am I, but you did a good job explaining the concept of corporate personhood.  Personship.  Personizing?  Ok I give up.
 
2014-03-21 12:12:58 PM  
Citizen's United what?
 
2014-03-21 12:13:41 PM  

47 is the new 42: In fact, to me, it appears that the semicolon was used to actually separate clauses that seemed not to be too related to each other.


This is because you are not stupid.
 
2014-03-21 12:14:43 PM  

47 is the new 42: FTA:
"Appellants also argue that Citizens United is applicable to the Free Exercise [of religion] Clause because ―the authors of the First Amendment only separated the Free Exercise Clause and the Free Speech Clause by a semi-colon, thus showing the continuation of intent between the two," said circuit judge Robert Cowen in the Conestoga Wood appeals court decision. "We are not persuaded that the use of a semi-colon means that each clause of the First Amendment must be interpreted jointly."
In other words, the semi-colon argument holds that the free exercise of religion and free exercise of speech are linked. Since the Citizens United case gave corporations the same free speech rights as people, the argument states that corporations should have the same free religious exercise rights as people, too,  and they should be able to opt out of Obamacare.

Now let's check http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.h t ml .  The only thing I did was bold some words and the semicolons.  You can verify this through the link I provided.

Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights."

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I count two semicolons.  One that separates the clauses relating to religion from the ones relating to free speech and free press, and the other that separates the free speech and free press clause from the right of people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances clause.  In fact, to me, it appears that the semicolon was used to actually separate clauses that seemed not to be too related to ...


Semicolons may also be used to separate items in a list or series if any of the items contain commas. You have provided an excellent example of that.
 
2014-03-21 12:15:20 PM  

BMFPitt: Citizens United dies not, contrary to the majority opinion of Fark, bestow magical powers upon corporations.

An individual person cannot just opt out of laws because Jeebus, therefore an incorporated group of people cannot, either.


But a religious institution can opt out, and there is a work around for semi-religious organizations (those owned by a religious institution but doing public works like education or healthcare.) At the end of the day, Citizen's United said you can't discriminate between collective speech and individual speech. It didn't say you couldn't discriminate against speech (like campaign finance caps), but if a person has no cap on independent expenditures on behalf of a campaign, neither does a corporation or a union.

Hobby Lobby is arguing if you can't discriminate based on the source of the speech then you shouldn't be able to discriminate based on the type of entity claiming to be religious. Theoretically you could even expand the argument that recognition as a religious sect by the IRS shouldn't be required since that allows discrimination: if you are an entity, you are afforded all the rights afforded any other entity.

It probably won't work, but if the argument wins it would have had a degree of precedent thanks to Citizen's United.
 
2014-03-21 12:16:34 PM  

Karac: I'll believe that Hobby Lobby has religious beliefs when I see it walk up to the front of the congregation and get dunked in the baptismal pool.


I'm sure they will as soon as PETA walks up and frees some animals while the Sierra Club climbs a tree.
 
2014-03-21 12:16:58 PM  

doyner: In that case, I should sue the IRS for not charging me the corporate tax rate.


Corporations are people, not the other way around.  They are our betters.
 
Displayed 50 of 180 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report