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.

(Salon)   The women on the US Supreme Court give Hobby Lobby a three way pounding. Now you're thinking about Ginsburg in a sexual way   (salon.com) divider line 251
    More: Cool, Hobby Lobby, Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, emergency contraception, Paul Clement, Supreme Court  
•       •       •

11460 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Mar 2014 at 10:31 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-25 06:40:13 PM  
Justice Anthony Kennedy seems to believe this is a case about abortion.

24.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-03-25 06:41:46 PM  
Wait, was I not supposed to before?


/Ohh yea, you're my baby, Ruth
 
2014-03-25 06:49:38 PM  

scottydoesntknow: Wait, was I not supposed to before?


/Ohh yea, you're my baby, Ruth


I prefer Justice Sotomayor, myself.
 
2014-03-25 06:54:46 PM  

DamnYankees: Justice Anthony Kennedy seems to believe this is a case about abortion.


Oy. That makes it 5-4.
 
2014-03-25 07:09:45 PM  
Sweet. Can't wait to found my Sharia-based law firm.
 
2014-03-25 07:32:05 PM  

Theaetetus: DamnYankees: Justice Anthony Kennedy seems to believe this is a case about abortion.

Oy. That makes it 5-4.


Ayup. The old white guys will have their way, as usual.

Yes I said white guys. Scalia's puppet doesn't count.
 
2014-03-25 07:54:49 PM  
Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2014-03-25 08:04:49 PM  

DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?


Are you trying to suggest Scalia is capable of logical thought?
 
2014-03-25 08:15:01 PM  

DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?


The same reason he forgets about his hatred for Wickard v. Filburn when it comes to federal marijuana laws.
 
2014-03-25 08:19:04 PM  

kronicfeld: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

The same reason he forgets about his hatred for Wickard v. Filburn when it comes to federal marijuana laws.


And the same reason he's able to say SCOTUS shouldn't interfere with laws passed by congress (DOMA) and then the next day interfere with a law passed by congress (Voting Rights Act).

I may have that sequence backwards, but you get the drift.
 
2014-03-25 08:20:35 PM  

fusillade762: kronicfeld: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

The same reason he forgets about his hatred for Wickard v. Filburn when it comes to federal marijuana laws.

And the same reason he's able to say SCOTUS shouldn't interfere with laws passed by congress (DOMA) and then the next day interfere with a law passed by congress (Voting Rights Act).

I may have that sequence backwards, but you get the drift.


No you got that right.
 
2014-03-25 09:28:38 PM  
The First Amendment doesn't only protect your religion from the government.  It also protects the government from your religion.
 
2014-03-25 09:36:55 PM  

kronicfeld: Sweet. Can't wait to found my Sharia-based law firm.


I think I should finally start my pagan/wiccan business and only hire people from christian mingle to run my stores.
 
2014-03-25 10:33:01 PM  
Oooooooooooooooooooo...
 
2014-03-25 10:35:35 PM  
So tired of special rights for religion...
 
2014-03-25 10:36:58 PM  
i141.photobucket.com

You know you want her to swing your gavel.
 
2014-03-25 10:41:04 PM  

DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?


A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.
 
2014-03-25 10:42:15 PM  
Roberts court = worst in history.
 
2014-03-25 10:43:24 PM  

Weaver95: kronicfeld: Sweet. Can't wait to found my Sharia-based law firm.

I think I should finally start my pagan/wiccan business and only hire people from christian mingle to run my stores.


Hell, I'm going to start my atheist grocery and you won't even get health insurance if you're religious. Let your god and/or gods handle your health. I've got a bottom line to deal with.
 
2014-03-25 10:43:34 PM  
Well that article wasn't slant much Left............NOT!
 
2014-03-25 10:46:05 PM  
You're not a church, you're a business, shut the fark up about your religion, treat your employees fairly, and get back to work.
 
2014-03-25 10:46:21 PM  

Weaver95: kronicfeld: Sweet. Can't wait to found my Sharia-based law firm.

I think I should finally start my pagan/wiccan business and only hire people from christian mingle to run my stores.


I'm thinking it's time to see what religions could have the most outrageous exemptions, and start a business just to have fun with 'family values' employees.
 
2014-03-25 10:46:40 PM  
I love how the writer knows what Scalia is thinking and tells everyone so they won't respect anything he says.
 
2014-03-25 10:46:53 PM  
Baseball, cold showers. Margret Thatcher naked on a cold day.
 
2014-03-25 10:51:11 PM  

DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?


Ostensibly, it's because Smith was decided pre-RFRA.  Of course, he'd still find a way to back Hobby Lobby here, because Scalia, but that's the reasoning at the moment.
 
2014-03-25 10:51:17 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: scottydoesntknow: Wait, was I not supposed to before?


/Ohh yea, you're my baby, Ruth

I prefer Justice Sotomayor, myself.


media.ny1.com
Not bad
 
2014-03-25 10:52:16 PM  
So if the muslim running my 7-Eleven down the street doesn't want to hire a woman clerk coz you know, she's a woman, he's protected on religious grounds, right?  And if he doesn't want his daughter to have a big cummer he has his cleric buddy cut her clit off and then beats her on religious ground, right?  And even if she has a SMOKIN' body he still drapes her in 5 layers in cloth but that's OK on religious grounds, right?
Some things seem to be OK, and others....
 
2014-03-25 10:55:25 PM  
I hope Hobby Lobby wins. There, I said it.
 
2014-03-25 10:55:27 PM  
It's not about really pleasing your imaginary sky-daddy so you get the brownie points for heaven.

It's 100% about disgusting old misogynists trying desperately to create lame excuses to keep those uppity women under control.

The sooner the old farts die off, the better,
 
2014-03-25 10:57:47 PM  

TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.


Here's how it works:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.
 
2014-03-25 10:58:46 PM  

Passive Aggressive Larry: You're not a church, you're a business, shut the fark up about your religion, treat your employees fairly, and get back to work.


So we should force Chick-Fil-A to open on Sundays then?
 
2014-03-25 10:59:55 PM  

TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.


We should have buired Scalia (alive) in Renquist's coffin as an offering to the Gods.
 
2014-03-25 11:00:38 PM  
Politics? In my Main tab? It's more likely than you think...

/blech
 
2014-03-25 11:03:11 PM  
The problem here isn't that Hobby Lobby is complaining about providing health coverage. The problem is a system where your employer has anything whatsoever to do with your general health coverage.
 
2014-03-25 11:03:26 PM  
Because he doesn't think contraception is good, this asshat wants to control the religious expression of all of his employees instead. Because if he doesn't want you to have contraception, then dang nab it, you shouldn't have access to it!
And family planning is an important part of women's health issues.
 
2014-03-25 11:03:27 PM  

The Mulatto Maker: Politics? In my Main tab? It's more likely than you think...

/blech


Well the trolling isnt confinednto the bridge
 
2014-03-25 11:06:05 PM  

Animatronik: TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Here's how it works:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.


That is a really stupid argument.
 
2014-03-25 11:06:35 PM  
Animatronik:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.

I'm a dude, and even I know what endometriosis is and how they treat it.  Also, it happens to prove you wrong.  If Medicare can happily pay for penis pumps for dudes, women should be able to get all their bodily functions regulated and cared for, even the dirty sinful parts that make guys uncomfortable.  Hell, even if Medicare didn't pay for that.  It's just a simple bit of logic.
 
2014-03-25 11:09:00 PM  

Russ1642: The problem here isn't that Hobby Lobby is complaining about providing health coverage. The problem is a system where your employer has anything whatsoever to do with your general health coverage.


Health coverage IS a benefit that a company's offers you to entice you to except their job offer.
 
2014-03-25 11:09:25 PM  

EnderX: Well that article wasn't slant much Left............NOT!


*Everything* slants left if you think Fox Propaganda is fair and balanced.
 
2014-03-25 11:10:16 PM  
The blue pill is fine for Rush Limbaugh, but women not getting knocked up is a bad thing? Some one tell him to get back in the kitchen and make me some pie
 
2014-03-25 11:10:42 PM  

Animatronik: There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.


I can't believe even you are so stupid as to keep bringing up that talking point.

Preventing pregnancy (which is a dangerous medical condition) would be an excellent example of preventive medical care.

Never mind the other medical uses for birth control, like preventing ovarian cysts, lessening the symptoms of MPS, etc.
 
2014-03-25 11:10:58 PM  
 
2014-03-25 11:11:49 PM  

Animatronik: TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Here's how it works:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.


Wow, you're so totally wrong.
"It is well established that oral contraceptives are essential health care because they prevent unintended pregnancies," said study author Rachel K. Jones. "This study shows that there are other important health reasons why oral contraceptives should be readily available to the millions of women who rely on them each year."

Polycystic ovarian syndrome
Endometriosis
Lower ovarian cancer risk
Regulation of irregular menstruation

But you just go on being wrong, mmmkay?
 
2014-03-25 11:11:55 PM  

karmaceutical: Animatronik: TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Here's how it works:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.

That is a really stupid argument.


True, but since the court will never hear anything remotely resembling it, it doesn't really matter.
 
2014-03-25 11:12:10 PM  

Animatronik: TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Here's how it works:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.


You pack a lot false assertions in one paragraph. Impressive
 
2014-03-25 11:12:15 PM  

EnderX: Russ1642: The problem here isn't that Hobby Lobby is complaining about providing health coverage. The problem is a system where your employer has anything whatsoever to do with your general health coverage.

Health coverage IS a benefit that a company's offers you to entice you to except their job offer.


Right, but his point is that health care should be at this point a universal right, and not a carrot/stick your employer (or even your union) should be allow to use against you.
 
2014-03-25 11:13:22 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: EnderX: Well that article wasn't slant much Left............NOT!

*Everything* slants left if you think Fox Propaganda is fair and balanced.


I cut off the right legs to my table and according to Fox News, it still slants left.
 
2014-03-25 11:13:28 PM  

Animatronik: TofuTheAlmighty: DamnYankees: Can someone explain to me how someone can consistently write the majority opinion in  Smith and vote in favor of Hobby Lobby here? Will Scalia have to say he was wrong in Smith? What's the argument?

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Here's how it works:

There is no compelling interest for the government in forcing companies to pay for contraception, because it isn't health care or a medical treatment, and it's not related to any kind of traditional concept of health insurance, which is supposed to cover emergency and preventative care, not contraception.


That would make sense if it were't completely wrong.
 
2014-03-25 11:13:58 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: EnderX: Well that article wasn't slant much Left............NOT!

*Everything* slants left if you think Fox Propaganda is fair and balanced.



I don't watch fox, I do listen to NPR............And that article was leaning so far left that Obama could see it.
 
Displayed 50 of 251 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report