Do you have adblock enabled?
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 38
    More: Cool, Hobby Lobby, Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, emergency contraception, Paul Clement, Supreme Court  
•       •       •

11477 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Mar 2014 at 10:31 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2014-03-25 09:36:55 PM  
4 votes:

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 07:09:45 PM  
4 votes:
Sweet. Can't wait to found my Sharia-based law firm.
2014-03-25 10:59:55 PM  
3 votes:

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 10:43:24 PM  
3 votes:

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 10:36:58 PM  
3 votes:
i141.photobucket.com

You know you want her to swing your gavel.
2014-03-26 12:20:02 AM  
2 votes:
So if a Hobby Lobby is considered a being, and gets the right to incorporate their religious beliefs, would that mean a failed Hobby Lobby store in a particular location has the right to life and they must keep it open no matter how much energy it takes and money they lose? Or can they just abort it?
2014-03-25 11:49:49 PM  
2 votes:

yourmomlovestetris: Lot of idiocy in this thread.


Indeed.  You really didn't need to add to it.  We already had enough before you posted.
2014-03-25 11:44:37 PM  
2 votes:
Solution:  Hobby Lobby employees shall only be allowed to have oral and/or anal sex.  GoPros shall be worn at all times to ensure compliance.  And a new profit stream.
2014-03-25 11:31:36 PM  
2 votes:

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


Conversely, my Satanic firm will have the single-most stringent birth control policy: mandatory birth control for all but the best and brightest (upper management).

Verily the Dark Lord's will shall be done. Hail, "Religious Freedom"!
2014-03-25 11:13:28 PM  
2 votes:

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 11:13:22 PM  
2 votes:

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 10:46:53 PM  
2 votes:
Baseball, cold showers. Margret Thatcher naked on a cold day.
2014-03-25 10:46:21 PM  
2 votes:

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.
2014-03-26 09:39:42 AM  
1 votes:

cirrhosis_and_halitosis: 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 accept their job offer.

I'm guessing that you aren't employed as an editor or copywriter.  His point, which seems to have escaped you, is that health coverage should be universal rather than a benefit for (some of) the employed.  That kind of system seems to work for every other first world country.  And many second and third worlds as well.


Thx for the spelling correction, I wish I was like you and never made a spelling mistake in my life. You are quite the special person. You seemed to have missed my point, health care is a benefit or a bonus that a employer offers to you. The government should not be forcing a business to give its employee's health care. Yeah other countries are great, maybe you should read the WSJ article on the failing health system in Europe.
2014-03-26 08:55:53 AM  
1 votes:
All this could be settled very quickly if HL just gives up the tax breaks for providing health care and pays the penalty.  They want the tax break for providing health care but at the same time want the power to dictate what does or does not constitute health care.  You can't have it both ways and anyone with a working brain should see why that's a conflict of interest.

i.imgur.com
2014-03-26 08:27:19 AM  
1 votes:

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



I'm going to convert my corporation/person  to Christian Scientist. We don't believe in most medicine, not even blood transfusions. I am gonna save a bundle!
2014-03-26 05:15:23 AM  
1 votes:
Whodathunkit, a left slanted opinion piece getting greenlit on fark and touted as fact.

The math here is simple: YOU use birth control; they disagree with birth control. YOU pay for the birth control YOU freely choose to use. Not force someone else to violate their beliefs.

I think the SCOTUS is going to get this one right. What's too bad is that it's being fought on the grounds of religious freedom, and not general 1st amendment freedom of expression like it should be.

And hooey to the feminists for showing their true colors. Not satisfied to have the freedom to prevent and abort pregnancies, they also feel the need to force others to pay for their decisions, or lack thereof. And I really dug their cause when they were seeking equality too.
2014-03-26 02:02:26 AM  
1 votes:

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 don't talk to very many women, do you?
2014-03-26 01:45:51 AM  
1 votes:

Trid_Kicker: m00: The real problem is that corporations were ever considered people. This is just a natural extension of that notion. This isn't going to go away. Corporations are going to fight for more and more rights as people, even as real people get those same rights stripped away. I think it's better to lose this battle and win the war, because maybe if Hobby Lobby wins voters will force an action.

No.  Voters cannot influence the Supreme Court.

If Hobby Lobby wins, voters are powerless until a contradictory case emerges, is propagated all the way up to the Supreme Court, and is decided in such a way as to overturn the previous decision.

A very lengthy, chancy, and tall order.  The term "frightening" comes to mind.


Actually if hobby lobby wins the owners should be publicly executed on the supreme court steps to honor the elder gods or some South American feathered serpent

Assuming they survive the attempted sacrifice, a VP should send out a memo stating Sith + rule of 2 is the one true religion followed by violent purging of all other VPs and assassination of the owners.  Legally that VP now assumes full ownership of the company as per the requirements of his religion.  Hopefully the new dark lord will finally carry industry standard power converters, rather the Trade Federation garbage the current owners have been trying to sell
2014-03-26 12:43:03 AM  
1 votes:

jst3p: Animatronik: debug: jst3p: debug: Why would you have to go to a doctor?  Just show your medical card at check out.  Seems pretty simple.

I don't think bandaids or toothpase or asprin prevent diseases, do they?

Band-aids prevent infection, kinda like condoms. Toothpaste prevents gum disease. Aspirin has been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Great, niether of you have yet answered my question.  Why not cover condoms?  Why shouldn't having birth controlcovered by your insurance inclue ALL birth control?  What's the downside that you are fighting so much against covering them?

Because condoms are not a hot topic for women, and therefore arguing this point will not help democrats win elections.

Part of the reason is that, since condoms prevent disease transmission, they are justified as preventative treatment, which is why a lot of plans DO cover them.

Interesting.

In spite of their popularity, most health insurance companies do not cover condoms under their plans at the present time. However, this might be set to change under the edicts of the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Under the new law, women with health insurance are likely to have access to condoms, with a prescription and without a co-pay. However, men do not have this option available to them.

So they will be covered. For women.

http://www.personalhealthinsurance.com/does-health-insurance-cover-c on doms/

That's kinda hilarious.


To be fair, the BC and the condoms do benefit men that want to get laid without fear of knocking some chick up. So I don't know why reproduction is considered strictly a women's issue.
2014-03-26 12:34:03 AM  
1 votes:

debug: jst3p: debug: Why would you have to go to a doctor?  Just show your medical card at check out.  Seems pretty simple.

I don't think bandaids or toothpase or asprin prevent diseases, do they?

Band-aids prevent infection, kinda like condoms. Toothpaste prevents gum disease. Aspirin has been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Great, niether of you have yet answered my question.  Why not cover condoms?  Why shouldn't having birth controlcovered by your insurance inclue ALL birth control?  What's the downside that you are fighting so much against covering them?


Because condoms are not a hot topic for women, and therefore arguing this point will not help democrats win elections.

Part of the reason is that, since condoms prevent disease transmission, they are justified as preventative treatment, which is why a lot of plans DO cover them.
2014-03-26 12:02:11 AM  
1 votes:

SundaesChild: So women have to go through a rather invasive physical exam and get their doctor to write up a prescription which may or may not be covered by their insurance, if they happen to have insurance. Men can just barrel up to the vending machine in the bar and plop in fifty cents. Seems fair.


When you use a condom it's not intentionally life-threatening, though this thread is making me wish it were.
2014-03-25 11:42:51 PM  
1 votes:

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

Oy. That makes it 5-4.


Well, technically it is about abortion. The only two (or four) types of "comtraception" they are seeking an exemption for are those that act like (I can't think of the correct term) abotiates, like The Morning After Pill. The companies lawyer has a very compelling case.
2014-03-25 11:33:35 PM  
1 votes:
Lot of idiocy in this thread. You people DO know that Hobby Lobby DOES cover the pill--the only thing it doesn't cover are IUDs and the Morning After Pill (both of which they consider abortifacients).  Birth control pills used for hormone regulation and other medical problems are covered by the company. No company, as far as I know is required to pay for abortions. (Although there are plenty of people in this forum who entitledly caterwaul that the government refusing to pay for abortion on demand is some kind of Crime Against Women. ) I say again: idiocy.

Pregnancy is NOT a "dangerous medical condition" It's the natural result of unprotected sex and is an absolute necessity for the continuation of the human race. I would agree that pregnancy COULD be considered a "stupid, civilization-wrecking condition" if it's done by people who don't have the means (or a stable enough relationship) to support a child. Which is why I would encourage private businesses and charities to donate low-maintenance birth control to women at risk. But strong-arming EVERYONE into paying for birth control via the government is a form of tyranny which may come back to bite us in the end.  Birth control and family planning are far too important to be left to the inept social engineering of the government.
2014-03-25 11:26:39 PM  
1 votes:
My religious preferences and choices are not at all a part of an application or job interview. In fact, it is not legal for them to ask about it. As an employee, I give precisely zero farks what your religious preferences are, because they are not a part of my job.

My medical records and treatment are also not a part of my responsibility to a potential employer. You aren't asking about my medical history, and I am not providing that information during an interview, nor as a part of my actual work.

What insurance pays for and covers for my medical needs are "not your business" unless there is a reason for it to be, and unless it involves time off for lengthy care, you can be absolutely certain that it will remain none of your business.

You don't get access to my prescription history by being my employer. Whatever your religious beliefs are, as your employee, there is no reason that what I need insurance for and what you believe should cross paths.

Suck it, and stop trying to dictate my health based on your religion that I am not required to be a part of in order to offer my abilities and experience as your employee.
2014-03-25 11:24:03 PM  
1 votes:

debug: but I don't see anyone providing condoms as part of their helath insurance, so why should they pay for the BCP?


My health insurance doesn't cover any OTC medication; why would it cover condoms?
2014-03-25 11:23:48 PM  
1 votes:

ciberido: EnderX: 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?

So far as I know selecting which hours you will be open for business isn't against the law.


Actually, there are local laws in a lot of places that specify when some businesses can do business - like so-called "blue" laws, that forbid the sale of alcohol on Sunday, or at certain hours. These laws have not been found unconstitutional.
2014-03-25 11:21:41 PM  
1 votes:

physt: So tired of special rights for religion...


I know huh?

It's almost like these people think they have some kind of right to practice religion any way they see fit.
2014-03-25 11:21:09 PM  
1 votes:

Callous: nucrash: 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.

From my point of view you cut off the left legs.


Now I have to cut them off too
2014-03-25 11:18:01 PM  
1 votes:

nucrash: 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.


From my point of view you cut off the left legs.
2014-03-25 11:12:10 PM  
1 votes:

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 11:11:55 PM  
1 votes:

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 11:10:58 PM  
1 votes:
2014-03-25 11:09:25 PM  
1 votes:

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 11:03:27 PM  
1 votes:

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 10:46:05 PM  
1 votes:
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.
jbc [TotalFark]
2014-03-25 08:04:49 PM  
1 votes:

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 06:41:46 PM  
1 votes:
Wait, was I not supposed to before?


/Ohh yea, you're my baby, Ruth
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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