Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception
An anonymous reader writes In a legislative first, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that for-profit companies can, in essence, hold religious views. Given the Supreme Court's earlier decisions granting corporations the right to express political support through monetary donations, this ruling is not all that surprising. Its scope does not extend beyond family-owned companies where "there's no real difference between the business and its owners." It also only applies to the contraception mandate of the health care law. The justices indicated that contraceptive coverage can still be obtained through exceptions to the mandate that have already been introduced to accommodate religious nonprofits. Those exceptions, which authorize insurance companies to provide the coverage instead of the employers, are currently being challenged in lower courts.
The "closely held" test is pretty meaningless, since the majority of U.S. corporations are closely held.
nonsense, contraception is cheap. people can buy their own damn contraception, cheaper than a movie per week.
The rights of religious zealots trump the rights of everyone else.
This has been the battle cry this year and SCOTUS seems to agree.
Gosh, if it was about contraception, you might have a point. You clearly have no idea what this conversation is actually about.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Welcome to america where we have the god given right to force our beliefs on people that are poorer than us.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Hobby Lobby pays a minimum of $14/hr for full time employees. This is $6.75/hr over the federal minimum wage of $7.25. Plan B costs about $50 out of pocket at Walgreens. In this situation, an otherwise minimum wage employee could afford about one Plan B dose per workday on the EXTRA money that Hobby Lobby voluntarily pays them.
If you can't pay for it, you don't get it.
Will we have to pay for an xbox for people earning below the poverty line because such people can't pay for things themselves?
I love the way the left is trying to divide people into two groups: those who have full rights of political expression, and those who have limited/no rights to political expressions. Of course, the left wants to choose the "voluntary" ways you end up in which group, but giving that power to the currently-leftwing government. Short sighted at best.
Do you really want to give the government the power to in any way influence or decide who has the right to political expression? Really? Any branch of the government seem safe to you for the next 100 years? Perfectly safe from abuse? I can see no flaw with this plan.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.