The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 3:55 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:44 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
Anyone keeping up with the SCOTUS Lately:

  • Unanimously deciding that Police officers can't search your cell phone without a warrant
  • and again that the Executive can't make recess appointments on a 3 day weekend (though they did vary on what a "recess is"). Even Obama's pet justices couldn't give him a pass on this.
  • and once more to decide that MA can't stop people from speaking to women personally outside abortion clinics
  • A split decision saying that "closely held corporations" can't be forced to pay for contraceptives under ACA
  • and a split decision against forced unionization of public employees.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:56 pm 
Offline
Near Ground
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:38 pm
Posts: 6782
Location: Chattanooga, TN
In other word, a mixed bag of a week for liberty.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:58 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
Care to elaborate/discuss?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:00 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Yeah, the ACA ruling is particularly terrible as to make the other, more gooder rulings shine less brightly.

Even the most amazing sandwich in the world tastes like **** when there's a big, fat, turd in the middle of it.

Edit: Oofa. I didn't know about the Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone law thing. That, also is a particularly terrible decision. Hooray for allowing people to harass others!

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:06 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
I know the last two are the most questionable and I really haven't looked into the details of the unionization case, other than that in the actual case, the woman a home health worker who (at least from my perspective) really didn't have a collective to bargain with as was just being taxed by the union for the privilege of working in the trade. You can certainly argue how that should trickle down.

As far as Hobby Lobby goes, they limited the scope to these "close corporations" (and I would guess by logic sole props.) These aren't publicly traded companies like Ford, these are individuals and families using corporate law to shield their personal assets from liability. Why should they be forced to pay for something that grievously violates their religion? Their employees aren't prohibited from getting Birth control with their own money.

And they are not allowed to Mus moose. If Pro-lifers are told to **** off then, **** off they must.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:10 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
I really see a central theme in all of these cases and that is: The government Cannot. Certain that's a good thing.

Private entities can buy birth control, but the government cannot force their employers to pay for it.
Private landholders can post no solicitation/tresspassing signs, but the government cannot police free speech in the right of way.
The Government cannot look at your cell phone without a warrant.
The Government cannot force you to belong to the union.
The government cannot operate outside its established balance of power.

Thus increased personal liberty.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Last edited by Rorinthas on Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:11 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Rorinthas wrote:
I know the last two are the most questionable and I really haven't looked into the details of the unionization case, other than that in the actual case, the woman a home health worker who (at least from my perspective) really didn't have a collective to bargain with as was just being taxed by the union for the privilege of working in the trade. You can certainly argue how that should trickle down.

As far as Hobby Lobby goes, they limited the scope to these "close corporations" (and I would guess by logic sole props.) These aren't publicly traded companies like Ford, these are individuals and families using corporate law to shield their personal assets from liability. Why should they be forced to pay for something that grievously violates their religion.

And they are not allowed to Mus moose. If Pro-lifers are told to **** off then, **** off they must.


Because **** your religion. We live in a country that allows religious freedom. Or kinda does. As long as you're Christian. Then you're free to be Christian.

Corporations aren't people. They can't have "Religious Values". Oh... wait. According to Citizens United, they are. And now, according to Hobby Lobby, they totally can have religious aspects. Because they're people now, and can go to Church. Or something. And its totally their business what sort of medical treatments their employees have chosen. Because Jesus.

But that's ok. They're Christian. And we're a Christian Nation. And now, its totally OK for anti abortion activists to harass people who are having a procedure that's none of their goddamned business.

Two totally shit-tastic decisions. And Jesus is at the core of both of them.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:13 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Either way though, I am predicting great things for this thread.

Yes, the Government "cannot". But in these two cases, the Government *should* because religious activists are assholes, as proven by the need for Buffer Zones, and the laws requiring insurance plans to cover medical contraception.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:15 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
By your own admission, you are an ******* (your word, not mine), should the government censor you? As I've said before, being one is awful low legal threshold.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:19 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Rorinthas wrote:
By your own admission, you are an ******* (your word, not mine), should the government censor you? As I've said before, being one is awful low legal threshold.


No. Because I'm only inflicting my assholishness on the message board. I'm not trying to tell anyone how to live their life because they'll burn in hell if they don't listen to me.

Once your bullshit infringes upon people in a tangible, legal manner, the government needs to step in and say "Hey buddy, stop being such a goddamn *******".

In this case, Hobby Lobby's assholishness has infringed upon the government's mandated right to a medical procedure that should be none of their business. But that's ok, because Jesus, and the 5 male dinosaurs decided that access to contraception is no big deal.

**** assholes. All 5 of them.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:21 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Müs wrote:
Corporations aren't people. They can't have "Religious Values". Oh... wait. According to Citizens United, they are. And now, according to Hobby Lobby, they totally can have religious aspects. Because they're people now, and can go to Church. Or something. And its totally their business what sort of medical treatments their employees have chosen. Because Jesus.

It's not the corporations who are going to church. It's the handful of private investor owners who do.

Just like it's the handful of private investor owners who say unpopular things about whatever hotbutton conflict of social issue and their religion is in the news this week, and everybody on Facebook boycotts the corporation, rather than telling the people who own it they're Neanderthal nitwits.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:25 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Rorinthas wrote:
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.


Because they're a legitimate, legal procedure for thousands of women. Some of whom do not use them for "contraception", others that may not be "Christian", and still others that have any other legit use that's none of the employer's business.

And yet, they'll cover vasectomies. Bit of a bullshit double standard there.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:29 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Müs wrote:
Corporations aren't people. They can't have "Religious Values". Oh... wait. According to Citizens United, they are. And now, according to Hobby Lobby, they totally can have religious aspects. Because they're people now, and can go to Church. Or something. And its totally their business what sort of medical treatments their employees have chosen. Because Jesus.

It's not the corporations who are going to church. It's the handful of private investor owners who do.

Just like it's the handful of private investor owners who say unpopular things about whatever hotbutton conflict of social issue and their religion is in the news this week, and everybody on Facebook boycotts the corporation, rather than telling the people who own it they're Neanderthal nitwits.


They know they're neanderthal nitwits. AND THEY DON'T CARE. Telling them they are does nothing. They have the money, and now they have the court's backing.

Another victory for Church sponsored tyranny.

Ginsburg has the dissent correct.
Quote:
"Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah's Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today's decision."
"Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be 'perceived as favoring one religion over another,' the very 'risk the [Constitution's] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude."
"The court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield."

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Müs wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.


Because they're a legitimate, legal procedure for thousands of women. Some of whom do not use them for "contraception", others that may not be "Christian", and still others that have any other legit use that's none of the employer's business.

And yet, they'll cover vasectomies. Bit of a bullshit double standard there.

Is it worth pointing out that they're not denying women regular use of the pill? Including for non-contraceptive uses?

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:44 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Müs wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.


Because they're a legitimate, legal procedure for thousands of women. Some of whom do not use them for "contraception", others that may not be "Christian", and still others that have any other legit use that's none of the employer's business.

And yet, they'll cover vasectomies. Bit of a bullshit double standard there.

Is it worth pointing out that they're not denying women regular use of the pill? Including for non-contraceptive uses?


This is a fair point.

;
however
,

By disallowing contraception from their insurance plans, they are causing their employees to bear a higher burden to obtain the medications that have been legally prescribed to them. I wonder if "ED Medications" are covered... Hmm.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Dude. The only stuff Hobby Lobby wants to deny coverage on are post-fertilization contraception. A couple types of IUD and the morning after pill.

Nobody's monthly prescription of hormonal contraception is being touched. Hobby Lobby wants to still cover that.

On the other hand, I'll happily grant you that there's a huge double standard going on with ED medication and the "contraception is for whores" reaction that some dumbasses spout.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:03 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Dude. The only stuff Hobby Lobby wants to deny coverage on are post-fertilization contraception. A couple types of IUD and the morning after pill.

Nobody's monthly prescription of hormonal contraception is being touched. Hobby Lobby wants to still cover that.

On the other hand, I'll happily grant you that there's a huge double standard going on with ED medication and the "contraception is for whores" reaction that some dumbasses spout.


That's news to me. If that is indeed the case, they're still neanderthals, but not as bad. Everything I've read has been "Hobby Lobby Hates Women and wants them all pregnant and barefoot." ;) (Which I don't doubt, because they're neanderthals.)

I retract *some* of my antipathy in that case. But not all. Either way, its still none of the employer's business what medical procedures the employee chooses to have.

And yes. That is stipulated. ;)

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:44 pm
Posts: 2315
None of you see a problem with the fact that "religion" is a valid reason to not provide certain mandated treatments, but nothing else is? What was that about religion not getting special treatment just because it's religion?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:04 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Xequecal wrote:
None of you see a problem with the fact that "religion" is a valid reason to not provide certain mandated treatments, but nothing else is? What was that about religion not getting special treatment just because it's religion?


Nono, if you look above, you see I have a HUGE problem with this.

Because Jesus.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:05 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
Müs wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.


Because they're a legitimate, legal procedure for thousands of women. Some of whom do not use them for "contraception", others that may not be "Christian", and still others that have any other legit use that's none of the employer's business.

And yet, they'll cover vasectomies. Bit of a bullshit double standard there.


Will they cover having tubes tied? That would be the equivalent procedure.

If they have to pay for it, it is their business. Either you want them involved, you don't, or you are being a hypocrite

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:08 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Rorinthas wrote:
Müs wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.


Because they're a legitimate, legal procedure for thousands of women. Some of whom do not use them for "contraception", others that may not be "Christian", and still others that have any other legit use that's none of the employer's business.

And yet, they'll cover vasectomies. Bit of a bullshit double standard there.


Will they cover having tubes tied? That would be the equivalent procedure.


Dunno. I haven't seen what's on or not on their HMO/PPO. Wouldn't surprise me either way if they did or didn't.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:09 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
Xequecal wrote:
None of you see a problem with the fact that "religion" is a valid reason to not provide certain mandated treatments, but nothing else is? What was that about religion not getting special treatment just because it's religion?


Where is that found? The argument is that paying for contraceptives violates their "free exercise thereof"

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:12 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
And I'd rather the government not force anyone to buy anything, even car insurance and I don't care if its enforced by the legal fiction that its a tax

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:36 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Rorinthas wrote:
Müs wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
why should anyone be forced to pay for contraceptives (or any medical procedure) other than "the government said so"? I really think your bias is showing on this one, as your repeated attacks indicate.


Because they're a legitimate, legal procedure for thousands of women. Some of whom do not use them for "contraception", others that may not be "Christian", and still others that have any other legit use that's none of the employer's business.

And yet, they'll cover vasectomies. Bit of a bullshit double standard there.


Will they cover having tubes tied? That would be the equivalent procedure.

If they have to pay for it, it is their business. Either you want them involved, you don't, or you are being a hypocrite


They're paying for their employee's medical insurance. If they're allowed to pick and choose what they cover as mandated by law, then the whole system will fall apart as other neanderthal factions will argue that their particular brand of neanderthinking should trump all.

When people won't do the right thing, government must step in to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

It would be nice if people would do right by their fellows, but in this country, its been proven time and time again that corporations can do as they wish and the government won't curtail their "rights".

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 187 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group