d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Supreme Court Allows Scientologists To Only Cover
Prev12345Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 61,379
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 10.77
Jun 30 2014 03:49pm
Quote (IceMage @ Jun 30 2014 02:47pm)
Derp.

There are exceptions for religious people so that they don't have to violate their conscience.  Why would Muslims refuse to cover women or Mormons refuse to cover anyone not in a polygamous marriage?  That wouldn't violate their conscience.


Give me a fucking break. Hobby Lobby imports 99% of its shit from a county with a One Child policy that requires abortions as the status quo. The corporation is already funding mass abortions through its economic decisions.
Member
Posts: 96,125
Joined: Mar 15 2007
Gold: 7,252.72
Jun 30 2014 03:50pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ Jun 30 2014 05:45pm)
Gonna be so awesome when a hemophiliac child dies because his father works for a company owned by a Jehova's Witness who has dropped blood transfusions from their group policy.


...only a soulless liberal would look forward to this .
Member
Posts: 61,379
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 10.77
Jun 30 2014 03:51pm
Quote (IceMage @ Jun 30 2014 02:48pm)
:(

I'm sure you would volunteer your hard earned money to his cause.  Liberals donate to charity, right?


Nope. I'm going to lay this squarely in the lap of conservatives. If a single child dies for this reason, it's conservatives fault for not donating to his blood transfusion.
Member
Posts: 48,563
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 5,016.77
Jun 30 2014 03:52pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ Jun 30 2014 04:49pm)
Give me a fucking break. Hobby Lobby imports 99% of its shit from a county with a One Child policy that requires abortions as the status quo. The corporation is already funding mass abortions through its economic decisions.


That's irrelevant to the current discussion.

Quote (inkanddagger @ Jun 30 2014 04:51pm)
Nope. I'm going to lay this squarely in the lap of conservatives. If a single child dies for this reason, it's conservatives fault for not donating to his blood transfusion.


Freedom from responsibility. Yessir!
Member
Posts: 53,433
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 7,525.35
Jun 30 2014 03:52pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ Jun 30 2014 05:51pm)
Nope. I'm going to lay this squarely in the lap of conservatives. If a single child dies for this reason, it's conservatives fault for not donating to his blood transfusion.


If a single child dies anywhere its Ink's fault because he didn't pay to prevent it.
Is that a fair assessment?

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Jun 30 2014 03:52pm
Member
Posts: 61,379
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 10.77
Jun 30 2014 03:54pm
Quote (WidowMaKer_MK @ Jun 30 2014 02:50pm)
...only a soulless liberal would look forward to this .


Only a satanist posing as a Christian would allow this to become law.
Member
Posts: 96,125
Joined: Mar 15 2007
Gold: 7,252.72
Jun 30 2014 03:55pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ Jun 30 2014 05:51pm)
Nope. I'm going to lay this squarely in the lap of conservatives. If a single child dies for this reason, it's conservatives fault for not donating to his blood transfusion.


...what a shame your concern for the innocent and defenseless only begins when the child is entirely out of the birth canal .
Member
Posts: 38,317
Joined: Jul 12 2006
Gold: 20.31
Jun 30 2014 04:42pm
It will be interesting to trace from this decision to the impact it will have on future events. It will no doubt play a big part in deciding this year's midterm elections, and I shudder to think how this narrow decision will be cited in future rulings that are as ridiculous but are much, much broader. It could have the unusual effect of giving huge benefits to liberals, moderates, Independents, and Democrats this year but huge drawbacks down the road until those people help pick a new majority on the court.
Member
Posts: 36,123
Joined: Jul 18 2008
Gold: 2,407.00
Jun 30 2014 05:03pm
Quote (Subwoofer @ Jun 30 2014 04:39pm)
Now to find out if muslim business owners can refuse to cover women.


Have you seen muslim women? They're covered head-to-toe.
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 285.00
Jun 30 2014 05:27pm
The religion of corporate owners are more important than the religious freedom of the employees. Really pretty normal for the SCOTUS to put corporations above people.

This just makes the argument for public healthcare stronger. If corporations weren't health care brokers too we wouldn't have this mess.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jun 30 2014 05:28pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev12345Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll