General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy Women Aren't People (But Corporations Are)
Yesterday, five men agreed that closely held corporations with anti-birth control religious beliefs cannot be required to provide contraceptive coverage to female employees. Corporations are people, my friend. Women? Not so much.
The decision to declare women Unpeople was a narrow one; the five men agreed that corporations (people) shouldn't be able to use Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby to justify discriminating against anyone except women (lesser people-ish entities), and won't be able to use it to deny other health care besides contraception. The same religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act that applies to nonprofit organizations also applies to for-profit companies controlled by a small group of people who think birth control is black magic. This ruling applies to whore pills only. Not to blood transfusions, AIDS retrovirals, vaccines, treating infections caused by getting a SATAN RULES tattoo with an infected needle at an unsafe tattoo parlor, antibiotics purchased to fight off a nasty case of the clap caught while raw dogging a stranger in a bar bathroom. Just birth control. No matter why a woman needs it.
The five men also agreed that their ruling only applies to corporations (people) with "sincerely held" religious beliefs. You know, the kind of religious beliefs that are so sincerely anti-birth control that they invest in and profit from companies that manufacture birth control. The kind of religious beliefs that cite as justification for their beliefs a series of religious texts written before Western Medicine as we know it existed.
If corporations are people then why can't I punch one in the fucking face?
Monday, five men on the Supreme Court said that women's reproductive health care is less important than a woman's boss's superstition-based prudery and moral trepidation about fornication for female pleasure. They ruled that it doesn't matter if birth control actually causes abortions; it only matters if business owners sincerely believe that birth control causes abortions.
None of the five men behind the majority ruling have have ever suffered from endometriosis, painful periods, dangerous pregnancies, or simply risked becoming pregnant at a time that they weren't mentally, fiscally, or physically prepared for a pregnancy. They bought Hobby Lobby's "RELIGIOUS LIBERTY!" argument despite the fact that Hobby Lobby doesn't personally object to covering vasectomies for men; their religion only applies slut panic to women. The Court won't classify Hobby Lobby's woman-only scientifically illiterate objections to contraception as "discrimination" against women. But it would be discrimination if Hobby Lobby's religious objections applied to black people or gay people. Are you following? Me neither.
http://jezebel.com/why-women-arent-people-but-corporations-are-1598061808
And the fallout will be horrendous|
Squinch
(50,918 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Cresent City Kid
(1,621 posts)Is it possible to be shocked and not surprised simultaneously? A 5-4 decision that the sky is red wouldn't surprise me anymore. But somehow I held out hope that the ridiculousness of the notion of a company having a religion would be obvious. If a company can have a religion, I want to see it go to church, any church. Not the owner, not the employees I want to see the company in a church.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,967 posts)It's not just hobby lobby, it's the implications of the entire ruling. I haven't read it yet, and I'm very interesting in what their legal rational is
world wide wally
(21,739 posts)FailureToCommunicate
(14,007 posts)Did looming doom motivate folks to vote in 2000 and 2004?
GOTFV!!
Moostache
(9,895 posts)The fact that so many decisions have strayed utterly from evaluating the constitutionality of a law and into the realm of writing law (that favored Republican canard about 'legislating from the bench' writ large) is proof positive that lifetime appointments to the court has failed its intended purpose - to keep the court as apolitical in its decisions as possible.
I will give the TEA party morons SOME credit...they are right about our country disappearing before our eyes, they just can't recognize that they are supporting the very people accelerating the disappearance at every turn. These 5-4 decisions of the court - from Bush v. Gore to Citizen's United to Hobby Lobby and more to follow have reduced me to 2 things:
1) hoping that Justice Ginsberg retires next year and allows President Obama to name her successor to the court
2) praying that Anton Scalia keeps eating and bloating and dies of a massive heart attack in the next year as well
Under that scenario, a retired Ginsberg and natural causes dead Scalia, we could reset the court ahead of the 2016 elections and end this disaster before even more damage can be inflicted on us all...