The Constitution Separates Church And State,except For Healthcare

[Evangetholic]

I have lived in the South for my entire life (the closest to patriotism I get is love for this land, the land of my birth, the Sacred, hypocritical, violent, saccharine sweet, maddeningly obstinant, Christ-obsessed, ignorant, fluid, beautiful, grace stalked, rythmic Southland). I have not found it to be racist--literally all of my friends are white and Southern--without exception. NYC and Boston on the other hand...

[add]

I have lived in the South for my entire life (the closest to patriotism I get is love for this land, the land of my birth, the Sacred, hypocritical, violent, saccharine sweet, maddeningly obstinant, Christ-obsessed, ignorant, fluid, beautiful, grace stalked, rythmic Southland). I have not found it to be racist--literally all of my friends are white and Southern--without exception. NYC and Boston on the other hand...

What happened in NYC and Boston?

[add]

the Obama Administration does not respect the religious beliefs of all
Americans,” said Francis Manion, Senior Counsel of the ACLJ. “This
country’s laws and Constitution protect the religious freedom of all
Americans, whether organized into religious bodies or not. Religious
believers who simply want to conduct their businesses in a manner
consistent with their religious beliefs have the same right to religious
liberty as everybody else."

Edited February 11, 2013 by add

[4588686]

Cars are also not in the constitution.  Let's outlaw those too.  

[add]

Cars are also not in the constitution.  Let's outlaw those too.  

 

no one is trying to outlaw birth control. 

the objection is about religious freedom and the God given right of all Americans to conduct their businesses in a manner consistent with their religious beliefs

[4588686]

no one is trying to outlaw birth control. 

the objection is about religious freedom and the God given right of all Americans to conduct their businesses in a manner consistent with their religious beliefs

 

 

Individuals have religious freedoms.  Corporations don't.  It looks like non-profits are going to be exempted.  Which means that at this point you are arguing that businesses can just nullify taxes that they deem immoral, by whatever criteria they choose.  If I claim that my religious views prohibit from paying my employees minimum wage does that claim have to be respected?  Obviously not.  

[add]

Individuals have religious freedoms. Corporations don't. It looks like non-profits are going to be exempted. Which means that at this point you are arguing that businesses can just nullify taxes that they deem immoral, by whatever criteria they choose. If I claim that my religious views prohibit from paying my employees minimum wage does that claim have to be respected? Obviously not.

Individuals make up religious Institutions, Corporations are not religious Institutions. Most non-profits companies are tax except.
If I claim that my religious views prohibit from paying my employees minimum wages then no one would work for me and/or this enterprise would quickly Cease to exist because of a lack of willing workers to accept substandard wages.

[StMichael]

Vehicles are not provided to the citizen by the government.

 

Additionally, U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 we have a right to Freedom of Movement.

 

Cars are also not in the constitution.  Let's outlaw those too.  

 

[add]

The Obama Administration announced a new
regulation being sold as a "compromise" on the HHS mandate. It is merely
an accounting gimmick to hide the fact Americans of conscience will be
forced to participate in coverage of abortion-inducing drugs,
sterilization, and contraception. The only acceptable outcome is the
repeal of the HHS mandate and the restoration of a thriving marketplace
where Americans can choose health care coverage consistent with their
beliefs.

Tell your elected officials that religious and moral freedom is not up for negotiation.

[Socrates]

Cars are also not in the constitution.  Let's outlaw those too.  

 

Let the strawmen continue . . 

 

No one was talking about banning anything.  A better analogy would be the federal government forcing the guy to buy a car who doesn't want one, and is quite happy riding his bike to work. 

And further, forcing the Amish to buy cars against their religious beliefs.

 

Even without the issue of the government denying private citizens the right of free practice of religion, the idea that the government has the power to force private citizens to buy products against their will is extremely problematic.

 

 

 

Individuals have religious freedoms.  Corporations don't.  It looks like non-profits are going to be exempted.  Which means that at this point you are arguing that businesses can just nullify taxes that they deem immoral, by whatever criteria they choose.  If I claim that my religious views prohibit from paying my employees minimum wage does that claim have to be respected?  Obviously not.  

 

Corporations are made of individuals.  The idea that people relinquish basic constitutional rights such as free practice of religion and free speech simply because they are  part of a corporation is malicious nonsense.

 

I've yet to see someone explain why there is such a necessity for employers to be forced to buy insurance covering contraceptives against their religious conscience.  It's completely bogus.

[add]

[4588686]

Corporations are made of individuals.  The idea that people relinquish basic constitutional rights such as free practice of religion and free speech simply because they are  part of a corporation is malicious nonsense.

 

I've yet to see someone explain why there is such a necessity for employers to be forced to buy insurance covering contraceptives against their religious conscience.  It's completely bogus.

 

And those individuals retain their rights individuals.  A corporation is a legal entity.  States are also composed of individuals.  Individuals are not treated as states under the law.    

[StMichael]

Corporations have, from the beginning of this nation, Corporate Personhood and then have the full protection of the 14th amendment.

 

In the case of  Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania - 125 U.S. 181 (1888), the Court clearly affirmed the doctrine, holding, "Under the designation of 'person' there is no doubt that a private corporation is included [in the Fourteenth Amendment]. Such corporations are merely associations of individuals united for a special purpose and permitted to do business under a particular name and have a succession of members without dissolution."  This doctrine has been reaffirmed by the Court many times since.

 

 

 

And those individuals retain their rights individuals.  A corporation is a legal entity.  States are also composed of individuals.  Individuals are not treated as states under the law.    

 

[4588686]

Corporations have, from the beginning of this nation, Corporate Personhood and then have the full protection of the 14th amendment.

 

In the case of  Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania - 125 U.S. 181 (1888), the Court clearly affirmed the doctrine, holding, "Under the designation of 'person' there is no doubt that a private corporation is included [in the Fourteenth Amendment]. Such corporations are merely associations of individuals united for a special purpose and permitted to do business under a particular name and have a succession of members without dissolution."  This doctrine has been reaffirmed by the Court many times since.

 

 

There was a strong tendency towards idiocy in the 19th century which gave corporations a lot of leeway.  That was beaten back, as it ought to have been, in the 20th century.  It has now been, stupidly, revived.  

[StMichael]

Actually that has never been the case. It has been lawless to subvert it and it is clearly stated  in 1 U.S.C. §1 (United States Code), which states:

 

"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise-- the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;"

 

There was a strong tendency towards idiocy in the 19th century which gave corporations a lot of leeway.  That was beaten back, as it ought to have been, in the 20th century.  It has now been, stupidly, revived.