Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Supreme Court: "closely Held" Companies Do Not Have To Pay Fo


BG45

Recommended Posts

It's good news. I didn't think they'd rule in favor of the companies. But I think they should have overturned the presidential order on other grounds - such as that no president can dictate to companies what benefits they will provide to employees.

 

Historically, insurance has not been a required benefit of employment. It was a benefit negotiated by unions for their members, and it may have been used to sweeten the deal, to attract (non-union) employees to a company.

 

For a president to then turn around and say, "This is the way it must be for all employees" is a misuse of executive power. The president is supposed to execute the law, not create it. 

 

I wouldn't be happy with it if the senate and house of representatives passed such a law, but at least in that case the law would be the result of the full democratic-representative process.

Edited by Luigi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could all be avoided if we just had a single payer system.  Or at least a public option.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Single Payer is a bs term. It makes the government the third party payer and pretends that it's not doing the same thing as the current HMO system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fidei Defensor

I've always wondered why this was such a big deal. If you company employs people of "good morals" they aren't gonna use the contraceptives anyway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anastasia13

I've always wondered why this was such a big deal. If you company employs people of "good morals" they aren't gonna use the contraceptives anyway!

Religious discrimination! You shouldn't not hire someone because they are Baptist or whatnot. The ACLU will be all over you. Imagine the legal bills...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fidei Defensor

Religious discrimination! You shouldn't not hire someone because they are Baptist or whatnot. The ACLU will be all over you. Imagine the legal bills...

Yes, yes. Just, coming from a company that closes sundays for worship time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Credo in Deum

I've always wondered why this was such a big deal. If you company employs people of "good morals" they aren't gonna use the contraceptives anyway!

 

People can lie about having good morals; plus a company cannot dictate who's morals are good and who's are not.  It's better if the company simply states it is a "(insert religion) company which holds (insert religion) values, and if you have a problem with this then you shouldn't apply for employment here."

Edited by Credo in Deum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fidei Defensor

People can lie about having good morals; plus a company cannot dictate who's morals are good and who's are not.  It's better if the company simply states it is a "(insert religion) company which holds (insert religion) values, and if you have a problem with this then you shouldn't apply for employment here."

Of course. I was just thinking out loud.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basilisa Marie

Ugh my stupid facebook feed is full of misinformation and ignorant rage. 

If they took any time to read the stupid opinions they'd realize that Alito crafted his opinion with a scalpel, not the sledgehammer they're perceiving. All they're saying is that under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, certain small companies run by religious people using religious guidelines for their business practices don't have to pay for the four kinds of birth control that they believe to be abortifacient, because the government hasn't demonstrated that forcing them to pay for them is the simplest way to pursue their own compelling interests, namely because they've already created a loophole system for non-profits so why can't they try applying that to these people first. He's very clear that this isn't a ruling that has anything to do with the First Amendment or how good the RFRA is. 

 

So many people are just spewing about how wonderful Ginsberg is when they probably never bothered reading her dissent in the first place, let alone Alito's opinion (or even Kennedy's rather short concurring opinion). 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winchester

Who cares what these assholes think? The supremes are idiots. Useless, worthless pieces of human garbage with zero authority. Their decisions are never worth reading. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nihil Obstat

Who cares what these arse portals think? The supremes are idiots. Useless, worthless pieces of human garbage with zero authority. Their decisions are never worth reading. 

Scalia seems decent to me. As decent a person as you can find in power given society these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basilisa Marie

Scalia seems decent to me. As decent a person as you can find in power given society these days.


I went to a thing where he talked about stuff when I was in high school. It was pretty cool.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...