Skip to comments.Hobby Lobby opinion may come down tomorrow
Posted on 06/29/2014 3:33:39 PM PDT by ReformationFan
One of the most important religious freedom cases heard before the Supreme Court in a generation may see an opinion handed down tomorrow.
Hobby Lobby, a Michigan based company, is challenging the Obamacare contraception mandate on the grounds that paying for coverage would violate their religious beliefs.
Cleveland Plain Dealer:
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court is likely to release its decision in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby, a widely anticipated ruling expected to have far-reaching implications for businesses.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
"The fundamental right of women to plan when they will have a family..." is not dependent on getting free or almost free contraception. That's ridiculous. Are we to believe that a woman's rights are violated if she has to pay for something rather than get it free? Nonsense.
Perhaps it will be someone's "right" to own a Mercedes someday.
These are the sort of nonsensical arguments advanced by the other side in this debate. And they're designed to distract from the core issue; are individual business owners' conscience to be dictated by government? Or belief in a higher power?
Those experts in the know believe that Obama will get a big win against Hobby Lobby and the owners of Hobby Lobby will be on the hook for millions in IRS penalties.
I hope not.
Apparently Reuters did a push-poll to prove that nobody but Neanderthals takes the side of Hobby Lobby.
Hobby Lobby is fighting to keep each and everyone of us that dont support murdering babies from becoming unwilling participants, (please pray about this)
When a nation reaches a point where its people collectively empower those that oppose God directly and then require his people to surrender their beliefs to peacefully coexist, when this kind of government sanctioned evil becomes the law of the land making murderers out of all of us
This is when a nation is judged,
I don’t think whats coming can be stopped, but we can pray to rebuke this evil administration and its followers, we have that authority if we would only claim it,
This is a spiritual battle, and enough people must realize what is happening here and join the battle in the spirit.
Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Matthew 18:18
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12
Well they said the SC would hand down its decision before the end of June, so ... that would have to be tomorrow.
The Roberts court is not friendly to freedom. It rots from the head.
I predict it will be a 5-4 decision.
If not struck down the principle established is: your rights are violated when something is not provided to you without charge.
Every way the Supreme Court could rule in Hobby Lobby
06/28/14 09:43 AMUpdated 06/28/14 03:41 PM
2 save share group 254
By Irin Carmon
“Theres no employer mandate, so theres no substantial burden. The theory that five of the Justices seemed to take most seriously at oral argument was Martin Ledermans, which is that there is no substantial burden on religious exercise at stake because the government isnt forcing Hobby Lobby to provide health insurance in the first place or as Lederman puts it, theres no employer mandate. If theres no government force, except paying a fine, theres no RFRA violation.
Justice Kennedy seemed highly intrigued by this theory, which was introduced early on by the female Justices. Assume hypothetically that its a washthat the employer would be in about the same position if he paid the penalty and the employee went out and got the insurance and that the employees wages were raised slightly and that its a wash so far as the employer [is] concerned, he asked Paul Clement, arguing for Hobby Lobby. Then what would your case be?
“Chief Justice John Roberts could be the “swing” vote as he was two years ago when siding with the court’s more liberal members to allow the law’s “individual mandate” to go into effect.”
I predict a win for the Constitution and for the rule of law. The right to the free exercise of religion is the most basic of our God-given freedoms. A woman’s right to free stuff on demand is nowhere in the Constitution (except, of course, in the penumbra). Unless Roberts in being blackmailed to crush freedom, and gutless enough to succumb again to those personal threats, there is no chance at all that he will rule with the big government liberals. What could go wrong?
>> Justice Kennedy seemed highly intrigued by this theory, which was introduced early on by the female Justices. Assume hypothetically that its a washthat the employer would be in about the same position if he paid the penalty and the employee went out and got the insurance and that the employees wages were raised slightly and that its a wash so far as the employer [is] concerned,
Why would the employee’s wages be raised?
If they lose they should shut down their business and fire all their employees.
I have become a Hobby Lobby fan. I love companies that stand on principal. As for Sebelius, the upside is that her wrinkled a** was out of Kansas for a few years. The Great OZ has spoken.
That would be absurd. It would establish the principle that you have a “right” to anything and everything - without charge.
Not may. Will come down tomorrow. Last day of the term.
May come down tomorrow?
How dumb of a headline. If it doesn’t come down tomorrow then it won’t until October. Tomorrow is the last day for the Supreme Court this year.
The Supreme Court had been 100 percent correct on ALL of their decisions in 2014.......Please keep up the trend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.