No, but can a company claim protection under the RFRA against being forced to provide vaccines under their health care plan? If a Chrisitan Scientist owns a corporation can they claim refuse to offer medical health care plans to their employees, even if Obamacare requires it, because such a requirement violates their religious beliefs?
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act says that people cannot be forced to take actions that violate their religious beliefs. Mitt Romney said "Corporations are people." The government says they are not. But the courts have ruled in the past that corporations have the same right to free speech that people have, and that they can make political contributions just as people can. So if corporations are the same as people in their First Amdendment right to free speech then shouldn't they be considered the same regarding their First Amendment right to freedom of religion?
But if you consider corporations as people in that regards then what about freedom of association, implicitly protected in the First Amendment? As a person I can associate with anyone I like, and refuse to associate with anyone I like. So shouldn't a corporation be free to refuse service to anyone they want to? Gay marriages, for example? But then can they deny service to anyone they want, based not only on sexual orentation but race, religion or ethnic background?
“This issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.”
_________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” - Barack Obama, election eve, 2008
...In 1969, the year that publishers reissued Alinsky’s first book, Reveille for Radicals, a Wellesley undergraduate named Hillary Rodham submitted her 92-page senior thesis on Alinsky’s theories (she interviewed him personally for the project). In her conclusion Hillary compared Alinsky to Eugene Debs, Walt Whitman and Martin Luther King.
The title of Clinton’s thesis was “There Is Only the Fight: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.” In this title she had identified the single most important Alinsky contribution to the radical cause – his embrace of political nihilism. An SDS radical once wrote, “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.” In other words, the cause of a political action – whether civil rights or women’s rights – is never the real cause; women, blacks and other “victims” are only instruments in the larger cause, which is power.”
Guided by Alinsky principles, post-Communist radicals are not idealists but Machiavellians. Their focus is on means rather than ends, and therefore they are not bound by organizational orthodoxies in the way their admired Marxist forebears were. Within the framework of their revolutionary agenda, they are flexible and opportunistic and will say anything (and pretend to be anything) to get what they want, which is resources and power.......
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3095927/posts