Motley Moose – Archive

Remember Hobby Lobby?  That corporate use of personal religious freedom to make decisions about employees’ benefits?  

Guess what?  Did anyone really think that decision would stay put and never been seen again?  Because Wheaton College decision came out 3 days later?  But still, maybe, just maybe it could have been buried.  

But wait!  The Fundamentalist LDS, have decided not to pay kids to harvest pecans.  The Department of Labor is investigating labor violations.  FLDS leaders claim they do not have to testify because “religious freedom.”  

So I wonder what else the FLDS have religious freedom for?  Perhaps child sex assault?  Do we need to let Warren Jeffs out of prison because of “religious freedom”?

Do Lutherans have the same protection?  How about followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Judge David Sam is in a federal court, and overruled another judge who was a magistrate.  I am not a lawyer and welcome the help of lawyers to explain this better.  It just seems to be that “religious freedom” just became a huge legal reason to not do anything you didn’t feel like doing.  

Ironically, the judge deciding the case chose to not investigate the religious beliefs:  

“It is not for the Court to “inquir[e] into the theological merit of the belief in question,” Sam wrote, citing the Hobby Lobby decision.  “The determination of what is a ‘religious’ belief or practice is more often than not a difficult and delicate task …. However, the resolution of that question is not to turn upon a judicial perception of the particular belief or practice in question; religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.”

Ben Winslow for Fox-13

I think that any religious group could have cited Hobby Lobby in any variety of cases, and it is just luck that it happened here first. This is not limited to the FLDS.  And please remember, this is not an opportunity for you to bash the LDS.  If you need to do that, please write your own diary.  

Please do not use this diary for LDS or Mormon bashing.  

From Bernie’s Buzz:

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked a bill that would have protected women’s right to make their own health care decisions. In the 56-43 vote – four short of the 60 needed – only three Republicans supported this basic protection for women.

Although the vast majority of American women use birth control at some point in their lives, many women without insurance could not afford the method that would work best for them. The Affordable Care Act guaranteed that health insurance would fully cover the cost of contraception. A recent Supreme Court decision took back that guarantee, telling women they could only be covered if their bosses said it was ok.

“The court was wrong and the Senate Republicans are wrong,” Sen. Bernie Sanders said. “Bosses should not be able to impose their religious beliefs on their employees. Bosses should not be able to deny insurance-covered birth control to their female employees. Women should make their own health care decisions, not their employers.

“At a time when tens of millions of women use birth control, there is no valid reason to restrict a woman’s access to safe, widely-used preventive services simply because her employer does not approve of what should be her private medical decisions.”

The Protect Women’s Health from Corporate Interference Act would have ensured that employers cannot interfere in their employees’ decisions about contraception or other health services.

In trying to make sense of The Way Things Are in a post-Hobby Lobby world, it is important to peel away the layers and understand what the Hobby Lobby ruling is and, more importantly, what it isn’t.

The Supreme Court ruled that a closely-held corporation can avoid paying for health insurance that covers contraceptive options if the belief about how those methods work offends the religious feelings of the majority stockholders.

Yes, the ruling is a direct assault on common sense in its attempt to assign freedom of religious expression to a corporation.

Yes, the ruling is science-denialism writ large.

Yes, it is a poke in the eye to the separation of powers: where a law passed by Congress and signed by the president can be, not merely ruled unconstitutional, but hacked up and rewritten by a court.

And, it is likely a specific poke in the eye to President Barack Obama who the right wing has become completely unhinged over to the point that they want to nullify the results of two presidential elections and three congressional elections.

What it really is: complete and utter disrespect for women.

Today the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the Sebelius v Hobby Lobby Stores case, a matter that may decide whether of not the religious beliefs of the shareholders of a corporation allow the corporation itself protection from the provisions of federal statutes.

Hobby Lobby is a for-profit corporation, employing over 16,000 people, which is claiming an Affordable Care Act exemption that protects religious organizations from having to provide contraception as part of its employer-based health insurance plan.

The laws of incorporation are generally in place to protect the shareholders from personal liability and in this case, the Green family is seeking to claw back their personal right to impose their religious beliefs on their employees while leaving the other protections of incorporation intact.

The hearing will start at 10am Eastern and will include 2 hours of arguments, expanded from the normal 90 minutes.

The lawyer for Hobby Lobby is Paul D. Clement and the lawyer for the United States government is Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. Over 2 dozen briefs have been filed in support of the government’s position and over 5 dozen in support of Hobby Lobby and the other party, Conestoga Wood Specialties. Two additional briefs were filed that take no side but which discuss the constitutional issues involved.

UPDATE: Transcript  13-354. Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (PDF)

From Lyle Denniston at the SCOTUSblog:

For the first time since the broad new federal health care law partially survived its most sweeping constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court nearly two years ago, the Affordable Care Act comes up for a new test before the Justices.  This time, the Court will be examining whether the government may enforce against private businesses owned by religiously devout owners the requirement that employee health plans provide no-cost coverage for women’s pregnancy-related services, including birth control.

More …