Hobby Lobby customers may soon be required to sign a compliance form, indicating that their religious views coincide with those of David Green, CEO and founder of the company.
Beyond that, the 95-page Opinion of the Court (SCOTUS) delivered by Justice Alito may have far-reaching, unforeseen and unintended consequences for years to come.
I had previously referenced a post about the Hobby Lobby decision from fellow blogger, Jocelyn Geboy. If you'd like to read her comments click here .
From the get-go, this case was a big bowl of wrong. The grounds for filing it are not just disingenuous, but highly suspect. For the plaintiffs, this was more an attack on Obamacare and President Obama, himself than an entrenchment of religious high ground.
You may disagree, which is your right and I will defend that right until SCOTUS or the House of Representatives repeals it.
In their 2012 Annual Report of Employee Benefit Plan, Hobby Lobby revealed that the company had more than $73 million in mutual funds. Most of that consisted of matched funds for their employees’ 401K retirement plan
Their investments were in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture intrauterine devices (IUDs), drugs used for abortion and emergency contraceptive pills. Maybe tax-deferred plans get special dispensation from biblical retribution.
It's impossible to think about Hobby Lobby-sounds funny when you say it-without thinking about the Supreme Court itself. How is it possible for nine men and women, charged with interpreting and upholding the Constitution to read every word of that document through party-colored lenses?
Notice how Justice Ginsburg (seated, on right) seems to be leaning away from her robed brethren
There's always been divisions and acrimonious differences of opinion on the court, but today's split decisions are too predictable and too microcosmic of a country divided.
We can blame each side for not playing nice with the other, but the 4-man conservative voting block seems best represented by the court jester, Antonin Scalia. Some of his wittier witticisms can be found here .
You can almost discount Justice Thomas, who spent the first few years of his judgeship playing Bernardo-Zorro's deaf-feigning sidekick. It was probably an upgrade from his previous role as "Long Dong Schlong".
The court rarely considers its own hypocrisy. Protesters are banned from the steps of their court house, but the justices felt that abortion protesters were being denied their freedom of speech if asked to stay 35 feet from the entrance to an abortion clinic (McCullen v. Coakley).
In the Citizens United case, it seemed clear that the Motown 5 were voting along party lines, which, regrettably coincided with the interests of big business and the Koch Brothers.
Justice Stevens was so outraged by that decision that his 90-page dissent was three times the length of Justice Kennedy's majority opinion.
Citizens United is an example of how "unintended" consequences are the gifts that keep on giving. SCOTUS originally opened the door to unleashing corporate contributions when they equated money with free speech in Buckley v. Valeo .
When SCOTUS gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965 last year, the court was definitely split along party lines, but the construct of that line is troublesome. It made me wonder which way Justice Kennedy would go if four of his colleagues voted to add white hoods to their official garb.
Really, Justice Roberts? We don't need to protect black voters because the election of President Obama proves that racism in America is a non-issue? Seriously?
It took me four days to get through Justice Alito's 95-page tome on Hobby Lobby or, as you might want to call it, "Through the Looking Glass" or "Down the Rabbit Hole".
I highly recommend it for anyone suffering with insomnia.
Justice Ginsburg's dissent was cogent and on point. It contains the obligatory legalese, but it's written so that even I could understand it. I wouldn't go so far as to call it scathing, but she still has to work with those douche bags.
I'm neither a lawyer nor a scientist, but anyone with a high school diploma should be able to see that the Hobby Lobby decision defies common sense. They are wrong on the law and they are wrong on the science.
The latter shouldn't be too consequential, since science could well become a thing of the past, like history that speaks favorably of Northern soldiers, Indians or any of a number of inconvenient truths.
Since global warming is a myth and our planet magically appeared 6,000 years ago, adherence to scientific fact should be heavily discounted. Perhaps the Flintstones should be viewed as a documentary.
For more of the court's scientific missteps, click here .
The fact is, the contraceptive methods cited by both Hobby Lobby and Justice Alito do not cause abortions. That is a scientific fact, one which sailed out an open window.
It's also a legal fact. Utilizing any-or all-of those methods of birth control do not fit the legal description of abortion. As Rick Perry might say, "Oops". Also out the open window.
The court's ruling, however will have no impact on prescription Viagra. All religions sanction boner pills.
Individuals go to great lengths to remove themselves personally from their business interests with legal entities called corporations. "Hey, it's not me doing all these bad things, it's my corporation".
It's like having your cake and preventing anyone else from getting any.
How anyone could construe that the Founding Fathers intended the Bill of Rights to bestow the rights of individuals on the heartless, soul-less entities we call corporations is beyond comprehension.
In any case, was anyone's freedom to practice their religion really upheld in the Hobby Lobby decision? Or did the court's ruling have the opposite effect, imposing an employer's religious views on subject employees?
Nothing was interfering with the Green's right to practice their religion as they choose. Not Obamacare, not Nancy Pelosi and not the whores using birth control and having wanton sex, when and with whom they choose.
Not even the heathen savage who may have chosen to have an abortion had an impact on the Green's expression of their religious beliefs. Not even the queers next door.
What this decision is saying to workers is that they need to consider the religious beliefs of prospective employers, as they may be required to adhere to those beliefs.
It also implies that business owners may not have to comply with laws that conflict with their religious beliefs.
Abortion, the prohibition of which seems to be the endless obsession of so many is not mentioned in the Bible. Not even once.
The duty to end abortion is a belief held by many who subscribe to certain, select portions of the Bible. Just as honor killing and the destruction of America is a belief held by many who subscribe to certain, select portions of the Koran.
What other laws will be challenged by corporations' deeply held religious beliefs remains to be seen. In the mean time, those fearing the insinuation of Sharia law into our government can relax. The Taliban can't touch the Tea Party.
Keep up with my posts ... type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. You will NEVER get anything else from me (no SPAM!), and you can opt out at any time.