Hobby Lobby says “We must obey God rather than men!”

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**d-usa**

At this point I want them to either be fined for being to dumb to realize what drugs really do and wasting the time of the Supreme Court because of it.

Why can't a judge just dismiss the lawsuit on account of them being dumb?

**Easy E**

whembly wrote:
Easy E wrote:
So comapnies can choose which laws are terrible and selectively ignore the ones they choose themselves as being terrible?

That happens all the time... 'tis why there's always litigation / fines being thrown out.

We can brainwash them or something...

So there are suppose to be consequences, and these compnaies have to live with them; despite them being a private business?!?

I'm so confused on what rights corporations should have.

**LordofHats**

d-usa wrote:
Why can't a judge just dismiss the lawsuit on account of them being dumb?

I wish. How awesome would that news clip be?

**Alfndrate**

d-usa wrote:
At this point I want them to either be fined for being to dumb to realize what drugs really do and wasting the time of the Supreme Court because of it.

Why can't a judge just dismiss the lawsuit on account of them being dumb?

Did you leave out the or in that statement?

You have an either, but no or lol.

**d-usa**

That's what I get for answering my phone while I post...

Either get fined for being dumb, or have it dismissed on account of being dumb.

"The court finds that the complaint is dumb since you can't be forced to violate your faith by paying for abortions since these drugs don't cause them. Your fine is a subscription to medical journals..."

**Alfndrate**

d-usa wrote:
That's what I get for answering my phone while I post...

Either get fined for being dumb, or have it dismissed on account of being dumb.

"The court finds that the complaint is dumb since you can't be forced to violate your faith by paying for abortions since these drugs don't cause them. Your fine is a subscription to medical journals..."

We would like to sue the court for making us read. We feel that it is in our rights to ignore free speech when it is in the written word, and we shall not enact the sacred chant of our forefathers. lalalalalalalalalalalalalalala WE CAN'T HEAR YOU!

**kronk**

I hate that Hobby Lobby is closed on Sundays. That's about the only day I have time to swing by there. fethers.

**Alfndrate**

kronk wrote:
I hate that Hobby Lobby is closed on Sundays. That's about the only day I have time to swing by there. fethers.

Yeah, I jokingly said that I hope this forces them to change their "pro-religious" policies so they can finally be open on a Sunday...

hell, I'd purposely keep my Hobby Lobby open on a Sunday, just hire anyone that celebrates their holy day on a different day of the week, or ya danged atheists

Note: well aware that if I did have a HL, I couldn't simply because the closed on Sunday is company policy and I'd be out of a job faster than you can say, "he rose again on the 3rd day."

**Talizvar**

If you do not like a Law:
- Do not obey it and be prepared for the perscribed punishment.
- Fight it in court and see if you can be the next precidence for getting the law overturned.
- Lobby your local representative and give some good reasoning for the need for change.
- Create a petition, setup a website stating your case join with like minded people.

People have a right to determining their lives.
We all buy into our governments and if willing to gain the benefit of it we must be prepared to put-up with or try to legally bring about change what we do not like.

Rebellion is the weapon of last resort usually used when dealling with people of strong "principles" that do not hesitate on imposing on others.

**Seaward**

Easy E wrote:
So comapnies can choose which laws are terrible and selectively ignore the ones they choose themselves as being terrible?

Can you point me to where I said that? Please stop making gak up and putting it in my mouth. If you're not going to act like an adult, go sit at the kids' table.

**whembly**

Well... Dominos (or that office park?) got the injunction:
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/legal-challenges/275015-judge-halts-birth-control-policy-for-dominos-founder

A federal judge has ordered a temporary halt on the Obama administration's birth-control coverage policy for Tom Monaghan, the Catholic billionaire who founded Domino's Pizza.

Federal District Court Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff issued the decision Sunday, less than two days before the policy would have taken effect and exposed Monaghan to fines for non-compliance.

"Plaintiff has shown that abiding by the mandate will substantially burden his exercise of religion," Zatkoff wrote.
"The government has failed to satisfy its burden of showing that its actions were narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest. ... This factor weighs in favor of granting Plaintiffs' motion."

Monaghan recently filed suit against the policy, which requires most employers to cover a range of birth-control methods in their health plans. Churches and houses of worship are exempt, and employees of religiously affiliated institutions such as Catholic schools will be able to obtain birth control directly from their insurance company, also without a co-pay.

The accommodation does not cover employers who are personally religious and object to their employee health coverage serving as a vehicle for forms of birth control they disagree with, such as the morning-after pill.

The suit comes on behalf of Monaghan and Domino's Farms, a Michigan office park he owns, not Domino's Pizza.

It is one of more than 40 challenges pending against the mandate, many of which come from employers who run secular businesses.

Monaghan also founded Ave Maria University, a Catholic college in Florida, and Legatus, a group of Catholic business leaders. Both organizations have already filed suit over the mandate.

Supporters of the requirement say birth control is essential component of most women's healthcare and should be covered by insurance to make it as affordable as possible.

**hotsauceman1**

Why do i have a feeling that this only applies to christian beliefs. That is a Jew or Muslim try to do it, they are Ignored?

**Alfndrate**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why do i have a feeling that this only applies to christian beliefs. That is a Jew or Muslim try to do it, they are Ignored?

Because Christians tend to make a lot of noise when things infringe upon their beliefs in this country? Idk

Though, there have been famous people of different religions complaining about doing their job on holidays. There was a stink in the NBA this year about having to play on Christmas instead of enjoying the holiday with their families, couple that with Sandy Koufax and Hank Greenberg missing games on their various post season chasing teams because of Yom Kippur. Note:

I'm sure there are better examples, but those are the only sorts of examples I can think of that are even similar, though in those cases it was more that they didn't play, and not the reasons why (at least what sports media covered)

**Ahtman**

Talizvar wrote:
people of strong "principles" that do not hesitate on imposing on others.

Like the Greens imposing on their employees?

**whembly**

Ahtman wrote:
Talizvar wrote:
people of strong "principles" that do not hesitate on imposing on others.

Like the Greens imposing on their employees?

Easier to find a different job than to leave a country...

**Easy E**

Seaward wrote:
Easy E wrote:
So comapnies can choose which laws are terrible and selectively ignore the ones they choose themselves as being terrible?

Can you point me to where I said that? Please stop making gak up and putting it in my mouth. If you're not going to act like an adult, go sit at the kids' table.

Your right, you didn't say it, you only implied it based on your statement that the ACA was a terrible law, combined with the fact that Hobby Lobby shouldn't follow it. Therefore the Company cna decide what is a terrible law and not follow it. Sorry I actually followed your "argument" to its conclusion and you didn't like where it led.

Also, @Whembly if we can litigate a Comapny not following the Law, we are thereby holding it accountable to that law and not simply letting them decide which law is appropriate for them to follow.

**whembly**

Easy E wrote:
Seaward wrote:
Easy E wrote:
So comapnies can choose which laws are terrible and selectively ignore the ones they choose themselves as being terrible?

Can you point me to where I said that? Please stop making gak up and putting it in my mouth. If you're not going to act like an adult, go sit at the kids' table.

Your right, you didn't say it, you only implied it based on your statement that the ACA was a terrible law, combined with the fact that Hobby Lobby shouldn't follow it. Therefore the Company cna decide what is a terrible law and not follow it. Sorry I actually followed your "argument" to its conclusion and you didn't like where it led.

Also, @Whembly if we can litigate a Comapny not following the Law, we are thereby holding it accountable to that law and not simply letting them decide which law is appropriate for them to follow.

E... here's a question for you.

Should Hobbit Lobby just shut up? They're engaging the political/legal process with this... at least they ain't responding violently.

**Easy E**

Engaging in the political process is fine. That's why they have lawyers and lobbyists. They cross the line when they refuse to comply after failing to receive and injunction.

Come on, if Hobby Lobby was some kid on a sidewalk at a college campus in California refusing to comply with the law to keep the sidewalk clear, Righties would be cheering them on to get maced. Why the change of heart for Hobby Lobby's failure to comply with the law? Shouldn;t we Mace them too?

**whembly**

Easy E wrote:
Engaging in the political process is fine. That's why they have lawyers and lobbyists. They cross the line when they refuse to comply after failing to receive and injunction.

What do you mean by "cross the line"? What line? Legally? I you meant legally, I'm sure they're fully cognizant and are prepared for the consequences.

Come on, if Hobby Lobby was some kid on a sidewalk at a college campus in California refusing to comply with the law to keep the sidewalk clear, Righties would be cheering them on to get maced.

Wait, wut? I wouldn't want to mace 'em.

Why the change of heart for Hobby Lobby's failure to comply with the law? Shouldn;t we Mace them too?

O.o
If you disagree with their position, you can affect them other ways. Don't patronize their business... and/or support ogranizations that protest against them.

**Seaward**

Easy E wrote:
Your right, you didn't say it, you only implied it based on your statement that the ACA was a terrible law, combined with the fact that Hobby Lobby shouldn't follow it. Therefore the Company cna decide what is a terrible law and not follow it. Sorry I actually followed your "argument" to its conclusion and you didn't like where it led.

So when I agreed with Killkrazy that companies should follow the established laws, you thought that meant I believed Hobby Lobby shouldn't follow the law? Interesting.

Look, if you're just not going to read them, why even bother responding to my posts?

**Easy E**

Since I can't read, can you tell me what exactly you are arguing, other than refighting the ACA?

**Seaward**

Easy E wrote:
Since I can't read, can you tell me what exactly you are arguing, other than refighting the ACA?

No, because all I'm really arguing is that the ACA is terrible law.

**Easy E**

Okay then, thanks for the clarification.

**Cheesecat**

Easy E wrote:
Come on, if Hobby Lobby was some kid on a sidewalk at a college campus in California refusing to comply with the law to keep the sidewalk clear, Righties would be cheering them on to get maced. Why the change of heart for Hobby Lobby's failure to comply with the law? Shouldn;t we Mace them too?

Except can we use an older version of the mace this time around?

**hotsauceman1**

Well they are Christians, We can go medieval on them.

**boyd**

whembly wrote:
Are they willing to pay the 1.2 million daily fine?

Makes no difference. They can pay or go out of business. What will actually happen its they will get a reduced fine if the courts side against them. Unless our goverment takes the stance that top defy them is to go out of business.

**Vulcan**

Cheesecat wrote:
Easy E wrote:
Come on, if Hobby Lobby was some kid on a sidewalk at a college campus in California refusing to comply with the law to keep the sidewalk clear, Righties would be cheering them on to get maced. Why the change of heart for Hobby Lobby's failure to comply with the law? Shouldn;t we Mace them too?

Except can we use an older version of the mace this time around?

Technically that's not a mace, that's a morningstar. The spikes give it away.[/medieval weapon geek]

**whembly**

Vulcan wrote:
Cheesecat wrote:
Easy E wrote:
Come on, if Hobby Lobby was some kid on a sidewalk at a college campus in California refusing to comply with the law to keep the sidewalk clear, Righties would be cheering them on to get maced. Why the change of heart for Hobby Lobby's failure to comply with the law? Shouldn;t we Mace them too?

Except can we use an older version of the mace this time around?

Technically that's not a mace, that's a morningstar. The spikes give it away.[/medieval weapon geek]

O.o... that it was more like:

????

**Alfndrate**

That's a flail

This is a mace:

Spoiler:

**whembly**

Right on. my bad.