Supreme Court justice; RBG; displays ignorance of Constitution

[-CraZed-]

Aielyn said:

-CraZed- said:
So your religious freedoms stop at churches do they? Just because you run a business or a corporation (which does not even necessarily mean you are a big powerful evil greedy entity, ma and pop operations regularly incorporate to protect their personal assets through corporate holdings) doesn't mean you should be forced to provide for those who work for you with contraceptives or anything else for that matter other than a mutally agreed on wage and providing as safe a work environment as possible.

Corporations are made up of people just like any other organization. Why should they be treated any differently in regards to their Constitutional rights? I know, I know because money right? Yeah Gates, Buffet, Soros they have more money each than a majority of the registered corporate entities of this country and they spend tons of money on political causes.

No corporations aren't a person. They are however, people.

Churches are a special case, because they operate on a non-profit basis. And yes, YOUR religious freedoms go beyond the church... but it does not extend to being forced upon your employees.

Tell me, if I get a job working for a muslim, should they be able to force me to do prayers 5 times daily, facing Mecca? By your reasoning, my refusal to do so impacts upon their religious freedom, rather than being a case of me exercising my own. How is the case of paying for health insurance that covers contraception any different?

You are right being employed by someone doesn't allow them to enforce their beliefs on you. How does not paying for someone elses contraceptives amount to forcing your religious views on someone? Forcing your employees to pray to Mecca =/= not paying to abort someone's indescretion in their personal life (which I thought we wanted other people out of anyways).

The idea here is that currently under US law it is legal to kill your unborn baby before it has fully incubated in the womb (state law dependant) but that employers have the right to not pay for it. In what way is this an employer forcing their religion on someone? In fact, were they to affirm the opposite of the ruling,  THAT would be forcing ones views upon another.