Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Liberals call for burning Hobby Lobby after Supreme Court decision

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Liberals call for burning Hobby Lobby after Supreme Court decision

    Liberals call for burning Hobby Lobby after Supreme Court decision


    Play

    Video at the page link:

    A divided Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Monday that closely held corporations cannot be required to provide contraception coverage for their employees. HuffPost Live breaks down the ruling and discusses what it means for reproductive rights.on.aol.com

    Joe Newby
    Crime & Courts Examiner


    Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

    June 30, 2014

    On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that companies with religious objections may opt out of covering contraceptives for women, the Associated Press reported. The news did not sit well with pro-abortion liberals who decried the ruling. Some, Twitchy said, were so angry they called for burning down Hobby Lobby in violent, profane tweets.
    "[L]iterally burn hobby lobby (sic) to the ground," one pro-abortion liberal screamed on Twitter.
    "I hope all your stores burn to the ground," another person said.
    "#HobbyLobby are scum of the earth. Burn every single one down, build a homeless shelter there instead," a third person said.
    Not everyone called for scorched-earth tactics against Hobby Lobby, but a number expressed anger with the ruling.
    "Is Hobby Lobby now authorized to sterilize these women? What the hell are they talking about?" one person asked. The answer, of course, is no, Hobby Lobby is not allowed to sterilize women, but "closely held" corporations like Hobby Lobby are not required to pay for contraception if they have deeply-held religious views against it. According to the AP, the ruling only applies to those companies controlled by just a few people where there is basically no difference between the company and its owners.
    "[W]ell, #HobbyLobby, I guess you've seen the last of me," another person said on Twitter. Others also called for a boycott of Hobby Lobby.
    Contraception, the AP added, is one of the "preventive services" Obamacare says must be provided at no extra charge. The Supreme Court upheld that law two years after it was signed. At the time, Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the administration, but joined the majority in Monday's ruling.
    Many claimed the ruling means women cannot obtained contraception, but the Twitter account SCOTUSblog said not so fast.
    "Don’t overread Hobby Lobby. The Court makes clear women can still get coverage and it isn’t opening the door wide to religious claims," SCOTUSblog tweeted. "Under the Hobby Lobby decision, the government can pay for the coverage itself so that women receive it."
    But that was little consolation for one person who claimed that "Revolution is coming."
    "It won’t be televised here," SCOTUSblog responded on Twitter.
    The majority opinion was written by Justice Samuel Alito, the AP said. The four liberal justices voted against Hobby Lobby. The AP also noted the ruling is the first time the court has said a for-profit company can hold religious views under federal law.

    Suggested by the author

    Liberalism: An ideology of rage and hate
    Do liberals really want a second civil war in America?
    Liberals on Twitter threaten violence against conservative True the Vote
    Liberals on Twitter threaten to kill Romney, tweets forwarded to Secret Service
    Liberals on Twitter threaten to attack, burn White House if Romney wins


    http://www.examiner.com/article/libe...court-decision
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    [Watch] NOW President Blasts Men on Supreme Court as Gender Bigots, Religious Beliefs Heinous

    Posted on 1 July, 2014 by Rick Wells


    The bar has been moved thanks to obamacare. Now, anybody having to pay for their own birth control or abortion medication is claimed to be being disadvantaged, where just a couple of years ago it was the realm of the employer, with no mandated coverage. The Obama socialists have changed the rules.
    Terry O’Neill, the president of NOW, the National Organization for Women, says defiantly to start the interview, “Look, we are going to make sure that women have access to reproductive health care.”
    Health care includes abortion pills, because naturally, you can’t be healthy if you have children or become pregnant. She continues, “But let’s be clear, the men who wrote this decision on behalf of the Supreme Court have entered into a ‘war on women,’ they have become a blatantly politically activist anti-woman political organization.”
    Her rant continues and she expresses that the sincere beliefs of religious freedom in this case are “so heinous that government should not respect them, no way, no how.”
    She goes on to compare apartheid in South Africa to the religious beliefs of the principles involved in this decision as well as accusing the Southern Baptists of being behind, slavery Jim Crowe and segregation.
    She goes on to label the Supreme Court Justices who voted in the majority as being guilty of gender bigotry. She says “Withholding basic health care from women is bigotry, plain and simple, we should not accept it, no matter how ‘sincerely’ the belief is held.”
    It’s typical liberal hypocrisy that a bigoted organization, NOW, which exists solely to promote a gender preference, has the nerve to send this broom-rider out to label the Supreme Court Justices as bigots. Their only “crime” was disagreeing with a mandate against one’s religious beliefs, a Constitutional principle. The founding fathers must have been bigots as well.



    Clearly this woman didn’t get to her position through her appreciation for the opposite sex, although she is lightning-quick to charge others with that characteristic. She seems to also have a deep-rooted resentment towards religion and people of faith, particularly when it gets in the way of forced contributions to government-funded baby killing.
    This “woman” is evidence of the true nature of these control-freak liberals. There is no tolerance in these people and no compromise. They want control of our lives in every aspect; they demand that we conform to their wishes, period.
    The so-called “war on women” is a red herring to portray themselves as victims in order to gain preferential legal status or advantage. Then again, if this is a liberal woman, a little war might not be such a bad idea.

    Rick Wells is a conservative author who recognizes that our nation, our Constitution and our traditions are under a full scale assault from multiple threats. Please “Like” him on Facebook, “Follow” him on Twitter or visit www.rickwells.us

    http://gopthedailydose.com/2014/07/0...liefs-heinous/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Dana Loesch Puts Her Own Spin on Leftist Chants After Supreme Court’s Contraceptive Ruling

    Jun. 30, 2014 8:00pm Erica Ritz
    Video at the page link:

    After the Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Affordable Care Act cannot force companies to pay for emergency contraceptives for their employees in violation of their religious beliefs, many on the left reacted with outrage.
    “Birth control – not my boss’s business!” was one popular slogan seen throughout social media.
    While guest hosting The Glenn Beck Program Monday, Dana Loesch modified some of the more popular slogans, saying hers would be more accurate, though less catchy.

    Dana Loesch guest hosts The Glenn Beck Program June 30, 2014. (Photo: TheBlaze TV)

    Here are some of the slogans Loesch proposed:
    “Not my boss’s business — but I want my boss to pay for it!”
    “Hands off my uterus — just give it your dollars instead.”
    “Women united will never be defeated (so pay for our birth control).”
    “Not the church, not the state, women must control our fate (please finance our fate).”
    Loesch said women’s access to contraceptives is no more restricted than it was before the ruling. All that has changed is that employers are no longer forced to pay for the contraceptives of others in violation of their religious liberties, she said.
    The case was brought forward by Hobby Lobby, a Oklahoma-based retail chain owned by the Green family. The Greens said they are willing to cover 16 of the 20 birth control methods mandated by Obamacare to its employees, but not four others, like “Plan B,” because the risk of abortion goes against their religious beliefs.
    Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion, over a dissent from the four liberal justices, that forcing companies to pay for methods of women’s contraception to which they object violates the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act..

    The full episode of The Glenn Beck Program, along with many other live-streaming shows and thousands of hours of on-demand content, is available on just about any digital device. Get it all with a FREE TRIAL.

    The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    Other Must-Read Stories





    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014...eptive-ruling/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546
    The Left Can't Stop Distorting the Hobby Lobby Decision


    Guy Benson | Jul 01, 2014







    The so-called 'contraception mandate' has been an issue on which the Left has lied with exceptional fervency since the administration first released its controversial regulation in 2012. For reasons we explained yesterday, the Supreme Court's ruling in the Hobby Lobby case was a narrowly-tailored exercise in judicial restraint. Listening to some on the Left, though, one could be forgiven for thinking that the Court had outlawed womanhood itself. The outrage flowed from the cynically deceitful to the mindless, reactionary, under-informed masses, on whom said cynics rely for votes. Elected Democrats got the ball rolling with a string of deeply misleading, paint-by-numbers "war on women" and anti-corporation slogans:

    Senator Harry Reid @SenatorReid Follow

    It's time that five men on the Supreme Court stop deciding what happens to women.

    Elizabeth Warren @elizabethforma Follow

    Can't believe we live in a world where we'd even consider letting big corps deny women access to basic care based on vague moral objections.
    8:49 AM - 30 Jun 2014

    Leave it to Harry Reid to make the cheapest argument imaginable, which naturally fails to mention that a key related ruling against the overreaching mandate at the DC Circuit Court of Appeals was handed down by Judge Janice Rogers Brown, an African American woman. It's time that our white male Senate Majority Leader stop telling black woman jurists how to do their jobs. And I, for one, "can't believe we live in a world" in which a privileged white woman can shamelessly traffic in an entirely unsupportable "ethnicity" claim throughout her career, drop the pretense once she's reached the pinnacle of her profession, and still get elected to the United States Senate as an anti-privilege, populist liberal. Nobody is deciding "what happens to women," nor is "access to basic care" being "denied." Women managed to obtain and use birth control without incident for decades leading up to the 2012 regulation issuance, and they will continue to do so. We've returned to the pre-2012 status quo in which (a) birth control is legal, accessible and affordable, and (b) a relatively small handful of religious employers are not coerced by government to pay for something that violates their beliefs. The Hobby Lobby decision upholds the principle of keeping the government (and your boss) out of your bedroom. "Contraception is none of my boss' business!" and "my boss must pay for my contraception!" are incompatible. Imbecilic "slippery slope" arguments about the medical dystopia that could arise from yesterday's precedent ignore the Court's explicit admonition that its ruling does not apply to other mandates, and that a refusal to subsidize other forms of care would not be supported on religious objection grounds. They also ignore the majority's strict scrutiny National Review's editors summarize things clearly and succinctly:

    Women who work for the plaintiffs, Hobby Lobby, remain able to use their employer-provided insurance coverage to finance the most popular forms of contraception. They remain free to use their wages to finance the ones Hobby Lobby will not cover. They remain free to find other jobs, too, if they want employer-provided insurance coverage that includes the abortifacients to which Hobby Lobby objects. Congress remains free to enact a new law that requires employers to cover abortifacients and contraceptives and explicitly rules out any RFRA exemptions. It remains free, for that matter, to repeal RFRA altogether.

    Speaking of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), Hillary Clinton has pronounced herself scandalized by SCOTUS' decision that applied and upheld that law -- which, as we discussed yesterday, was signed by her husband after sailing through Congress with three total 'no' votes. Her comment on the issue, which Allahpundit characterizes as stopping an inch short of "comparing the Roberts Court to the Taliban:"

    “You watch women and girls being deprived of their rights, some of them never have them, some of them lose them. Among those rights is control over their body’s, control over their own health care, control over the size of their families. It is a disturbing trend that you see in a lot of societies that are very unstable, anti-democratic, and frankly prone to extremism. Where women and women’s bodies are used as the defining and unifying issue to bring together people – men – to get them to behave in ways that are disadvantageous to women but which prop up them because of their religion, their sect, their tribe, whatever. So to introduce this element into our society…it’s very troubling that a salesclerk at Hobby Lobby who needs contraception, which is pretty expensive, is not going to get that service through her employer’s health care plan because her employer doesn’t think she should be using contraception."

    Hillary either doesn't know, or doesn't care, that Hobby Lobby already offered its employees coverage that included 16 types of contraception; their lawsuit was over having to pay for a small number of forms they consider to be abortifacients. And this isn't a matter of whether or not an employer thinks an employee "should be using" a product. It's about being compelled to pay for that product, under threat of heavy fines. (Perhaps Mrs. Clinton feels like she must make over-the-top overtures to her base on flash-points like this to distract them from the fact that she's still quasi-defending her Iraq war vote). I'll leave you with these videos taken outside of the Supreme Court yesterday, via the Daily Signal and Pocket Full of Liberty:






    Reminder: Huge majorities of Republicans, Independents and Democrats are totally fine with birth control. This debate is not about the moral acceptability of birth control, or women's freedom to procure and use it as they see fit. Also, Hot Air covers a lefty law professor lamenting his side's stupid demonization of the Roberts Court. Two other liberal legal experts have been straying off the reservation on Obama's overreach, as well.




    Guy Benson

    Guy Benson is Townhall.com's Senior Political Editor. Follow him on Twitter @guypbenson.
    Author Photo credit: Jensen Sutta Photography

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybens...ision-n1857728










  5. #5
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    36,012
    These wannabe anachists are a testament to the indoctrination of Socialist rhetoric and the dumbing down of the American education system.


  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546
    Liberals make a Mountain out of a Mole Hill with Hobby Lobby

    By Onan Coca / 3 July 2014



    A very wise friend of the Eagle Rising family was watching as the Hobby Lobby news was handed down and was amazed to see the response from the left on the issue. I think her reaction is probably what a lot of us Hobby Lobby supporters were thinking in the hours and days following the decision.
    The Hobby Lobby decision was extremely important as a defense of religious liberty – but as an attack on liberalism… it really meant nothing. Its major view as a major threat to the left is vastly overstated in every way but one… the ruling slowed government overreach. So is that the real reason the liberals are so angry?


    I amazed that people do not "get" the real truth in the Hobby Lobby ruling:

    1) Hobby Lobby is NOT stopping anyone from getting the specific 4 types of birth control they object to PAYING for. Big difference there.
    2) They DO cover ALL other types of birth control so this whole "paying for employees sex live" with the Viagra argument is moot.
    3) Funny to me that those that are CONSTANTLY telling us if we do not like the laws to "change them" are the same liberals that are so upset about this decision.
    4) It is not the proper role of government to FORCE a company to pay for or support the religious beliefs of their employees. And asking them to support something they feel is against the Bible is exactly that.
    5) The rights of the employees ends where the rights of the owners of the company begin. It is not about the corporation. it is about the people that make up that corporation, WHO is paying for these treatments or not paying for it, it is not an entity. It is PEOPLE. People who DO have a right to not be forced by government to abandon their beliefs TO SUPPORT someone else's. Neither should the employee be forced to pay for the beliefs of the employers.
    6) Why do liberals feel that one set of rights should be ignored while the others should be support even with the threat of government force?
    7) The birth control issue is NOT about "rights". Take regular birth control pills, practice responsibility and there is no reason for the hate against Hobby Lobby.
    Hobby Lobby is not keeping women from getting an IUD or from taking Plan B, and does and will not discriminate against those that do. There are many many other options than IUD and Plan B ( In Florida) is $40.

    So really, let's stop pretending like those that are upset about this are upset because it took away a woman's rights ( it doesn't, it just does not PAY for those rights) or that it is "pro corporations" because, really, it is the PEOPLE that run Hobby Lobby that are paying for this... or that Hobby Lobby is against paying for people's sex lives... since they cover every other form of Birth Control.
    In my opinion those upset about this ruling are upset that the SCOTUS actually ruled against the growth and over reach of the government. And any time the government is limited (even is a common sense way) they get upset.


    Read more at http://eaglerising.com/7144/liberals...6sy4R7bCPg1.99

Similar Threads

  1. Obama Bullies Hobby Lobby All The Way To Supreme Court…
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-23-2013, 05:55 AM
  2. COURT RULES FOR HOBBY LOBBY IN HHS MANDATE CASE, SUPREME COURT NEXT?
    By Newmexican in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-19-2013, 10:33 PM
  3. Republicans Respond to Ricci Supreme Court Decision
    By Texas2step in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-01-2009, 11:04 AM
  4. IDAHO SUPREME COURT DECISION ON IMMIGRATION BAD
    By zeezil in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2008, 12:55 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •