Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama Admin Offers Hobby Lobby Contraceptive Workaround (31 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm not happy with this. (8+ / 0-)

    I view the 'accommodation' to the original group to be unreasonable.

    Because if a Church decides to engage in commercial enterprise wherein they buy and sell things - THAT is not church business, it's just business.

    I've been an atheist for about 45 years now. I don't expect any church to do anything for me - and I expect that my government will do nothing for or against churches.

    But when it comes to a church which decides to materially act in a business, then they should NOT receive the same treatment from the government vis a vis their business actions as they do for the CHURCH actions.

    Want to have a bake sale in the Church parking lot, to raise funds to build a new annex for your increasing congregation? FINE by me.

    Want to install a small shop on Church grounds which sells bibles/torahs/holy tracts, plaques with religious sayings, to fund your summer bible school for children of the congregation? FINE by me.

    Want to buy or build a hospital and hire doctors and nurses and phlebotomists and anesthesiologists and surgeons to work in it? THIS is not a church related activity. This is a business. The IRS may say it's a non-profit business, but it's a business all the same, and in these cases I believe that the IRS exemption these businesses are granted should not be.

    Your exemption from government edicts and regulations for your religiously based activities SHOULD NOT apply in business related activities.

    Why? Because every dollar which churches who own and run BUSINESSES earn is not taxable. Which means that I and all the other taxpayers are subsidizing  this church now.

    Which I find morally repugnant. Yes, I said it and I meant it. Morally repugnant. I feel that strongly about religion and it's influence and reach into our government.

    So no, I don't approve this "workaround" offered up to Privately held businesses.

    Because I also believe that the John Roberts Court is pulling findings out of it's religiously tainted ass.

    Why in the world should government regulation of a corporation depend upon WHO owns the stock. Or whether or not the stock in the company is traded on the Stock Market or held by private parties?

    Worse, how could these five in the Majority on the court, including our Chief Justice, find that a legal entity has a Right to a Religious Belief? How? Their convoluted reasoning on this case reminded me quite strongly of the arguments from the Bush Administration on WMD in Iraq.

    I believe without a doubt that the Court did indeed "fix the facts to meet the policy" which they already agreed with. That religious beliefs are more important than the Law of the Land, and must be accommodated, no matter what it takes.

    "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization"

    by Angie in WA State on Fri Aug 22, 2014 at 03:06:26 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site