Skip to main content

For the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.  This is one of the many reasons I am not registered with either party.  What were they thinking in 1993?  As if religion were under some kind of threat which it wasn't back then.  Oh yeah there will be many on this site willing to carry the water for Bill and Chuck on this and attack this post.

Politicians in this country are terrified of anything with the word religion attached to it.  I live in a town where a commercial enterprise is masquerading as a religion and has all the politicians of both parties in their pocket.  The Democratic chair of the county actually said to me I should be glad this group doesn't pay taxes.  They bought 400 acres on the Hudson River for twenty-one million dollars no tax.  They own two corporate jets, have a monopoly on jet fuel at a local airport, toy businesses and the workers labor for free.  It is so bad that any politician running for office will go speak to the group but never hold a town meeting to speak to the tax paying citizens.  The leader of the group has said in an interview he doesn't believe in democracy yet has no problem sending bus loads of members to vote in local elections.

How does this all relate to Hobby Lobby?  That bill passed in 1993 allowed religion to get out of control in this nation.  After dealing with politicians I thought were progressive and liberal on this subject I don't know who to vote for in November!

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  about that ending: (6+ / 0-)
    I don't know who to vote for in November
    Just remember the SCOTUS decision was made by 5 GOP appointees.  

    That might help you decide.

    •  and the ACA passed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bluenick

      without a single Republican vote. And they've been trying to repeal it ever since.

      Without Democrats, no woman in America would be guaranteed birth control coverage in her employee sponsored health plan.

      Seriously. Can the diarist still not think of any way to distinguish between Democrats and Republicans?

      •  RE (0+ / 0-)

        I worked for choice for women way back beyond the time it was legal and I can tell you no it wasn't a difference between Republican and Democrats it was between religious fanatics and secularists.  Today there are plenty in the Democratic Party who are against choice.  No I can't see a difference when I see both parties getting huge amounts of money from the same PACS.

        Let me list some of my own political interests for you:

        1. Open Primaries (Now that 40% of registered voters don't have a party but pay for primary day expenses with their taxes).
        2. An end to the religious tax exemption (Let's see a politician from any party have enough courage to tackle this which is costing every town across this country Billions yes billions)
        3.  Religion completely out of politics and the town square
        4. Reestablish the draft so that if we decide to go to war every family has a stake in that war.
        5. Free education through college
        6. Single payer medical and dental plans
        7. A repeal of of the religious freedom restoration act (which was ridiculous in the first place)

        Just a very few of my many political interests.  If you want blind party loyalty don't expect me to support your fanaticism!
         

  •  the RFRA was for people - NOT corporations (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AJayne, Gooserock, Jerry056

    The 5 Mullahs on the Supreme Court did some fancy foot work to impose their version of Sharia law in the USA.

    "Tax cuts for the 1% create jobs." -- Republicans, HAHAHA - in China

    by MartyM on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 05:59:05 AM PDT

  •  What were they thinking? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AJayne, Just Bob, skohayes, Deep Texan, elmo

    To answer that question at that time there was a native american tribe that used an hallucinogenic during their cerimonies who were convicted as a result.  That law was the intent to protect such religious practices by individuals.

    •  Re: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mikey

      Which is exactly what the court decided in the Hobby Lobby case.  Religious beliefs by individuals who owned a corporation and they were careful to distinguish between corporations owned by thousands of stock holders and a corporation's stock held by a single family.  Like it or not the RFRA came back to bite women yesterday!  

      •  I think Hobby Lobby should be allowed to (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        allie4fairness, Deep Texan, schumann

        use peyote. Who knows, it might even expand their consciousness.

        http://thinkprogress.org/...

        I'm a Vietnam Era vet. I'm also an Erma Bombeck Era vet. When cussing me out and calling me names please indicate which vet you would like to respond to your world changing thoughts.

        by Just Bob on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 06:25:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  What they ruled was that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shaylors Provence, Sunspots

        corporations have more rights than people do.
        And you can hardly compare a corporation imposing its "religious beliefs" on women to a tribe of Native Americans practicing a religious ritual.

        If trees gave off WIFi signals, we would probably plant so many trees, we would save the planet. Too bad they only produce the oxygen we breathe.

        by skohayes on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 07:00:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I can't, no. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Shaylors Provence, skohayes

          But that's what Congress did.  

        •  RE (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Shaylors Provence

          The law was too broad in it's definition and stupid Schumer should have realized it.  Clinton then compounded the error by signing it.  The law protects any individual whether they be women of a Native American Tribe or a family who owns all the stock of their corporation.  Look I know there are many people who only want to see the crimes of their political opponents but refuse to admit their side might be at fault as well.  Why do you think 40% of the registered voters in this country refuse to join either party!

          •  Independents can't vote in many state's primaries (0+ / 0-)

            which is why I am a registered Democrat. I want a say in the primaries.

            If trees gave off WIFi signals, we would probably plant so many trees, we would save the planet. Too bad they only produce the oxygen we breathe.

            by skohayes on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 12:09:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  There's a huge difference... (0+ / 0-)

        ....between an individual using substances and making a decision to the detriment of others.  It would be a better comparison to HL if the Native tribes were forcing others to use certain substances against their will.  I don't think it's appropriate to blame the authors of RFRA for this one.

      •  If you believe that the 5 justices (0+ / 0-)

        who sided with Hobby Lobby would have ruled the same way if the case had involved a religious objection by a religion other than Christianity, I can get you a great deal on a slightly used bridge in Brooklyn.

      •  It may have... (0+ / 0-)

        But it sure is easy to look backwards in time to find someone to blame, isn't it?

        Given how much American legal precedent has been ignored in this decision and in Citizen's United, I really don't think anyone could have seen this coming 20 years ago.

        There are lots of Clinton decisions you can call him out for - signing the Glass-Steagall changes (the Financial Services Modernization Act) into law would be the top of my list - but I don't see this as realistically foreseeable.

        Just my $0.02

  •  The Nonrightwing Seems Almost Completely (0+ / 0-)

    devoid of people who think in terms of functionality, about how anything about governance actually works. That, in combination with its fundamentalist religious belief still shared by our head of state that the Republicans and the rightwing are the Democrats' honorable opposition.

    It's been 40-45 years of "well that new policy wasn't so terrible."

    Inch by inch. No willingness or seeming ability to connect dots and extrapolate forward --or even to read the effing organization and mission papers of rightwing groups that are in the effing public domain.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 06:40:40 AM PDT

  •  Chuckie E. Schumer - he never fails to disappoint (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Portlaw, Sunspots

    “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

    by 420 forever on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 06:57:00 AM PDT

  •  would this be . . . . (0+ / 0-)
    I live in a town where a commercial enterprise is masquerading as a religion and has all the politicians of both parties in their pocket.  The Democratic chair of the county actually said to me I should be glad this group doesn't pay taxes.  They bought 400 acres on the Hudson River for twenty-one million dollars no tax.  They own two corporate jets, have a monopoly on jet fuel at a local airport, toy businesses and the workers labor for free.  It is so bad that any politician running for office will go speak to the group but never hold a town meeting to speak to the tax paying citizens.  The leader of the group has said in an interview he doesn't believe in democracy yet has no problem sending bus loads of members to vote in local elections.
    . . . Scientologists . . . ?

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 07:02:05 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site