Tenth Circuit Allows For Companies To Cite Religious Exemption To Laws

Jun 28, 2013 | Posted by: Sei | Full story: lezgetreal.com

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that companies can cite religious belief to deny birth control to employees, and possible to allowing discrimination
Comments
21 - 37 of 37 Comments Last updated Jun 29, 2013
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jun 29, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, at question is whether the owner of said corporation may project their religious beliefs onto their employees. I think that is a violation of the employees individual right to free exercise, as well as a violation of their free speech. Arguably it is also creating a situation where the employee gives up their free will and is basically nothing more than a slave to the employer.
Employees are employed by their employer, by providing their time an skills VOLUNTARILY. They're not tied to the plantation, and they may leave whenever they wish (unless they signed a contract saying otherwise).

To say ALL corporations, be they a single person, or more than one person, cannot be a religious institution, is simply UNTRUE.

I imagine nearly all religious institutions of whatever kind are incorporated in their state merely for personal liability reasons, such as a member falling and breaking a leg on the property.(I learned the hard way, that you can slip and fall a very short distance (I'm not too tall), and break your leg.:()

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jun 29, 2013
 
Europa Report wrote:
Employees are employed by their employer, by providing their time an skills VOLUNTARILY. They're not tied to the plantation, and they may leave whenever they wish (unless they signed a contract saying otherwise).
To say ALL corporations, be they a single person, or more than one person, cannot be a religious institution, is simply UNTRUE.
I imagine nearly all religious institutions of whatever kind are incorporated in their state merely for personal liability reasons, such as a member falling and breaking a leg on the property.(I learned the hard way, that you can slip and fall a very short distance (I'm not too tall), and break your leg.:()
To say that they have a right to project their religious moral views onto their employees impacting their healthcare choices is simply wrong. It violates free speech, it violates free exercise of religion, and it is entirely outside of what an employer may validly require of their employees.

They can incorporate to limit their liability, they may not compel their employees to abide by their religious views.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jun 29, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
To say that they have a right to project their religious moral views onto their employees impacting their healthcare choices is simply wrong. It violates free speech, it violates free exercise of religion, and it is entirely outside of what an employer may validly require of their employees.
They can incorporate to limit their liability, they may not compel their employees to abide by their religious views.
You guy just make this stuff up out of thin air. So when the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment, they wee thinking of "Healthcare". Did George Washington immediately give all his slaves Blue Cross\Blue Shield ?

And who was the LARGEST WHISKY DISTILLER in the 1790's ???

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jun 29, 2013
 
Europa Report wrote:
You guy just make this stuff up out of thin air. So when the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment, they wee thinking of "Healthcare". Did George Washington immediately give all his slaves Blue Cross\Blue Shield ?
And who was the LARGEST WHISKY DISTILLER in the 1790's ???
Nothing about this is made up. The free exercise of religion is a personal, not an institutional freedom. Corporations are not people, regardless of what Mitt Romney might spew.

Should I, as an employer be able to make you as an employee conform to Sharia Law?

Do you see how decisions like this could be terribly dangerous?

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jun 29, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing about this is made up. The free exercise of religion is a personal, not an institutional freedom. Corporations are not people, regardless of what Mitt Romney might spew.
Should I, as an employer be able to make you as an employee conform to Sharia Law?
Do you see how decisions like this could be terribly dangerous?
Nope

And Mitt Romney's not a Christian, so I don't care what he has to say about religion. And corporations ARE PEOPLE.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jun 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Europa Report wrote:
Nope
And Mitt Romney's not a Christian, so I don't care what he has to say about religion. And corporations ARE PEOPLE.
I knew your new persona would never last and you would soon be back to the same old same old.

Mormons believe that the Book of Mormon expands upon the old and new testament.

Corporations are not people. When they are sued, human representatives represent them in court. They do not have freedom of speech or religion, although their employees do, and they do not have the right to project their religious morals onto their employees, thereby denying them their religious freedom and free speech.

This decision will be overturned upon appeal. It is inept.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Jun 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
UNTRUE.
Any religious organization, or religious individual, can incorporate under the laws of their state. Therefore any corporation can be, and some are a "religious organization", be it a single person or more.
Organizations are composed of sovereign Citizens each of whom have rights ... the organization does not of itself have any.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Jun 29, 2013
 
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Organizations are composed of sovereign Citizens each of whom have rights ... the organization does not of itself have any.
That's not what SCOTUS said. Corporations don't have Free Speech Rights such as spending as much money as they want for advertising signs and tv and radio and web advertising ? They don't have the right to own real estate and other property ? They don't have the right to hire someone to preach religious things ?

Once again, you're WRONG !

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Jun 29, 2013
 
Europa Report wrote:
That's not what SCOTUS said. Corporations don't have Free Speech Rights such as spending as much money as they want for advertising signs and tv and radio and web advertising ? They don't have the right to own real estate and other property ? They don't have the right to hire someone to preach religious things ?
Once again, you're WRONG !
And the US Supreme Court is never wrong?

Is segregation still going on, because the Court clearly stated in Plessy v. Ferguson that separate but equal was perfectly legal?

Mistakes CAN be overturned upon further review, and corporations are not people. They may be allowed to spend freely in elections (an issue that also needs to be overturned by legislation), but that doesn't make them people.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Jun 29, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
And the US Supreme Court is never wrong?
Is segregation still going on, because the Court clearly stated in Plessy v. Ferguson that separate but equal was perfectly legal?
Mistakes CAN be overturned upon further review, and corporations are not people. They may be allowed to spend freely in elections (an issue that also needs to be overturned by legislation), but that doesn't make them people.
it's not "WRONG" until SCOTUS says its "WRONG". And what you say is simply nonsensical and not constitutionally sound.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Jun 29, 2013
 
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/55...

Could you kindly point out where specifically the justices say corporations are people?

Corporations have long been acknowledged as having corporate personhood for purposes of contracts and lawsuits since Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward 17 U.S. 518 (1819).

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Jun 29, 2013
 
Europa Report wrote:
it's not "WRONG" until SCOTUS says its "WRONG". And what you say is simply nonsensical and not constitutionally sound.
Sorry Charlie. Segregation was wrong, even before the US Supreme Court said so. The same is true of Corporate free speech and limitless campaign contributions.

Sorry to see that your lunacy has relapsed. For a moment, you almost seemed rational.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Jun 29, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Charlie. Segregation was wrong, even before the US Supreme Court said so. The same is true of Corporate free speech and limitless campaign contributions.
Sorry to see that your lunacy has relapsed. For a moment, you almost seemed rational.
Well, if you don't like what SCOTUS had to say about that, you'll have to wait a couple of decades at least for them to change it.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Jun 29, 2013
 
Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not what SCOTUS said. Corporations don't have Free Speech Rights such as spending as much money as they want for advertising signs and tv and radio and web advertising ? They don't have the right to own real estate and other property ? They don't have the right to hire someone to preach religious things ?
Once again, you're WRONG !
There is significant move afoot to deal with that.

http://www.change.org/petitions/repeal-citize...

http://www.nmtelegram.com/2013/06/18/udall-in...

http://www.nmtelegram.com/2013/06/18/udall-in...

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/sotomayor_ov...

https://movetoamend.org/

http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/gover...

http://www.californiacountynews.org/2012/07/s...

http://www.wilderutopia.com/politics/end-corp...

etc.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Jun 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Europa Report wrote:
Well, if you don't like what SCOTUS had to say about that, you'll have to wait a couple of decades at least for them to change it.
We won't have to wait that long.

You have neglected to point out where in the Citizens United decision that the court says Corporations are people.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Jun 29, 2013
 
Europa Report wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if you don't like what SCOTUS had to say about that, you'll have to wait a couple of decades at least for them to change it.
I doubt that very much. Alito and Roberts will be alone on the court with their pro-aristocratic agenda soon enough. And Roberts may turn out to be much less dedicated to serving the powerful than has been assumed.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Jun 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
I doubt that very much. Alito and Roberts will be alone on the court with their pro-aristocratic agenda soon enough. And Roberts may turn out to be much less dedicated to serving the powerful than has been assumed.
Roberts is a devout Marxist-Leninist, and destroyer of the U.S. Constitution.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••