Hobby Lobby: When a Principled Company meets and UnPrincipled Government
CONSERVATIVEREPORT.ORG 2 Hours Ago
Hobby Lobby: When a Principled Company meets and UnPrincipled Government
by Mike Madden
by Mike Madden on December 29, 2012
The Federal Government and the Courts in the United States have decided the First Amendment no longer applies. That seems like a harsh statement but it is reality. Hobby Lobby, a christian founded and privately held company filed a suit to be exempt from the Health and Human Services mandate rules on Health insurance providers and companies supplying abortion inducing drugs through the health insurance providers at no cost to employees.
Inherent in Hobby Lobby’s system is a firm faith in our Lord, Jesus Christ. Here is an excerpt from the companies site.
The constant element throughout Hobby Lobby’s growth is our loyal customers and our outstanding employees. The foundation of our business has been, and will continue to be strong values, and honoring the Lord in a manner consistent with Biblical principles. Hobby Lobby store hours are Monday through Saturday from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m., and all Hobby Lobby stores are closed on Sunday.
Here we have another company willing to put faith before profits. Closing on Sunday. So when the government violated the First Amendment, Hobby Lobby was right there filing a lawsuit to stop the mandate as a infringement on it’s rights.
The courts have ignored the central issue and instead focused on the economic burden. Hobby Lobby is arguing a religious belief and as such a corporate culture while the courts and government are arguing that this will not overly burden the compnay. Here from the 10th Circuit decision.
[T]he particular burden of which plaintiffs complain is that funds, which plaintiffs will contribute to a group health plan, might, after a series of independent decisions by health care providers and patients covered by [the corporate] plan, subsidize someone else’s participation in an activity that is condemned by plaintiff[s’] religion. Such an indirect and attenuated relationship appears unlikely to establish the necessary “substantial burden.”
Once again the courts standing on an unprincipled foundation fail to see the emotional burden that such a cost would have on the family who owns Hobby Lobby. They are pro-life and feel that their money should not go to pay for abortions. This being a very principled stance the courts fail to see.
This argument is not about economic cost. It is about emotional costs and religious freedom. The company appealed for an injunction to the Supreme Court and due to the assignment chart drew Justice Sonya Sotomayor. Sotomayor being a Roman Catholic would surely understand the principled stance of Hobby Lobby and allow an injunction based on the religious exemption. Sotomayor cites a ruling from 1982 when another court decision ruled against an Amish businessman. Here from the United States vs Lee is one of the most chilling conclusions ever written.
(a) While there is a conflict between the Amish faith and the obligations imposed by the social security system, not all burdens on religion are unconstitutional. The state may justify a limitation on religious liberty by showing that it is essential to accomplish an overriding governmental interest.
The make up of the court in 1982 notwithstanding that one line should make it clear that the Supreme Court does not always get it right or vote based on the Constitution.
The mechanism to crush the first amendment has been put in place and it is interesting that a Roman Catholic Supreme Court justice is driving another nail in the coffin.
Hobby Lobby and it’s subsidiaries have walked the walk since their founding. What is the overriding government interest in forcing a christian company to provide a drug they are by faith opposed to? Other than forcing an agenda on religious people and institutions?
Hobby Lobby: When a Principled Company meets and UnPrincipled Government
by Mike Madden
by Mike Madden on December 29, 2012
The Federal Government and the Courts in the United States have decided the First Amendment no longer applies. That seems like a harsh statement but it is reality. Hobby Lobby, a christian founded and privately held company filed a suit to be exempt from the Health and Human Services mandate rules on Health insurance providers and companies supplying abortion inducing drugs through the health insurance providers at no cost to employees.
Inherent in Hobby Lobby’s system is a firm faith in our Lord, Jesus Christ. Here is an excerpt from the companies site.
The constant element throughout Hobby Lobby’s growth is our loyal customers and our outstanding employees. The foundation of our business has been, and will continue to be strong values, and honoring the Lord in a manner consistent with Biblical principles. Hobby Lobby store hours are Monday through Saturday from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m., and all Hobby Lobby stores are closed on Sunday.
Here we have another company willing to put faith before profits. Closing on Sunday. So when the government violated the First Amendment, Hobby Lobby was right there filing a lawsuit to stop the mandate as a infringement on it’s rights.
The courts have ignored the central issue and instead focused on the economic burden. Hobby Lobby is arguing a religious belief and as such a corporate culture while the courts and government are arguing that this will not overly burden the compnay. Here from the 10th Circuit decision.
[T]he particular burden of which plaintiffs complain is that funds, which plaintiffs will contribute to a group health plan, might, after a series of independent decisions by health care providers and patients covered by [the corporate] plan, subsidize someone else’s participation in an activity that is condemned by plaintiff[s’] religion. Such an indirect and attenuated relationship appears unlikely to establish the necessary “substantial burden.”
Once again the courts standing on an unprincipled foundation fail to see the emotional burden that such a cost would have on the family who owns Hobby Lobby. They are pro-life and feel that their money should not go to pay for abortions. This being a very principled stance the courts fail to see.
This argument is not about economic cost. It is about emotional costs and religious freedom. The company appealed for an injunction to the Supreme Court and due to the assignment chart drew Justice Sonya Sotomayor. Sotomayor being a Roman Catholic would surely understand the principled stance of Hobby Lobby and allow an injunction based on the religious exemption. Sotomayor cites a ruling from 1982 when another court decision ruled against an Amish businessman. Here from the United States vs Lee is one of the most chilling conclusions ever written.
(a) While there is a conflict between the Amish faith and the obligations imposed by the social security system, not all burdens on religion are unconstitutional. The state may justify a limitation on religious liberty by showing that it is essential to accomplish an overriding governmental interest.
The make up of the court in 1982 notwithstanding that one line should make it clear that the Supreme Court does not always get it right or vote based on the Constitution.
The mechanism to crush the first amendment has been put in place and it is interesting that a Roman Catholic Supreme Court justice is driving another nail in the coffin.
Hobby Lobby and it’s subsidiaries have walked the walk since their founding. What is the overriding government interest in forcing a christian company to provide a drug they are by faith opposed to? Other than forcing an agenda on religious people and institutions?
Comments
Post a Comment