I’ve often said that these conservatives wading into the tricky waters of claiming “religious freedom” to justify breaking (or passing) laws should really be careful what they wish for. It’s advice I’d give to all of those conservatives who are celebrating the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby ruling.
And based on his brilliant response to that ruling, George Takei seems to be an individual who understands this as well.
Posting his response on the website for his play Allegiance, Takei made several fantastic points concerning not only the hypocrisy of this ruling, but the dangerous precedent it could set going forward.
Takei wrote, “The ruling elevates the rights of a FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION over those of its women employees and opens the door to all manner of claims that a company can refuse services based on its owner’s religion.”
“Think about the ramifications: As Justice Ginsberg’s stinging dissent pointed out, companies run by Scientologists could refuse to cover antidepressants, and those run by Jews or Hindus could refuse to cover medications derived from pigs (such as many anesthetics, intravenous fluids, or medications coated in gelatin).” he continued.
And that’s the slippery slope for which this ruling potentially opens the door. Where will the line be drawn where you say to a company, “Sorry, but your religious beliefs aren’t protected?”
What if someone who owns a corporation is anti-vaccine? What if they then say it’s against their religious beliefs for their company to offer health care that covers vaccines? Based upon this Supreme Court ruling, they could theoretically be within their rights to claim that.
But the best point Takei made was in a direct shot at right-wing ignorance. He wrote, “In this case, the owners happen to be deeply Christian; one wonders whether the case would have come out differently if a Muslim-run chain business attempted to impose Sharia law on its employees.”
As we all know, when these conservatives talk about “religious freedoms” they’re really only referring to Christianity.
He also went on to make the point that Hobby Lobby has invested in companies which produce the morning after pill and it gets much of its inventory from China, a country where forced abortions are common.
In other words, they’re blatant hypocrites.
“Hobby Lobby is not a church. It’s a business — and a big one at that,” Takei continued. “Businesses must and should be required to comply with neutrally crafted laws of general applicability. Your boss should not have a say over your healthcare. Once the law starts permitting exceptions based on “sincerely held religious beliefs” there’s no end to the mischief and discrimination that will ensue. Indeed, this is the same logic that certain restaurants and hotels have been trying to deploy to allow proprietors to refuse service to gay couples.”
Once again, he’s absolutely right.
For some reason conservatives seem to think that a lack of options equates to “more” freedom. Before this ruling, women working at Hobby Lobby had the option to have access to these contraceptives. Now they won’t.
If the owners of Hobby Lobby reject specific types of contraceptives, that’s fine. They don’t have to use them. But now their beliefs are being imposed on women who might not share those same beliefs.
Take a good look, because that’s how an employer can determine an employee’s health care coverage. Because a woman working at Hobby Lobby now can’t get health care coverage for certain contraceptives, not because she’s against them, but because her employer is.
How exactly is that respecting her religious freedoms?
Takei also points out religion is a way many conservatives have tried justifying discrimination against homosexuals. These “religious freedom” bills that essentially give businesses the right to deny service to homosexuals based on their religious beliefs.
The bottom line is, religion has no place in government or in business. If someone wants to express their religious views to others, they need to start a church – not a for-profit corporation.
Yeah, this is all great in hypothetical land, but the free market would destroy almost any business that would attempt anything too outrageous.
Not necessarily. I don't know if Allah considers macaroni pictures an affront to faith, but if you set up a sharia law hobby store in a Muslim-dominated district, why would it be any worse off?
Also, the free market isn't some perfect machine that self-corrects. The early 20th century proved that. If a Hobby store has a stranglehold on the market by artificially out-competing then it can pretty much do whatever it wants (See: Starving Wal*Mart Employees)
Now, the issue of course is that it's obviously ridiculous that a Hobby-store would have a stranglehold on anything other than the demographic of registered sex offenders and unexposed serial killers.
Indeed, this is the same logic that certain restaurants and hotels have been trying to deploy to allow proprietors to refuse service to gay couples.
And each time they try to assert this, they've failed miserably. They have an immense hurdle to climb besides proving sincere beliefs. I understand the concern here and don't think decisions like these should be taken lightly, but people are overreacting to this one in particular.
If religious conservatives want the government providing healthcare for even more people, then I say let them rally for it before they realize they're only shooting themselves in the foot.
Now, the issue of course is that it's obviously ridiculous that a Hobby-store would have a stranglehold on anything other than the demographic of registered sex offenders and unexposed serial killers.
Hey, craft stores are fun :( But the HL I went into had this strange, saccharine-sweet atmosphere to it that makes you wonder if there's a dark altar hidden beneath the construction paper isle littered with the remains of those unlucky few who got to close to their secrets.
Not necessarily. I don't know if Allah considers macaroni pictures an affront to faith, but if you set up a sharia law hobby store in a Muslim-dominated district, why would it be any worse off?
Well sure, it might fare well in a Muslim-dominated district, but it's essentially limiting itself to said district.
Also, the free market isn't some perfect machine that self-corrects. The early 20th century proved that. If a Hobby store has a stranglehold on the market by artificially out-competing then it can pretty much do whatever it wants (See: Starving Wal*Mart Employees)
Aren't most stores with a "stranglehold on the market" publicly traded anyway, thereby exempting themselves from the ruling? And really, Hobby Lobby is only an issue because it's already large. I wouldn't think a startup could grow a business as large as that with some of Takei's paranoid examples already in place.
Apparently Bacon doesn't like it when the xenophobic hypocrisy is pointed out by a 77 yr Japanese-American gay Buddhist.
Cause heaven forbid God fearing Muslims want to set up Mosques near the world trade center or have their religious freedoms covered under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 in America. His point is not far fetched.
But the HL I went into had this strange, saccharine-sweet atmosphere to it that makes you wonder if there's a dark altar hidden beneath the construction paper isle
I'm telling you it's all linked together! JCPenny = Hobby Lobby = Cthulh!!!! LOL
But the HL I went into had this strange, saccharine-sweet atmosphere to it that makes you wonder if there's a dark altar hidden beneath the construction paper isle
I'm telling you it's all linked together! JCPenny = Hobby Lobby = Cthulh!!!! LOL
God Takei vs hobby lobby? Jesus might as well get the funeral service going for hobby lobby, I adore George Takei, was in a Japanese internment camp, and is proud to be a homosexual. He even laughed at one politician when the politician said there was no racism going on during WWII.
Stop trying to spread liberal garbage. The first amendment states the right to religious freedoms and it extends to personal privately owned businesses. Hobby Lobby also pays VERY well allowing their employees to pay for their drugs. Hobby Lobby also includes 18 of 22 types of contraception to women employees. They don't pay for 4 types of abortion inducing drugs which violate their religous convictions. On top of that, if you don't agree with it, then don't work for them plain and simple. Go get another job that will provide Plan B drugs to you and shut up! Saying this is unlawful is just nonsense, as the Supreme Court has ruled. And that is coming from a Moderate Athiest here. And if any of you think Sharia Law is a laughing matter, ask the thousands of women slaughtered and raped yearly, or the children who get taken in the night and sold into slavery. Using it as a punch line isn't cute.
Stop trying to spread liberal garbage. The first amendment states the right to religious freedoms and it extends to personal privately owned businesses. Hobby Lobby also pays VERY well allowing their employees to pay for their drugs. Hobby Lobby also includes 18 of 22 types of contraception to women employees. They don't pay for 4 types of abortion inducing drugs which violate their religous convictions. On top of that, if you don't agree with it, then don't work for them plain and simple. Go get another job that will provide Plan B drugs to you and shut up! Saying this is unlawful is just nonsense, as the Supreme Court has ruled. And that is coming from a Moderate Athiest here. And if any of you think Sharia Law is a laughing matter, ask the thousands of women slaughtered and raped yearly, or the children who get taken in the night and sold into slavery. Using it as a punch line isn't cute.
I find this amusing. there is a thing called property rights and a business is considered property. if a person has a problem with the way a business is run and what benefits a company offers or refuses to offer go work or shop somewhere else. people don't like others to tell them how to live and work. I find it a hypocrisy that people try to tell others how to do things, but they tell others what they do is none of your business. birth control is a personal responsibility, not the company you work for. suck it up.
But the HL I went into had this strange, saccharine-sweet atmosphere to it that makes you wonder if there's a dark altar hidden beneath the construction paper isle
I'm telling you it's all linked together! JCPenny = Hobby Lobby = Cthulh!!!! LOL
I’ve often said that these conservatives wading into the tricky waters of claiming “religious freedom” to justify breaking (or passing) laws should really be careful what they wish for. It’s advice I’d give to all of those conservatives who are celebrating the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby ruling.
And based on his brilliant response to that ruling, George Takei seems to be an individual who understands this as well.
Posting his response on the website for his play Allegiance, Takei made several fantastic points concerning not only the hypocrisy of this ruling, but the dangerous precedent it could set going forward.
Takei wrote, “The ruling elevates the rights of a FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION over those of its women employees and opens the door to all manner of claims that a company can refuse services based on its owner’s religion.”
“Think about the ramifications: As Justice Ginsberg’s stinging dissent pointed out, companies run by Scientologists could refuse to cover antidepressants, and those run by Jews or Hindus could refuse to cover medications derived from pigs (such as many anesthetics, intravenous fluids, or medications coated in gelatin).” he continued.
And that’s the slippery slope for which this ruling potentially opens the door. Where will the line be drawn where you say to a company, “Sorry, but your religious beliefs aren’t protected?”
What if someone who owns a corporation is anti-vaccine? What if they then say it’s against their religious beliefs for their company to offer health care that covers vaccines? Based upon this Supreme Court ruling, they could theoretically be within their rights to claim that.
But the best point Takei made was in a direct shot at right-wing ignorance. He wrote, “In this case, the owners happen to be deeply Christian; one wonders whether the case would have come out differently if a Muslim-run chain business attempted to impose Sharia law on its employees.”
As we all know, when these conservatives talk about “religious freedoms” they’re really only referring to Christianity.
He also went on to make the point that Hobby Lobby has invested in companies which produce the morning after pill and it gets much of its inventory from China, a country where forced abortions are common.
In other words, they’re blatant hypocrites.
“Hobby Lobby is not a church. It’s a business — and a big one at that,” Takei continued. “Businesses must and should be required to comply with neutrally crafted laws of general applicability. Your boss should not have a say over your healthcare. Once the law starts permitting exceptions based on “sincerely held religious beliefs” there’s no end to the mischief and discrimination that will ensue. Indeed, this is the same logic that certain restaurants and hotels have been trying to deploy to allow proprietors to refuse service to gay couples.”
Once again, he’s absolutely right.
For some reason conservatives seem to think that a lack of options equates to “more” freedom. Before this ruling, women working at Hobby Lobby had the option to have access to these contraceptives. Now they won’t.
If the owners of Hobby Lobby reject specific types of contraceptives, that’s fine. They don’t have to use them. But now their beliefs are being imposed on women who might not share those same beliefs.
Take a good look, because that’s how an employer can determine an employee’s health care coverage. Because a woman working at Hobby Lobby now can’t get health care coverage for certain contraceptives, not because she’s against them, but because her employer is.
How exactly is that respecting her religious freedoms?
Takei also points out religion is a way many conservatives have tried justifying discrimination against homosexuals. These “religious freedom” bills that essentially give businesses the right to deny service to homosexuals based on their religious beliefs.
The bottom line is, religion has no place in government or in business. If someone wants to express their religious views to others, they need to start a church – not a for-profit corporation.
