Let me re-write your fourth sentence to reflect reality, at which you could have just stopped writing:
..............Realists view it as another example of Iranian trickery, a con game that benefits the Tehran regime in the short term and allows near assurance of Iranian-triggered nuclear madness in the slightly more than short term.
November 30, 2013 at 9:07 a.m.
Here is what these very same Democrats had to say when changing the filibuster rules was not in their best political interest because they wanted to be able to filibuster to block Republican presidential appointments
My, my, how the tune has now changed.
November 27, 2013 at 3:19 p.m.
The utter hypocrisy of the Democrats is on display for all to see:
November 25, 2013 at 8:11 p.m.
......"They can not fire someone, or other wise discrinimate against someone because of their religion".....
Absolutely agreed. There are reasonable laws that restrict our behaviors so that we cannot infringe upon the rights of others.
........"Under Obamacare, one of the costs of doing business will be insuring employees."..........
This is the crux of the problem. This is a horribly ill-conceived inane atrocity of a law, that yields our rights to the whims of the executive branch.
I am not putting words in your mouth, I am simply pointing out the extent of what you are proposing. If you support the concept of forcing the people who own Hobby Lobby to buy birth control for their employees, as directed by the President; then you also support the concept of forcing them to pay for limousines to take their female employees to abortion clinics if directed by the President (or any of my other hypotheticals). It does not matter if you would personally not take things this far, you have yielded this authority to the President. You support the concept that the President can order this.
YtownParent asked me where I would draw the line....I will answer more directly:I would draw the line at ensuring Hobby Lobby can NOT prevent their employees from procuring and using birth control; and as has been pointed out, we already had this line before Obamacare.
The real question is, where do you draw the line, or more importantly where does President Obama draw the line? I see no evidence of a line at all.
November 17, 2013 at 6:46 p.m.
You made the judgment that the owners of Freshway really don't believe what they say they believe, and that they were engaging in a "cheap ploy". Not only that, you are advocating that they should be financially punished based on that judgment. You decided that the desire of the people who own Freshway to not pay for birth control was not virtuous enough to suit your tastes.
You're asking me where "the line should be drawn"..................The line should not have to be drawn at all, except that we have this atrocious monstrosity call Obamacare.
We have laws (including labor laws) that prevent us and restrict us from doing things to harm one another, and to prevent my rights from infringing on yours. Things we are NOT supposed to do.
How do you twist that into requiring the people who own Hobby Lobby or Freshway to take affirmative action to buy a specific product for their employees?
The bottom line is that the owners of Hobby Lobby and Freshway are NOT preventing their employees from procuring and using birth control. Any employee of Hobby Lobby or Freshway can buy and use as much birth control as they want, and their employment is in absolutely no jeopardy. No one is taking that right away from them.
Why do you wish to take the right to NOT pay for birth control away from the people who own Hobby Lobby and Freshway??????
November 17, 2013 at 5:19 p.m.
So..... now you have set yourself up as the official and sole arbiter, empowered to make final decisions regarding who does and who does not really have moral beliefs.
November 17, 2013 at 2:23 p.m.
You made the connection to automobiles, as if there was a point to be made. Also, you are the one who is advocating the use of the law to force your beliefs onto other people.
I simply provided yet another example case in which the owners and operators of an inanimate object are human; and forcing a human to violate his moral beliefs is wrong. Forcing the owner of a car to violate his moral beliefs with his car is wrong. Forcing the owner of a corporation to violate his moral beliefs with his corporation is also equally wrong.
You brought up automobiles as if this was an applicable analogy. I was pointing out that your analogy actually serves to make my point, not yours. You may fill in any moral/religious dilemma you might imagine which could come up using an automobile: transporting alcohol, picking up women, driving to the drug store to procure birth control, driving to Walmart on the Sabath, driving a pregnant woman to get an abortion, etc etc.
It is wrong to assume we can force a person to violate his moral or religious beliefs, just because he owns and operates an inanimate car. It is also wrong to force a person to violate his religious or moral beliefs. just because he owns and operates an inanimate corporation.
What point were you trying to make????
November 17, 2013 at 2:18 p.m.
I never said corporations had moral beliefs. I said the corporations are created, owned, and operated by PEOPLE who do.
Yes, I own and operate an automobile, and it does not have moral beliefs......but I do. I will not use my automobile to do something I believe to be immoral.
Apparently, however, you feel you have the divine right to force people to do something they believe to be immoral with their automobiles also. I suppose, in your opinion, if a person who is opposed to abortion has a car and refuses to drive pregnant women to get abortions, they are then violating the right of the women and should be punished.
November 17, 2013 at 10:45 a.m.
I do blame Nancy Pellosi and Harry Reid and the absurd Congress they presided over in 2009-2010 when this atrocity was enacted in the dark of night entirely and absolutely by Democrat votes. I also blame President Obama because it was his idea and it was/is his HHS Department that has written the ensuing 20,000+ pages of oppressive regulations to implement this degrading mess.
This atrocity of legislation assigns the power to make decisions about what we can be forced to do to the President and the HHS..............so, yes, they can make us do anything they want us to do and punish us financially if we do not comply with their wishes. Congress has completely abdicated their Constitutional function is this regard.
November 16, 2013 at 6:30 p.m.
"If you don't like the law, you don't have to do business here"
I kind'a thought we had rights in this country to conduct our lives as we see fit, and to earn a living and conduct business as we see fit, as long as we did not harm other people. I guess I was wrong.
It now seems we do not have the right to conduct business and earn a living unless we conform to the latest politically correct points of view, and check for approval with President Obama and YTownParent first. If we don't agree with them, then we have to leave the country to conduct business.
You do realize what you are saying is that the President and HHS secretary now have the power to make us do ANYTHING THEY WANT US TO DO, and if we do not conform we can be financially punished......right???
I wonder what our divinely empowered ruler, President Obama, will decide I have to do next, in exchange for his benevolent permission allowing me the privilege (not right) to conduct business in America.
November 16, 2013 at 2:05 p.m.