Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

Dev.SN ♥ developers

posted by janrinok on Wednesday March 26 2014, @06:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the companies==people-er-does-not-compute dept.

gishzida writes:

"According to a Reuters report Supreme Court signals support for corporate religious claims, "The U.S. Supreme Court appeared poised on Tuesday to open the door to companies' religious-based objections to government regulations as justices weighed whether business owners can object to part of President Barack Obama's healthcare law. From the article:

During a 90-minute oral argument, 30 minutes more than usual, a majority of the nine justices appeared ready to rule that certain for-profit entities have the same religious rights to object as individuals do. A ruling along those lines would likely only apply to closely held companies. As in most close cases of late, Justice Anthony Kennedy will likely be the deciding vote. Based on his questions, it was unclear whether the court would ultimately rule that the companies had a right to an exemption from the contraception provision of President Barack Obama's 2010 Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare.

The dozens of companies involved in the litigation do not all oppose every type of birth control. Some object only to emergency contraceptive methods, such as the so-called morning-after pill, which they view as akin to abortion.

The case marks the second time Obamacare has featured prominently before the Supreme Court. In 2012, the court upheld by a 5-4 vote the constitutionality of the act's core feature requiring people to get health insurance. Although the case has no bearing on the overall healthcare law, it features its own volatile mix of religious rights and reproductive rights. A capacity crowd filled the marble courtroom, while outside hundreds of demonstrators, most of them women, protested loudly in an early spring snowstorm.

We already know that the SCOTUS thinks corporations are citizens, do you think the SCOTUS should allow corporations to have religious beliefs too?"

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Nobuddy on Wednesday March 26 2014, @07:27PM

    by Nobuddy (1626) on Wednesday March 26 2014, @07:27PM (#21813)

    Corporations want their cake and to eat it too. They are immune from the physical repercussions of lawbreaking- no corporation or executives in said corporation, go to jail for crimes that would put a citizen away for life. Egregious and intentional poisoning of water supplies (Duke Energy caught pumping waste into the drainage canals)or laundering money for drug cartels (HSBC), or manipulating credit reporting to commit fraud for profit (mortgage backed Securities).

    They want all the perks- the right to vote, free speech, the right to discriminate based on religion yet do not give up their immunities for these rights. Until this happens, they deserve no such privileges. If a corporation wants human rights, then that corporation needs to get a SSN, register for the draft, and use the same tax code as the private citizen. Or extend corporate tax code to us... I would take a depreciated deduction on the cost of my home or rent.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday March 27 2014, @07:13AM

    by khallow (3766) on Thursday March 27 2014, @07:13AM (#21986)

    There's no point to persecuting corporations for crimes that they can't commit. For example, "egregious and intentional poisoning of water supplies"? Someone did that. Put those people in jail. "Manipulating credit reporting to commit fraud for profit"? Someone did that. Put them in jail.

    They want all the perks- the right to vote, free speech, the right to discriminate based on religion yet do not give up their immunities for these rights.

    And they should have those rights - both the employees and owners of the corporation. There's no exception in the First Amendment for corporations. There's no "you can have all these rights unless you're acting on the behalf of a corporation".