tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post9162970018103306900..comments2024-02-19T07:24:42.397-08:00Comments on Anglican Curmudgeon: The Simply Stunning Illogic of Sen. BoxerA. S. Haleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05108498446058643166noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-21951296898059516532014-03-27T07:48:14.772-07:002014-03-27T07:48:14.772-07:00Boxer is a long time supporter of even partial bir...Boxer is a long time supporter of even partial birth abortion. And once you hunt babies, other outrages come easy.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02059920222709764278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-34064028210798741312014-03-26T18:06:35.569-07:002014-03-26T18:06:35.569-07:00I'm pretty sure Sen. Boxer is Jewish, not Cath...I'm pretty sure Sen. Boxer is Jewish, not Catholic, so the Holy See's take may be of limited interest to her. Paul Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04833212693999583069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-92159405315183219542014-03-26T11:25:36.963-07:002014-03-26T11:25:36.963-07:00Perhaps it is worth noting that when Pfizer was de...Perhaps it is worth noting that when Pfizer was developing Viagra they actually approached the Holy See for its perspective on the morality of the issue. This ought to be of interest to Ms Boxer as she is, alas, some sort of a Catholic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-49386628028344566412014-03-26T10:57:07.747-07:002014-03-26T10:57:07.747-07:00In fact, many insurance plans have restrictions on...In fact, many insurance plans have restrictions on drugs like Viagra thereby "dictating" how many erections a month a man may have. In the past, an employer could be petitioned by its male employees to change insurance companies in order to boost coverage for certain conditions. Under the law in question, employers must obey whoever is in power in Washington DC and thereby they lose their freedom to choose an insurance plan that serves both their employees and is in keeping with their religious values. This undermines free markets and opens the door for all sorts of future coercive measures from the Federal decision making process, a process that is controlled by bubble-headed lawmakers as described above. I would predict that if this law stands, eventually physician assisted suicide (euphemistically called death with dignity) will be the next insurance coverage issue for which corporations to have to provide coverage.Undergroundpewsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10182191422663119484noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-55608854220028652212014-03-26T09:51:57.185-07:002014-03-26T09:51:57.185-07:00Mike Alsobrook, don't spend too much time wait...Mike Alsobrook, don't spend too much time waiting for Justice Scalia to sort that out. While from a logical standpoint you may be correct about corporations, the fact is that from the standpoint of history (precedent), corporations are persons in they eyes of the law. ("On this point," said Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once, "a page of history is worth a volume of logic.")<br /><br />Since corporations are persons, they, too, have rights under the First Amendment -- <i>see, e.g., Citizens United</i>; or even go all the way back to <i>NAACP v. Button</i>. So your first point is irrelevant: lots of people have no religion, yet they still have rights under the First Amendment. Nor is your second point necessary -- because corporations are persons in their own light, their constitutional rights do not depend on any kind of transfer theory.<br /><br /><i>Employment Division v. Smith</i> involved a law of <i>general</i> application, not specifically targeted at churches. ObamaCare regulations, however, exempt churches but not other faith-based entities. By making the exemption, the Obama Administration admitted that the law would otherwise include churches in its compass.<br /><br />And many churches are corporations, while others are not. So how do you draw a line between what churches believe and what private corporations believe? I don't see a principled way to do so, and that's why Hobby Lobby is before the Supreme Court. A. S. Haleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05108498446058643166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-759178030677978044.post-86422060934453960342014-03-26T08:57:43.415-07:002014-03-26T08:57:43.415-07:001. Corporations are artificial legal fictions use...1. Corporations are artificial legal fictions used to limit liability for stockholders and therefore can no more have a religion than fall in love.<br /><br />2. The individual rights of those who are stockholders cannot be transferred to the corporation as Scalia points out in Domino's Pizza v McDonald.<br /><br />3. Religious convictions do not relieve an individual from following the law as Scalia pointed out in Employment Division v Smith.<br /><br />I do not expect Justice Scalia to remain consistent and look forward to the rhetorical gymnastics he undergoes to try and hide his inconsistency.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00945724667856576177noreply@blogger.com