Wake up women. Do not work for any religious organization for any reason. They want to control every aspect of your life.
In addition, this is why control of the senate is so critical. Moscow Mitch, the Heritage Foundation, and the federalist society are all salivating at appointing more religious zealots to the bench.
Unfortunately it looks like they will get their way.
Those are mearly the tip of the spear, the public face of the demonic political machinations of those that want whatever the Xtian equivalent is of sharia law.
If you grew up being told that your in-group should hold dominion over all the other groups, then you found out otherwise, you might be miffed. If you were a fragile little baby.
Time to force the Catholic church to divest from all health-care related enterprises. No more catholic hospitals, clinics, etc. They should also have to divest from all for-profit businesses. If you're a church, be a church. If you want to run a business that serves the public at large, you have to operate like any other non-religious entity. No more special exemptions.
It's one thing for them to want to live their lives according to their religious dogma. But their freedom of religion ends when it interferes with my freedom _from_ religion.
The opinion opens with this statement: "It is a precarious time for people of religious faith in America. It has been described as a post-Christian age."
Why is a "post-Christian age" necessarily a problem of "people of religious faith?" Is Christianity (of a certain type, honestly) what "religious faith" means? I don't grant the premise. But I don't think many people here are truly concerned about religious freedom. Not when we hear references to a "post-Christian age" as if that is what "religious faith" means.
Religious freedom includes employees. What about THEIR religious freedom? If they do ministerial duties, okay, they voluntarily signed on. But that doesn't sound like what is involved here.
I'd add that I do think there is some reasonable concern about "religious freedom" out there. In individual cases, also, there is a reasonable cause for religious exemptions in certain contexts.
The problem is that the term is for a certain subset actually code for Christian Nationalism or at least selectively applied.
I grew up in a strict faith. The coolest thing is once I realized it was Gods job to convince them of right or wrong. Yes I played my parental role until it was their job w their own free will to decide for themselves.
If we believe in God it’s a tie between God and oneself. A parent is a side partner. It’s not a party of 3 at a certain point.
When it comes to business, any business, it’s a lot of back n forth.
Like all relationships. Thank you for your comment
Aside from being a religious zealot, this judge is a slobbering imbecile. Protecting the rights of others is an "assault on religion?" You know who is waging an actual war on Catholicism in America? The US Catholic bishops. The protection of pedophiles by the Irish Church, the barbaric treatment of unwed mothers consigned to "Magdalene Laundries, and the decision to let women die rather than perform a medically necessary abortion turned Ireland into a secular country in less than a generation. Here, the same thing is happening. The US Catholic Bishops are so foreign to the religion of Jesus that millions are turning away, with no help or encouragement from the government. They have done this to themselves, and anyone who wants to reinvigorate authentic Christianity in America would do well to adopt Sinead O'Connor's famous pope-picture-ripping words on Saturday Night Live: "Fight the real enemy."
1) So to become a federal judge in North Dakota, you don't need to know what the prefix "in-" means. Good to know, for all the stable geniuses in the audience. Let's lower that bar! (No pun intended.) 2) In my experience, children aren't real concerned with being conceived via the "loving act" of their parents, and as they become bigger children, they REALLY don't want to know. 3) Again, let us consider that this fool thinks IVF and other fertility treatments are chosen by people who COULD get pregnant the old-fashioned way, they'd just prefer to spend tens of thousands of dollars (and heartache) doing it the fancy scientific way, just to say they could? I can't. I'm going to pull an Elie Mystal and say I don't consider myself bound by ANY of these laws, since I didn't get input on any of them and I don't intend to be ruled by a bunch of poorly educated zealots.
I’m sorry to rant on this post, but what about separation between church and state, do they not understand? It has been my understanding that judges are supposed to be impartial both religiously and politically. Keep your religious beliefs out of other people’s lives period!
The position of love and getting pregnant in thr most natural way doesn’t require time off. IVF does. I worked for a hospital I was never able to take off to get even one allergy shot.
If this was about obtaining medical care. The point is so what u want, no avenue is available if it effects work time.
Does this mean control of life?
Does the church have a right when functioning as a church not an employer?
When u pay employees is it still a church?
Do free standing business like Drury or Hobby Lobby have a right to curtail a women getting estrogen as their way choosing not to get pregnant?
What about the catholic men as employers?
I do understand christian leadership. Is this what these rules are for?
Or is this an Old Testament ruling ? Do we live by grace now?
How many of us have understood the difference?
Is this all fear, that it all will get out of control if we don’t close the gate in what everyone wants?
Perhaps the c church is trying to show what’s honorable in their faith?
However thr Pharisees and Romans long ago didn’t they have a coat where they walked around and delivered the rule?
Or now it’s seen as the ppl do not have Jesus’ Holy Spirit to guide us?
Not easy but much at play? Yes?
Or is this trying to lead a faith? Or trying to lead a business model?
If it was only about time off from work, I might not be freaked out. But it’s about a primitive concept of “murder” and the forceful imposition of someone else’s standards on mine.
Once upon a time SCOTUS struck down RFRA as applied to states. But never as applied to Feds bc Obama whiffed on the chance in Hobby Lobby. Once more unto the breach SG Prelogar!
Wake up women. Do not work for any religious organization for any reason. They want to control every aspect of your life.
In addition, this is why control of the senate is so critical. Moscow Mitch, the Heritage Foundation, and the federalist society are all salivating at appointing more religious zealots to the bench.
Unfortunately it looks like they will get their way.
Vote out every Republican.
Those are mearly the tip of the spear, the public face of the demonic political machinations of those that want whatever the Xtian equivalent is of sharia law.
The Christian Taliban
I work for one. Change comes from within as often as from without. ;)
Of course the religious people see themselves as the real victims here...
If you grew up being told that your in-group should hold dominion over all the other groups, then you found out otherwise, you might be miffed. If you were a fragile little baby.
I'd add that many of the employees are likely religious people too. But, their choices, which often has a religious component, is not being respected.
Time to force the Catholic church to divest from all health-care related enterprises. No more catholic hospitals, clinics, etc. They should also have to divest from all for-profit businesses. If you're a church, be a church. If you want to run a business that serves the public at large, you have to operate like any other non-religious entity. No more special exemptions.
It's one thing for them to want to live their lives according to their religious dogma. But their freedom of religion ends when it interferes with my freedom _from_ religion.
Exactly!!
Well this is asinine
The opinion opens with this statement: "It is a precarious time for people of religious faith in America. It has been described as a post-Christian age."
Why is a "post-Christian age" necessarily a problem of "people of religious faith?" Is Christianity (of a certain type, honestly) what "religious faith" means? I don't grant the premise. But I don't think many people here are truly concerned about religious freedom. Not when we hear references to a "post-Christian age" as if that is what "religious faith" means.
Religious freedom includes employees. What about THEIR religious freedom? If they do ministerial duties, okay, they voluntarily signed on. But that doesn't sound like what is involved here.
It's never, ever, been about religious 'freedom'. It's always been about Christian Nationalism.
I'd add that I do think there is some reasonable concern about "religious freedom" out there. In individual cases, also, there is a reasonable cause for religious exemptions in certain contexts.
The problem is that the term is for a certain subset actually code for Christian Nationalism or at least selectively applied.
(Indeed. The EEOC itself stated in the rule and in the case here that there are case-by-case exceptions.)
Joe your comments are enlightening.
I grew up in a strict faith. The coolest thing is once I realized it was Gods job to convince them of right or wrong. Yes I played my parental role until it was their job w their own free will to decide for themselves.
If we believe in God it’s a tie between God and oneself. A parent is a side partner. It’s not a party of 3 at a certain point.
When it comes to business, any business, it’s a lot of back n forth.
Like all relationships. Thank you for your comment
Aside from being a religious zealot, this judge is a slobbering imbecile. Protecting the rights of others is an "assault on religion?" You know who is waging an actual war on Catholicism in America? The US Catholic bishops. The protection of pedophiles by the Irish Church, the barbaric treatment of unwed mothers consigned to "Magdalene Laundries, and the decision to let women die rather than perform a medically necessary abortion turned Ireland into a secular country in less than a generation. Here, the same thing is happening. The US Catholic Bishops are so foreign to the religion of Jesus that millions are turning away, with no help or encouragement from the government. They have done this to themselves, and anyone who wants to reinvigorate authentic Christianity in America would do well to adopt Sinead O'Connor's famous pope-picture-ripping words on Saturday Night Live: "Fight the real enemy."
And how about the rights of all those children that the priests molest.
They always play the victim card
1000 likes to your comments!!!
1) So to become a federal judge in North Dakota, you don't need to know what the prefix "in-" means. Good to know, for all the stable geniuses in the audience. Let's lower that bar! (No pun intended.) 2) In my experience, children aren't real concerned with being conceived via the "loving act" of their parents, and as they become bigger children, they REALLY don't want to know. 3) Again, let us consider that this fool thinks IVF and other fertility treatments are chosen by people who COULD get pregnant the old-fashioned way, they'd just prefer to spend tens of thousands of dollars (and heartache) doing it the fancy scientific way, just to say they could? I can't. I'm going to pull an Elie Mystal and say I don't consider myself bound by ANY of these laws, since I didn't get input on any of them and I don't intend to be ruled by a bunch of poorly educated zealots.
We need to be more actively trying to utterly destroy religion.
Religion poisons everything - Christopher Hitchens
What happened to separation
of Church from State?
If you want to be a Church or
organized religion, fine. Be
that and stay in your lane.
Don't cloak yourself as a
medical institution and deny
patients and employees their
rights as citizens. It's that
simple, isn't it?
🤬🤬🤬another one who should be removed from the bench.
This *clap emoji* is *clap emoji* why *clap emoji* we *clap emoji* need *clap emoji* universal *clap emoji* single *clap emoji* payer *clap emoji* healthcare *clap emoji* rather *clap emoji* than *clap emoji* employer *clap emoji* provided *clap emoji* insurance *clap emoji*
Who are the lawyers representing the religous organization
I’m sorry to rant on this post, but what about separation between church and state, do they not understand? It has been my understanding that judges are supposed to be impartial both religiously and politically. Keep your religious beliefs out of other people’s lives period!
Does this also affect Catholic employees at clinics, hospitals, schools, colleges?
If they're members of the CBA, yes.
The position of love and getting pregnant in thr most natural way doesn’t require time off. IVF does. I worked for a hospital I was never able to take off to get even one allergy shot.
If this was about obtaining medical care. The point is so what u want, no avenue is available if it effects work time.
Does this mean control of life?
Does the church have a right when functioning as a church not an employer?
When u pay employees is it still a church?
Do free standing business like Drury or Hobby Lobby have a right to curtail a women getting estrogen as their way choosing not to get pregnant?
What about the catholic men as employers?
I do understand christian leadership. Is this what these rules are for?
Or is this an Old Testament ruling ? Do we live by grace now?
How many of us have understood the difference?
Is this all fear, that it all will get out of control if we don’t close the gate in what everyone wants?
Perhaps the c church is trying to show what’s honorable in their faith?
However thr Pharisees and Romans long ago didn’t they have a coat where they walked around and delivered the rule?
Or now it’s seen as the ppl do not have Jesus’ Holy Spirit to guide us?
Not easy but much at play? Yes?
Or is this trying to lead a faith? Or trying to lead a business model?
If it was only about time off from work, I might not be freaked out. But it’s about a primitive concept of “murder” and the forceful imposition of someone else’s standards on mine.
Once upon a time SCOTUS struck down RFRA as applied to states. But never as applied to Feds bc Obama whiffed on the chance in Hobby Lobby. Once more unto the breach SG Prelogar!