|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:53 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| trueblue wrote: |
Forcing people to pay for things they find unmoral based on religious grounds, is a threat to religious liberty. |
(bold is mine)
Closely held corporations aren't people, my friend. They can't have sincere religious beliefs. |
Corporate personhood is only a concern when the corporation must necessarily be considered an entity apart from its directors. We could dismiss all rulings based on such logic and still maintain this Hobby Lobby ruling, as a reasonable man could (and should) see these beliefs as obvious extensions of those in control of the company.
I'm curious, why do you disagree with an employer not providing abortifacients (or any contraceptive, really) to his employees?
| Leon wrote: |
| Although I wonder if employers will start hiring lawyers and finding religion... |
That article I linked addresses this 'concern.' |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| trueblue wrote: |
Forcing people to pay for things they find unmoral based on religious grounds, is a threat to religious liberty. |
(bold is mine)
Closely held corporations aren't people, my friend. They can't have sincere religious beliefs. |
Corporate personhood is only a concern when the corporation must necessarily be considered an entity apart from its directors. We could dismiss all rulings based on such logic and still maintain this Hobby Lobby ruling, as a reasonable man could (and should) see these beliefs as obvious extensions of those in control of the company.
I'm curious, why do you disagree with an employer not providing abortifacients (or any contraceptive, really) to his employees?
| Leon wrote: |
| Although I wonder if employers will start hiring lawyers and finding religion... |
That article I linked addresses this 'concern.' |
Your link is partisan hackery, not much better than the people on the left he mocks. Your reasoning ignored mine. I really do think health care should not be a employers' responsibility. I even more strongly think that treating corporations as people or as entities capable of 'religion' or money as corporate 'free speech' are much more dangerous to our society than whether or not corporations are all forced to follow the same laws regarding a small part of their health insurance coverage. The left and right, as usual, miss the most important bits in their squabbles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Your link is partisan hackery, not much better than the people on the left he mocks. Your reasoning ignored mine. I really do think health care should not be a employers' responsibility. I even more strongly think that treating corporations as people or as entities capable of 'religion' or money as corporate 'free speech' are much more dangerous to our society than whether or not corporations are all forced to follow the same laws regarding a small part of their health insurance coverage. The left and right, as usual, miss the most important bits in their squabbles |
Crap...I think I am having a flashback to my Social Organizational Theory class back from graduate school.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
