“The reason why is hardly obscure. Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community. Indeed, by law, no religion-based criterion can restrict the work force of for-profit corporations…The distinction between a community made up of believers in the same religion and one embracing persons of diverse beliefs, clear as it is, constantly escapes the Court’s attention. One can only wonder why the Court shuts this key difference from sight.”
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Associate Justice — Supreme Court
Dissent to Hobby Lobby case
1.) So according to Ginsburg when you start a for profit corporation you lose all your religious rights in relation to the company.
2.) It is true that “Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith,” as those persons subscribe to the interests of the God of their religious faith, but it is not true that for-profit organizations do not exist to foster those same interests. For-profit corporations do exist to foster the interests of persons who own the corporation. The corporation does not exist primarily either for the employees nor for the consumers, the corporation exists for those who own the corporation and so are subscribes to the same religious purpose; to wit, making a profit.
3.) If workers for a corporation don’t like the policy of a particular corporation there is alway the option of leaving the corporation they don’t like in order to get abortifacients as part of their health care package at another corporation.
4.) Neither religious organizations nor business ultimately exist for the membership or the workforce. Both exist for the ownership. Religious organizations exist to advance the cause of the God of their faith system and corporations exist to advance the profit of the owners of the corporation. In both cases neither the membership or a religious organization nor the workforce for a corporation has the place to advance their interests over the interests of the God of the religious organization or the owners of the corporation. Ginsburg’s mistake is to think that the corporation exists for the workforce and their needs as opposed to what the situation really is and that is the fact that the workforce exists for the corporation and its needs.
4.) This woman is so twisted in her reasoning she would try to make a case that Cow’s milk is really Cow urine. After all … it is liquid and it comes from a Cow and it is a byproduct.
One thought on “Taking On Ruth Bader Ginsburg & Her Hobby Lobby Dissent”
Finally, a voice of reason~! I totally agree. I completely support the decision and Hobby Lobby. After all, it was voted on based upon the Constitution. I am puzzled as to why everything else seems to be viable and significant except for religion. I get the separation of church and state argument, of course, but this is not the same. The scare tactics of opponents like Ginsburg and her supporters is staggering. “Blood transfusions”, etc. Not likely. I’m continually feeling as if I should apologize for being a white, Christian conservative woman. (The woman part is the only one that seems to be “okay.”) But nope, in the memes that ridicule it, make sarcastic jokes about it, we are told that the “war on Christianity” is a myth. Gotcha. Smh.