(June 30, 2014 at 5:49 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote:(June 30, 2014 at 3:12 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Yes, that's good...but it's unclear what reasoning allows them to allow Hobby Lobby to evade covering certain types of birth control, that doesn't apply to a Jehovah's Witness business owner not being able to do the same. At first glance, the reasoning seems to be based on none of the justices being a JW.
Exactly.
It's only a matter of time before the hypocrisy in allowing religious exemptions for certain types of BC and disallowing religious exemptions for blood transfusions is made clear. The justices are cherry-picking what they agree with.
It's a crying shame SCJ hold their position for life.
I know this is a little out of context, but can a religious guardian refuse his/her son/daughter a blood transfusion for religious reasons it it's a matter of life or death (in the USA)? Considering a child cannot consent.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
