January 3rd, 2014
09:21 AM ET
7 months ago

Supreme Court to rule on Obamacare, same-sex marriage injunctions

Washington (CNN) – The Supreme Court could act as early as Friday on pending requests for injunctions in two separate, high-profile cases– health care reform and same-sex marriage - that put Justice Sonia Sotomayor in an unusually pivotal role.

Religious-affiliated non-profits - including a Denver-based home for the elderly run by Catholic nuns - have asked the high court to block enforcement of the requirement in the Affordable Care Act to provide birth control and other reproductive health coverage to their workers.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Health care • Obamacare • Same-sex marriage • Supreme Court
soundoff (66 Responses)
  1. rs

    What if someone is unemployed but they don't want to take a job for someone who would let them die in the event of a medical emergency – should they lose their UE benefits for refusing to take said job, and on what grounds?
    ____________
    Don't waste the energy Mallory. Tom has dug himself quite the ditch to die in. Logic is meaningless at this point. This is simply Tom's anti-order chaos theory of government on display. Frankly given the visceral reaction to the BC issue I am frankly amazed he didn't stroke out on the Utah Same-sex marriage one! Think of those "religious" implications!

    January 3, 2014 12:33 pm at 12:33 pm |
  2. Lisa P.

    Delta Communications

    These religious organizations need to show the US government that they are serious and aren't going to take it anymore and refuse to take advantage of the Billions in IRS Tax write-offs every year.
    January 3, 2014 10:53 am at 10:53 am
    -------------------------------
    Hey wait a minute! Just because we're waving the banner of religious zealotry so we'll have one more way to micromanage our employees' lives doesn't mean we need to get all fanatical about it!

    Employer, heal thyself. And please leave the tax write-offs for groups that provide complete public services to the whole public, not just the ones the petty tyrants and dictator wannabees claim have passed their arbitrary Scripture sniff test. I'm still wondering why none of these holy rollers have a problem with paying for insurance that might pay for a prescription for Viagra. What a very convenient religion they've got there - fun for me and punishment for thee. We should all have it so good.

    January 3, 2014 12:40 pm at 12:40 pm |
  3. Marie MD

    What is scary is that these are the same teaklans who are trying to take away human and civil rights from others. Do these morons look at themselves in the mirror and see a dark halo?
    I m not a religious person but evil does exist and rethugs are right smack in the middle of the chaos.
    at least they will have plenty of company in he11 because I don't think their god is happy with them one bit.

    January 3, 2014 12:41 pm at 12:41 pm |
  4. Silence DoGood

    Classic conservative Radical Right Utopia: The people with money and control can tell their employees what is the right way to think. The next step is to legislate morality as was tried with DOMA as an example. And the next step is dominating Theocracy. I hope God gets the last laugh: After a State-run religious system is set up, wouldn't be funny if another different religion just came in a took over? I wonder how great State-Religion would seem to the Radical Right then.

    January 3, 2014 01:02 pm at 1:02 pm |
  5. just asking

    why is government dictating to employers or anybody else what their health insurance should cover anyways? are we all too stupid to know what we want and what we can afford? that is what obama and the democrats think. by doing this they have forced their way into other, pre-existing relationships (employer/employee) and now demand supremacy.

    as we will see when the employer mandate is enforced, many employers will give them that supremacy by dropping healthcare coverage for their employees. of course, the liberals and democrats will blame the employers but they must look out for the viability of their business, which provides jobs for these same people.

    obama, reid, pelosi and the democrat party has really put their foot in it this time. other large government programs never screwed up existing things like obamacare will do. for this nightmare they will pay a heavy price come november. remember democrats, we expect to see ads saying how great this all is so you can look like lying fools.

    January 3, 2014 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  6. Fair is Fair

    foxghostwriter

    Tom I, you got it all wrong. Businesses have to conform to the rules. They can then decide if they wish to remain in business or not. If they don't want to offer contraception, they don't have to. Just don't go into business.
    --------
    There you go. Toe the democratic party line or you are not allow to participate in the economy or provide for your family. Touche, lefties... touche.

    January 3, 2014 01:04 pm at 1:04 pm |
  7. Rudy NYC

    tom l wrote:

    "The trick will be to see if SCOTUS allows corporations run by fanatics to deny their employees (who may or may not have the same religious "beliefs") birth control

    Or, maybe they believe what they believe and you should let them alone rather than eviscerate them for exercising their freedom of religioin? Why must you feel you and the govt have the right to impinge on their rights?
    -------------------------
    No one is denying them religious freedom. They are being denied the freedom to impose their religion upon others. Don't the targets of their zeal have a right freedom of religion, too? Or must we all bow to the whims, desires, and beliefs of the land owners and aristocrats in our society. Seems to me some men got together and fought a Revolutionary War against that exact sort of treatment in the late 1700s.

    January 3, 2014 01:22 pm at 1:22 pm |
  8. Silence DoGood

    @Rudy NYC
    tom l wrote:

    "The trick will be to see if SCOTUS allows corporations run by fanatics to deny their employees (who may or may not have the same religious "beliefs") birth control

    Or, maybe they believe what they believe and you should let them alone rather than eviscerate them for exercising their freedom of religioin? Why must you feel you and the govt have the right to impinge on their rights?
    ---------
    No one is denying them religious freedom. They are being denied the freedom to impose their religion upon others. Don't the targets of their zeal have a right freedom of religion, too? Or must we all bow to the whims, desires, and beliefs of the land owners and aristocrats in our society. Seems to me some men got together and fought a Revolutionary War against that exact sort of treatment in the late 1700s.
    -------–
    Rudy, you have captured the key element of the free-enterprise fusion with Radical Right Christianity. It is just like Europe aristocracy before the American Revolution.

    January 3, 2014 01:46 pm at 1:46 pm |
  9. TONE

    The religious right is against abortion, and contraceptives, let the baby live, gov must not help to control abortions of unwanted pregnancies, now when the mother or father of that child cannot afford the baby, and gov helps then rightwingers blame the gov for doling out welfare. Do these people really care about abortion or contraception? or is this a way of controlling an electorate to remain in power? mess with their religious beliefs.

    January 3, 2014 02:02 pm at 2:02 pm |
  10. tom l

    @Silence
    "@Rudy NYC
    tom l wrote:

    "The trick will be to see if SCOTUS allows corporations run by fanatics to deny their employees (who may or may not have the same religious "beliefs") birth control

    Or, maybe they believe what they believe and you should let them alone rather than eviscerate them for exercising their freedom of religioin? Why must you feel you and the govt have the right to impinge on their rights?
    ---
    No one is denying them religious freedom. They are being denied the freedom to impose their religion upon others. Don't the targets of their zeal have a right freedom of religion, too? Or must we all bow to the whims, desires, and beliefs of the land owners and aristocrats in our society. Seems to me some men got together and fought a Revolutionary War against that exact sort of treatment in the late 1700s.
    ---–
    Rudy, you have captured the key element of the free-enterprise fusion with Radical Right Christianity. It is just like Europe aristocracy before the American Revolution."

    ======

    So...I'm Jewish. I believe in freedom of religion from govt telling them what do. You are saying that the govt has the right to tell people how to practice their faith. If you truly believed in the first amendment then you would realize that what you propose, especially with forcing someone to provide birth control, is to tell people how they should practice their religion.

    And please stop saying that they are denying them the right to have birth control because that's patently false. They are not telling their employees they can't have birth control. They are just simply not wanting to be the facilitator of an action that they are opposed to. Freedom of religion.

    January 3, 2014 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  11. sonny chapman

    Attention Christians: Those caught up in the semantics of the Ten Commandments should simply ask;what did Jesus say ? "Love each other as I have loved you" John 15.12.

    January 3, 2014 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  12. Silence DoGood

    @tom l
    @Silence
    "@Rudy NYC
    tom l wrote:

    "The trick will be to see if SCOTUS allows corporations run by fanatics to deny their employees (who may or may not have the same religious "beliefs") birth control

    Or, maybe they believe what they believe and you should let them alone rather than eviscerate them for exercising their freedom of religioin? Why must you feel you and the govt have the right to impinge on their rights?
    -
    No one is denying them religious freedom. They are being denied the freedom to impose their religion upon others. Don't the targets of their zeal have a right freedom of religion, too? Or must we all bow to the whims, desires, and beliefs of the land owners and aristocrats in our society. Seems to me some men got together and fought a Revolutionary War against that exact sort of treatment in the late 1700s.
    -–
    Rudy, you have captured the key element of the free-enterprise fusion with Radical Right Christianity. It is just like Europe aristocracy before the American Revolution."

    ======

    So...I'm Jewish. I believe in freedom of religion from govt telling them what do. You are saying that the govt has the right to tell people how to practice their faith. If you truly believed in the first amendment then you would realize that what you propose, especially with forcing someone to provide birth control, is to tell people how they should practice their religion.

    And please stop saying that they are denying them the right to have birth control because that's patently false. They are not telling their employees they can't have birth control. They are just simply not wanting to be the facilitator of an action that they are opposed to. Freedom of religion.
    -----
    You are missing the point about aristocracy that our Founders rejected. Why is the single religious view of the owner more valuable than the views of the employees? Can a Christian Scientist owner deny employees surgery coverage? Where is the limit of the Sacred views and values of the Holy Employer? Can I, as a objector to War spending withhold a portion of my corporate taxes? Why doesn't each corporation come up with its own laws, construct a moat around the fiefdom and we can return to feudal times.

    January 3, 2014 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  13. Rudy NYC

    tom l wrote:

    So...I'm Jewish. I believe in freedom of religion from govt telling them what do. You are saying that the govt has the right to tell people how to practice their faith. If you truly believed in the first amendment then you would realize that what you propose, especially with forcing someone to provide birth control, is to tell people how they should practice their religion.

    And please stop saying that they are denying them the right to have birth control because that's patently false. They are not telling their employees they can't have birth control. They are just simply not wanting to be the facilitator of an action that they are opposed to. Freedom of religion.
    --------------------------–
    "They are just simply not wanting to be the facilitator of an action that they are opposed to. Freedom of religion."

    Hmm, that looks like a Freudian Slip to me. Look, tom, the line must be drawn somewhere. This is it. If they don't want "their money" to pay for birth control pills, then what about the fact that "their money" goes to an insurance company pool of money that does provide birth control pills to people who don't even work for the employer? Hmm.

    Where is the line supposed to be drawn? Doesn't some of the money that these employers pay to their insurance companies go into the pool that pays for birth control pills for employees who work elsewhere? If it's birth control today, what will it be fomorrow? Faith healing?

    This is a very dangerous, and ill defined, slippery slope. It opens the door for anyone to be able to deny anything to their employees "on religious grounds." And yes, I think that people would use that excuse for no better reason than simple greed. Only the most naive would discount that scenario as a real possibility.

    January 3, 2014 02:30 pm at 2:30 pm |
  14. Anonymous

    Biblically speaking one sin is very much the same as the next sin, and yes, these employers are using their definition of what is sin as a means to control their employees. What then is next on what might be another employer's pursuit of a "religious freedom" agenda? You have to admit there are some very strange religious protocols being advanced these days, even in America.

    January 3, 2014 03:02 pm at 3:02 pm |
  15. rs

    Donna
    rs

    tom l
    @GOP
    "I believe in the 10 Commandments, specifically, the one that states "Thou shalt not kill"!"

    ====

    It's "thou shalt not murder". Big difference.
    _______________
    What a hypocrite you are! So you would deny people birth control because that's what the corporate boss wants, but you reserve the ability to kill, and keep your precious religious exception.
    -

    But NOBODY is denying them birth control so please stop the lies. They can buy all of the birth control they want with their own money. People should NOT be able to demand their employers pay for ANYTHING. But now the federal government has taken over what the definition of healthcare is in this country and they have created this mess.
    ___________________
    Well Donna, employees benefits should be little different if the work for a state, a federal agency, IBM, Xerox or, yes even Hobby Lobby. Why should one be different?

    January 3, 2014 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  16. rs

    And please stop saying that they are denying them the right to have birth control because that's patently false. They are not telling their employees they can't have birth control. They are just simply not wanting to be the facilitator of an action that they are opposed to. Freedom of religion.
    ______________
    Ahhh, yes, Tom's definition of freedom. When it disagree's with his, they can pay for it. Sorry Tom, equal means equal. Not being forced to live by someone else's edicts means "freedom", not paying more for it.

    January 3, 2014 03:25 pm at 3:25 pm |
1 2 3