I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, 'wouldn't it be much worse if life *were* fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them?' So now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. – M. Cole
This day is an anniversary of the date that women won the ability to control their own bodies here in the US when it comes to childbirth and abortion. This was the famous Roe vs. Wade decision.
Pleasantly enough, I have just read that the GOP majority in the US House of Representatives have failed to pass their draconian bill to attempt to retake control over women and treat them as second-class citizens who can’t make their own health care decisions. Some of their own members, women for the most part it seems, were not willing to vote for something that would require women to report rape to the police to be permitted to have an abortion. In an aside, lots of these Republicans in congress would like to entirely eliminate abortions for any reason, essentially forcing girls and women to bear the children of their abusers and forcing girls and women to bear to term fetus that have no chance of survival for no reason.
I personally think abortion is a stupid means of birth control, when there are so many good methods out there (let’s hear it for IUDs!). However, a puritan sense of morality keeps those hard to get for women, so abortions are what many are left with.
Many Christians claim that they are “pro-life”. This is shown not to be the case when these same people are often horrified if they are expected to provide a decent life for that child. These people are simply “pro-control”, needing to make everyone obey their religion and beliefs in a need for external validation.
If you are so interested in preventing abortions, support the availability of birth control and good thorough sex education, not some crap about celibacy which does not work. I had to be my friends sex ed teacher when we were in high school because the class was taught by gym teachers who had no idea what they were doing, and who never talked about anything but the anatomy charts. My mom was smart enough to talk to me and let me ask questions. None of my friends got pregnant; a lot of other girls did.
And if you still want to pretend your religion has a position on abortion, read your bible. Your god does a lot of killing and commands a lot of killing in there, women, children, and men and not one bit about how it’s important to keep eggs and semen. If you think that this god will judge anyone who supports a women’s right to control her own body, then allow him. Trying to murder them yourself certainly shows you have no respect for life at all or care what your bible says.
Again, we have wannabee theocrats making decisions based on their religion that affects many people in this country. The usual suspects on the US Supreme Court have decided that some people’s religion trumps other people’s religion (or lack thereof) in the US. They have also decided that corporations can have religion.
The case was if companies, Hobby Lobby is the cited one, can deny any medical procedure it wants, in this case birth control, to its employees because of religious beliefs. The decision now declares that the assenting justices are “only* supporting the RFRA, and it’s okay for some people can force their religions on others when it comes to birth control on people who work for them for fair compensation. This makes one set of religious beliefs more important than others. It also declares that a corporation can have religion beliefs, which can be pretty amusing to contemplate. This is q quote from Hobby Lobby’s website “We believe that it is by God’s grace and provision that Hobby Lobby has endured.” How great this god is for allowing a craft store to flourish and not getting around to, oh I don’t know, help people who need safety and food around the world.
Now, how can one determine if a corporation has beliefs and, perhaps more importantly, that it is following these beliefs as defined by some officially recognized religion? If we have a Christian corporation, is it going to heaven? Is it “saved”? Evidently the lawyers and owners of Hobby Lobby think so. Does it have to follow the commandments listed by its god? It certainly seems like they should considering this quoe from their website: “Honoring the Lord in all we do by operating the company in a manner consistent with biblical principles.”
Does Hobby Lobby advocate murdering everyone working on a Sunday? We do know that they aren’t open on Sundays but I’m sure that they rely on suppliers who have distribution centers that are open on Sundays, factories open on Sundays (oh say in Asia where most of their stock comes from, like Gildan tshirts ), container ships and their crews who bring these supplies to our shores, truckers who must work on Sundays to get their product on the shelves and I’m sure they will complain if those supplies aren’t on time where they want them. Golly, do they pick and choose just like human believers do?
And that second commandment, no graven images. Seems like HL stocks at least one image that breaks this gem and damns them to hell. “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.” (the commandment goes onto add that you shouldn’t worship this image either, two distinct commands.) Of course if we keep going, we can see that Hobby Lobby the corporation has to approve of slavery since that is part of their god’s commandments too. The bible also has that any believer should accept whatever its government says as law, without question since its god put those people in power. Putting up a defense against the gov’t is saying that their god is wrong for allowing Obamacare to be enacted into law. It did, didn’t it since this god controls everything in the world? Oh but not all Christians believe in this. Hmmm.
So, is Hobby Lobby the corporation really Christian? Many Christians would claim otherwise, even if the family who created Hobby Lobby claimed to have created the company with religious concepts in mind. The court now has put its toe in the water of deciding who has the “right” beliefs.
Ah, hypocrisy, isn’t great? It against shows that religion is nothing more than the claims that some imaginary powerful being agrees with human. It’ll be great to watch any company that tries to invoke this decision will be shown to be just as hypocritical and dishonest as any individual believer.
The decision is limited to a not publicly traded company, e.g. “closely held” e.g. family owned like the Westboro Baptist Church, eh? (which should be fun if the family doesn’t agree amongst itself). It also says that the government can still step in and say that anything else that these corporations wants to do regarding their religions, e.g. you can’t claim that taxes are against your religion or that public health issues are against your religion, can’t be done. Essentially, this law only applies to certain kinds of contraception, and women can still get birth control thanks to Obamacare. I’m sure that theists will whine about this, because it says that they can’t force their other nonsense on people. Of course, other corporations will try to push other ideas in front of the court.
In my opinion, the worst problem with the SCOTUS saying that its only supporting the RFRA, is that it directly says that some people’s religion trumps others. The RFRA says “ (a) IN GENERAL. — Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b). (b) EXCEPTION. — Government may burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person — (1) furthers a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. (c) JUDICIAL RELIEF. — A person whose religious exercise has been substantially burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution.”
So whose religion gets primacy? If I believe that my god supports birth control, then why does another person get to say my religion is wrong and theirs is what is to be followed? If I believe that my religion supports multiple partner marriages, how can my boss, or the government, say that my religion is wrong and only certain ones is right? Can I say that my religion says that people of a different ancestry are demonic and I don’t have to hire them? Can the government, or anyone else say that my religion is wrong if it doesn’t bother government at all?
There is another possible twist to this. Seems like the conservative justices on the SCOTUS, by citing the RFRA, have now reinforced the idea that they can’t forbid much of anything as long as religion believe is invoked. So, now we come to the problem, who has the “real” religions, and who has the most “sincere” claim a la Linus in the pumpkin patch? Are theists willing to have each of their sects and religions judged as “real” by others? Shucks, Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Alito, Thomas, all Catholics and on the SCOTUS are sure that any other Christian sect are false at worst and badly misguided at best. You want them to decide that your big ol’ mega church isn’t a true religion? You want the Jewish justices to decide that Christianity isn’t a real religion since there’s no reason to believe that Jesus Christ was the “messiah”? I’m guessing that my theist readers would be horrified if religions were judged on whose qualify, but now that’s what we can have so we can know for sure that the RFRA is being applied correctly. How can we know if someone has a “real” religion, and hasn’t just made one up to get its nonsense accepted as legal?
Now, what I would like to see is that since the SCOTUS says that they can step in to protect people from other stupid religious claims, i.e. refusing blood transfusions, no vaccines, no medical care, this would mean that parents who kill their children, or attempt to kill them, because of their religious beliefs would be punished to the fullest extent of the law. This decision does give support to the idea that religion isn’t quite the legal cover that many wannabe theocrats would wish it is. I’m guessing that there’s not a chance of this, because, as much as the conservative justices want to claim that they can refuse some religious claims, they won’t go that far to save lives, no matter how much they claim to be “pro-life”.
Again, hypocrisy always rules religion.
Postscript: Found this whilst looking at commandments “26 And do not go up to my altar on steps, or your private parts may be exposed.” – Exodus 20. So this god can’t tell its believers about underwear? The Israelites have nothing like underwear? God is offended by seeing body parts it supposedly created? Or is there some magic that suddenly exposes your penis if you use steps near an altar?
Postscript 2 – Congratulations to the usual teabaggers. You were so afraid of Obama introducing Sharia law. And now, we have your fellow conservatives enabling it! Yep, you now have precedent to allow anyone to claim the right to do anything, as long as they sincerely believe it.