Chic-Fil-A was donating money to organizations opposed to marriage equality
NEWSPEAK ALERT!
No, Dan Cathy donated money to organizations that worked against redefining marriage to fit a certain political agenda.
LK
You and the parent both fail to realise that the laws trump your religions. If their is a conflict between the 2 the law always takes precedent. Claiming your invisible sky-daddy wants or doesn't want something is irrelevant.
You're just so full of wrong here.
First, you mean precedence, not precedent.
Second, the SCOTUS just saw it my way.
So, you can go suck a bag full of dicks.
LK
how is the poster a moron?
I can't say for certain how he or she became a moron but the idiocy he or she is displaying is how I know that he or she is a moron.
Five years ago you would never think a corporation had a right to unlimited political spending in the name of the right of free speech of a corporation.
I argued that exact position before McCain-Feingold became law. If each of the people who own a corporation has the right to free speech, it's unthinkable that when they work together they somehow lose that right.
Last year you would not have thought Hobby Lobby could prevent it's employees from getting their Federally guaranteed earned health benefits in the name of a corporation's religious inclination.
1. No one is prevented from getting anything. Every Hobby Lobby employee who can get a doctor to prescribe birth control pills can still get them. Hobby Lobby just won't be forced to pay for it.
2. Yes, I not only thought but I hoped that would be the case when the issue was decided by the SCOTUS.
It really is just a few months at this rate before they vote.
Yeah, I see why you posted anonymously. If you had used your name, in a year, I would have waited to see you post and then replied to remind you what a fucking moron you are.
It's not going to happen. Ever.
What's to stop it?
The fact that to be able to have the right to vote, one must be a citizen and in order to be a citizen one must be a human being.
LK
Pregnancy: it takes two to happen, but it's always the woman's fault.
And the resultant expense is always the man's responsibility.
LK
Right, because running a corporation is a religious practice. Give us this day our daily board meeting.
Every part of your day can be a religious practice.
For some people, running their business in accordance with their faith is a part of their religious practices.
LK
Superstition trumps health care for women.
Stop with the butthurt.
Pay for your own Plan B. This decision doesn't take that away.
LK
Chick-fil-A were attacked because they were openly bigoted.
Were there any documented cases of Chic-Fil-A refusing to serve someone because they were gay? Refusing to hire someone because they were gay? Attacking someone because they were gay?
LK
No, you fucking moron.
Corporations are "persons" not "people" and moreover, only "Citizens" can vote. Corporations are not now, have never been and shall never be "citizens".
LK
I wonder when the big man at 1600 Pennsylvania is going to fix this gender disparity?
Shut your oppressive mouth. Cock-man! Despoiler!
Everyone knows that it's only discrimination to treat people differently when women aren't happy with the disparity.
LK
put their religion before the constitution. Shocking.
I guess you missed that part about "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
LK
+1 Fucking Right!
These "vouchers" that you are describing sound an awful lot like...money.
LK
Corporations can be the targets of legal action precisely because they are persons under the law.
LK
You can't run ads that mention political candidates or parties 2 weeks before an election.
How about political editorials?
Who will decide if "news" coverage is impartial or biased towards or against any candidate or party?
Congratulations, you found out that sometimes, there's a trade-off in a decision that you make, and a perfect solution doesn't exist.
Sure it does. Let people say whatever they want to say and in the marketplace of ideas, the most compelling argument wins.
LK
CocaCola does not get a vote in November.
Because CocaCola is not a citizen. Illegal aliens do not have the right to vote in November either. (We all know that many of them will anyway, but they have no right to do so.)
but the corporation is not a person.
Yes it is. Being a "person" under the law doesn't require one to be a human being. There is still a class of human beings who are not "persons" under the laws of the USA. You need to understand the underlying premise here.
The Constitution refers to "Persons", "The People" and "Citizens". These are three distinct types of entity under the law. I am a Citizen and by virtue of that, I am a person and one of the people.
Corporations are absolutely NOT people.
No, they are not "people". They are "persons". There is a legal distinction and an important one.
If a dog bites you, can you sue the dog? No. Why? Because the dog is not a person.
Can you sue a corporation? Yes. Why? Because it's a legal "person". "Incorporate" means to "bring together into one body".
LK
Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?
