An April 6 post on Sen. Patty I’m Not a Moron, I Just Play One In The Senate (And Everywhere Else) Murray’s Facebook page posed this non-sequitur related to the Hobby Lobby case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court:
Do Corporations Have Religious Rights?
Even though anyone with half a brain can tell you this a classic misdirect on the salient issue in this case – kinda like Healthcare.gov – that didn’t stop the Mindless Murray Minions from chiming in. Right on cue, these little darlin’s started shilling about Viagra, misogynist insurance coverage, discrimination, hypocrisy, “corporations aren’t people” and the usual claptrap you hear on the subject from every DemoLib that can crawl out from under a rock. They also launched that tired old canard they dredge up every time they can’t think of a real argument, which is most of the time: Gender Wars. (If you missed my incredibly incisive post on the topic, shame on you. Alright, alright. Here’s the link.)
Here’s a brief sampling of the *brilliant* (rolled eyes) responses said Murray Facebook post engendered:
If they are people then tax them the same as the rest of us. We don’t have the right to push OUR religion down anyone else’s throats and they don’t either. Would I get Muslim holidays off? Jewish? Catholic? NO! The SCOTUS only represent the rich, not the country! Not the poor, middle class or well off! Most shameful act I have seen in my near 70 years!
Who’s pushing “OUR religion down anyone else’s throats”? And while we’re at it, darlin’, how ’bout throttling back on pushing your lack of religion “down anyone else’s throats”?
Meanwhile – goin’ out a limb here – I kinda doubt that Hobby Lobby forces anyone to work for them. If an employee objects to the company’s policies or worldview, they’re free to work elsewhere. It’s called the free market. (No wonder DemoLibs don’t get it.)
Thank you, Patty, for all your hard work for the state of Washington and for the entire country, and also for your tireless efforts for women’s rights. I am saddened to see so many hateful, rude and ignorant comments. I thought we lived in a progressive enlightened state?
“Tireless efforts for women’s rights”? Unborn women exempted, right? And since when are “women’s rights” limited to abortion access and birth control? Like that’s not patronizing or anything. Not to play Captainette Obvious here or anything, but what about men’s rights? Oh, wait. According to DemoLibs, they don’t count. Forgot.
As for the “hateful, rude and ignorant comments,” have you watched Bill Maher lately? Laura Levite? Chief Harry or Babs Bouncer Boxer? Di Gun Ban Fi? Ummm… Patty Murray? And that “progressive, enlightened state” thing? You betcha. Too bad that doesn’t include you and your DemoLib compadres, sis. That appellation belongs to those who affirm constitutional fidelity and the Bill of Rights, which pretty well excludes your Prez Pinocchio and Sen. Moron.
This one takes the cake:
There are people who will try and take advantage of any law, any situation to try and take away a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, and they’re using the Affordable Care Act to do that, just like they have with the budget, just as they’ve used many other pieces of legislation here to do that
Oh, boo hoo. Just three more words here: Roe v. Wade. Oh, wait. A couple more: Kermit Gosnell.
And for the third graders among us, Viagra is NOT birth control. (ICYMI the first 8,000 times.) And no, DemoLibs, Hobby Lobby isn’t about gender wars or women’s rights (code for abortion-on-demand). Nice try.
What none of these little darlin’s seemed to notice – shocker – is that “do corporations have religious rights?” wasn’t on the docket. Despite the shills from the usual shills, the heart of the Hobby Lobby case is pretty simple: Liberty. Does the government have the right to force a private company to violate its principles?
Patty Moron and Co. say Yes. Not only can the government force a private company to violate its sincerely held religious beliefs, but it can also be forced to pay for said violation, too. That’s called serfdom. Patty and Pals may have to look that one up. (That’s okay. We’ll wait.)
So okay, DemoLibs, let’s play another round of Shoe on the Other Foot, shall we? It goes like this: If government can force a private company to violate its beliefs and provide and fund that which it finds morally objectionable, how ’bout the government forces your employer to:
- Pay for and distribute Bibles?
- Buy and distribute firearms to all employees (last time I checked, birth control wasn’t enshrined in the Constitution, as is the Second Amendment)?
- Eat kale?
- Wear blue on Saturday?
- Ban orange juice on Tuesdays?
- Close its doors to business on Sunday, drink Coors instead of Miller and wear nothing but Calvin Klein?
You see, Dear DemoLibs, you can’t have it both ways. When the government can force a private entity or individual to affirmatively engage in activity that said entity or individual legitimately objects to, where does it end? And what makes you think you’re exempt?
Oh, and by the way, that deal about corporations not being people? What do you think a corporation is made up of – hemlock posts? (Not going too fast for ya, are we? That’s okay. We’ll still wait.)