# Let The Slippery Slope Begin: Government Contractors Using Hobby Lobby Ruling To Deny LGBT Rights **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 3, 2014, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238 "2014-07-03T00:22:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/141 "2014-07-11T13:40:33Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, that changes everything! Gosh, here I was thinking that this was an unreasonable assertion of a flimsy theological rationale, with the result of making life a bit more difficult for people who do not share that view. > > They must have gone to a different Sunday School than I did, I don’t recall Jesus saying anything like “Go forth and be a total pain in the butt.” Matt 21:12. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/142 "2014-07-11T16:39:22Z")
Fucking hippies! So _intolerant_! ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/143 "2014-07-11T21:35:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And it’s spelled differently, too. > > Hobby Lobby’s decision does impact other’s choices, but how – specifically, legally – is that fact relevant to creating vicarious liability? > > Against that suspicion, there is the strong evidence that for years, well before Obama was elected and gave us Obamacare, the Greens ran their company on what they viewed as Christian principles. > > Was that relevant to the Fortune 500 in some way? > > Which poster argued that the lack of Fortune 500 companies was “telling?” > Are you now saying that comment was unnecessary and a smoke screen? It was there because it was part of the text I quoted, nothing more. I don’t know why THEY inclkuded it. — so, I wasn’t swiping at you over that one. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/144 "2014-07-11T21:38:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes. > > Hobby Lobby’s belief is that preventing implantation of a fertilized embryo is sinful. > > The word “abortion” is not relevant here. Hobby Lobby says that deliberately or carelessly preventing the implantation of a fertilized embryo is sinful. And Hobby Lobby says that the four methods of contraception it objects to can do that. At present, the FDA also says that those four methods can do that. So then, just to be a jerk (yes I admit it but it’s fun)… do any of the Hobby Lobby wimmenfolk use any sort of birth control? It’s all about “preventing”. If so, they’re all horriblke sinners and heretics … and uhhh … stuff. Because by extension, all birth control prevents the fertilization. and other truthy sciencey stuff. Every sperm is sacred … and stuff. I’m an asshole. You don’t have to say it 😃 ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/145 "2014-07-11T21:41:10Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > That’s right. The medical community does not consider this abortion. > > But the point is that _theological beliefs need not be reality-based. They can believe that women are secret dinosaurs and act accordingly_, and _so long as it is sincere_ then the only question is whether the government has a compelling interest in burdening that practice and no less restrictive option. > > Their belief about personhood is pretty clearly theological. I’m not sure the same goes for their belief about the science of how IUDs work. That would allow for some REALLY crazy shit. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/146 "2014-07-11T22:12:57Z")
Well, yeah. Of course, the government usually has a compelling interest in ensuring that women are not treated like dinosaurs, and somewhat rarely has a less restrictive option. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/147 "2014-07-11T23:36:30Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > So then, just to be a jerk (yes I admit it but it’s fun)… do any of the Hobby Lobby wimmenfolk use any sort of birth control? It’s all about “preventing”. If so, they’re all horriblke sinners and heretics … and uhhh … stuff. Because by extension, all birth control prevents the fertilization. and other truthy sciencey stuff. > Every sperm is sacred … and stuff. > > I’m an asshole. You don’t have to say it 😃 But that view isn’t shared by Hobby Lobby. They don’t object in the least to preventing fertilization. ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/148 "2014-07-13T14:56:54Z")
Does the SCOTUS decision mean that the ACA administration now should regularly monitor Hobby Lobby for changes in the ownership or religious beliefs of the owners, in case the corporation converts to a new religion as a result, and can now pay for contraception without religious objection? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/149 "2014-07-13T15:12:12Z")
> [@Bookkeeper](#): > > Does the SCOTUS decision mean that the ACA administration now should regularly monitor Hobby Lobby for changes in the ownership or religious beliefs of the owners, in case the corporation converts to a new religion as a result, and can now pay for contraception without religious objection? The exemption must be renewed annually. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/150 "2014-07-13T17:20:48Z")
If I may presume to attempt to summarize: Religion is dumb. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/151 "2014-07-17T03:58:08Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > If I may presume to attempt to summarize: > Religion is dumb. and so is trying to impose one’s own dumbness on others. Bad science and hoodoo superstition and a bit of “control freak” tossed in for good measure. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/152 "2014-07-17T14:57:23Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > and so is trying to impose one’s own dumbness on others. > > Bad science and hoodoo superstition and a bit of “control freak” tossed in for good measure. The “imposition” came from the government ordering Hobby Lobby to buy contraception insurance for their employees. They objected to that order because it violated federal law. And they were right: turns out the law does not require them to buy those kinds of contraception insurance for their employees. You apparently want some other result, one that DOES involve the law forcing the employer to buy these kinds of insurance. Too bad. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/153 "2014-07-17T15:04:33Z")
But they can, however, be forced to offer insurance that covers transfusions, vaccinations, psychiatric medicines, and Viagra? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/154 "2014-07-17T15:09:59Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > But they can, however, be forced to offer insurance that covers transfusions, vaccinations, psychiatric medicines, and Viagra? They can be forced to offer insurance that covers those things, yes…_unless_ providing insurance to cover those things burdens their exercise of religion. If it does, then they can’t be forced, unless the method of forcing them is narrowly tailored to achieve the legitimate government goal involved. In the case of Hobby Lobby specifically, none of those things burdens their exercise of religion, so they can be forced. More’s the pity. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/155 "2014-07-17T15:43:26Z")
And just to be perfectly clear, it is the company that gets to decide what is or is not a burden, yes? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/156 "2014-07-17T15:50:49Z")
> [@andros](#): > > And just to be perfectly clear, it is the company that gets to decide what is or is not a burden, yes? No. Their claim that a particular requirement is a substantial burden presents a mixed question of fact and law. (Are you clear on the distinction between “a question of fact” and “a question of law?” I can explain this further if needed). It’s a question of fact for the trial court to determine what sincere religious belief exists that creates the claimed burden, and what facts exist that make the burden “substantial.” It’s a question of law whether those facts actually create a substantial burden. So a company seeking the protections of the RFRA must prove that they have a sincere religious belief, and prove that the burden imposed on them for choosing to follow that belief instead of complying with the government’s requirement is a substantial one. If they can prove those claims, then the government gets a turn at bat. It must prove that it’s requirement arises from a compelling government interest and that its method of achieving that compelling interest is narrowly drawn to achieve only that interest. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/157 "2014-07-17T16:01:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You apparently want some other result, one that DOES involve the law forcing the employer to buy these kinds of insurance. Personally, I want (or at least recommend) moving to a model where health insurance decisions are not controlled by employers, who are then free to be as dumbly religious as they like, at least on this issue. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/158 "2014-07-17T16:03:22Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Personally, I want (or at least recommend) moving to a model where health insurance decisions are not controlled by employers, who are then free to be as dumbly religious as they like, at least on this issue. Don’t you have it, already? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/159 "2014-07-17T16:40:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Their claim that a particular requirement is a substantial burden presents a mixed question of fact and law. (Are you clear on the distinction between “a question of fact” and “a question of law?” I can explain this further if needed). Nah, I’m good there, thanks. > [@](#): > > It’s a question of fact for the trial court to determine what sincere religious belief exists that creates the claimed burden This, I think, is my fundamental problem. I realize that trials determine such subjectivity all the time. Hell, that’s the essential core of determining _mens rea_. But it sits very uncomfortably with me. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238/160 "2014-07-17T17:05:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Don’t you have it, already? Yes, I’m Canadian and am discussing what I think Americans should do. Do you think I need to specify that every time I comment on the issue, or can you manage to retain the information? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-the-slippery-slope-begin-government-contractors-using-hobby-lobby-ruling-to-deny-lgbt-rights/692238.md?page=9)