Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
By that logic, what substantial burden is there on Hobby Lobby to comply with Federal law?
The original burden is in the passing of a law. The supreme law is supposed to be the Constitution. If we accept that the Constitution grants the Federal Government the power in all cases to tell individuals and private businesses what they must do, and in detail how they must do it under a penalty for noncompliance, whether that be a tax or imprisonment or death, then we accept that the Federal Government is supreme. That it has an unlimited power to destroy. And if we accept that, then there is no need for a constitution which purports to limit the power of government and holds the individual as sovereign. The progressive system of government has long ago begun the process of transforming our government into this kind of all-powerful leviathan. And if we accept that, we accept total subjugation to it, and are totally at its mercy. These current laws and regulations that are being passed in the name of providing for our welfare are the final touches to the process. That a majority of us are stupid enough to accept its "gifts" forces the rest of us, against our will and conscience, to comply with tyranny. And we are so apparently powerless that there is, as you put it, "no substantial burden" for the government to comply with its own law. It makes law and changes it at will. Why is there any substantial burden on us individuals to comply with such tyranny except by force, by threat of destruction.
The company is using resources (i.e. employees) which may not share the same religious convictions. Then...According to Jesus Christ, as long as the owners of the Hobby Lobby lead their life according to his teaching everything should be all hunky dory…
-spence
|
The owners of Hobby Lobby are providing a means for people who wish to participate with them in their enterprise and be compensated for their work, which helps the employees to have the things they wish to have. They are not forced to share in the enterprise, nor forced to worship or live as the owners do. How should it be that the employees should be able to force the owners to bend to their will? Is there some sort of suicide pact which must be signed in order to hire employees? If the compensation is not enough, the would be employee need not take the job. If the employer wishes to provide health insurance, must that insurance have clauses which violate the principles by which they personally live? If employees wish to have an assisted suicide, must the employers be compelled to provide the means to do so if it is against their conscience?
Those things employers create including what they provide in compensation are done in respect to who they are and what they believe? Those things are a reflection and a result of who they are. The resources they use are mostly out of their ability to control and not a result or reflection of who they personally are. They don't create or control the lives of the employees. They don't create the coin of the realm. They don't create the products which they sell. If the products they choose to sell are useful and beneficial, that is a reflection on who they are. If those products are harmful and against the principles by which they live, that is also a reflection of who they are.
Jesus Christ, I assume, would approve of them living their life and operating their business in a way which reflects his teachings. If they sold, or provided, in a way which is counter to his teaching, he would probably disapprove.