Hobby Lobby thoughts

[marta_bee]

The gang over at Facebook got me talking about the recent "Hobby Lobby" case, and I promised an explanation of why I disagreed with the decision. Not necessarily as a lawyer; I'm not one, though I play one on TV hang around quite a few and try to listen to what they say. Still, this is less about what the law allows and more about how I think

Comments

[ithilwen]

1. We'd all be better off if we ditched our current system in favor of either a government-run single payer system, or a system like Germany's where people purchase their health insurance directly from highly-regulated insurance companies (and the government helps with the costs if you're poor). Alas, I don't see that happening any time soon - but this case shows why it should.

2. How can a for-profit corporation (even a closely held one) have any religious beliefs other than membership in the Church of Let's Make Money? The whole POINT of incorporation is to create a business entity which is legally entirely separate from the shareholder(s). Seems the Greens want to have their cake and eat it, too: Hobby Lobby Inc. is an entirely separate entity from them when it benefits them (limited liability in the case of torts or bankruptcy), but suddenly becomes all-but-indistinguishable from them when the law requires Hobby Lobby Inc. to do something which conflicts with the Greens' religious beliefs. Why should they be allowed to have it both ways? There SHOULD be drawbacks to incorporation as well as benefits!