Why DOJ to Colorado Family Saying to Give Up Your Religion or Your Business? Who Will Prevail?

by jt Posted 2012/07/29 07:40:13

Related Topics: Religion, Family, DOJ, Justice Department, Conditioning, Justice, Colorado, Give Up, Business, News, Air

Read More

Read all 40 opinions

CNSNews.com) - The Justice Department last week presented the Newland family of Colorado--who own Hercules Industries, a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning business--with what amounted to an ultimatum: Give up your religion or your business.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-colorado-family-give-your...

A fwd article: -jt

DOJ to Colorado Family Saying to Give Up Your Religion or Your Business

classic 2012/07/29 14:23:37

+4
This is why Religion and law are seperate issues... No one is denying them the right to practice their religion.. What one does with their beliefs is their business, but they have no business shoving their beliefs on their employees,,, If the laws call for such insurance coverages,,,provide them, that doesnt stop them from encouraging their employees not to use them... Hmmmmmmmm Extremists are Idiots....
>> See Replies

More polls by jt

Red 2012/08/07 06:58:10
elijahin24 2012/07/31 01:34:03

Bosses aren't allowed to impose their religion on their workers. I'm fine with this.

reply
Cat to elijahin24 2012/08/03 02:33:26

Bosses also shouldn't be forced to pay for the murder of their employees' unborn babies. That part of the policy should be optional and left up to the insured to pay for if they want that kind of coverage .

reply
elijahin24 to Cat 2012/08/03 03:09:43

They aren't. They're paying for insurance. The insurance company pays for legal medical procedures of many kinds. And unless you've been impregnated by your rapist, or loved someone who was; you're talking out of your ass, when you call it murder.

reply
Squatch 2012/07/30 16:33:57

So tired of the Anti-Chrsitian thing. Where do we draw the line for separation of church and state? I mean people open private businesses, but they have to be licensed by the state, so is every business, even a Christian bookstore a violation? Also, if you are driving down a state road and can see a cross on a church steeple, is that a violation? And where is the DOJ in attacking Muslim business owners? I think there is no doubt that when the forefathers wrote the separation of church and state into the Constitution they did not intend it as a means to rid the USA of Christianity.

reply
Cat to Squatch 2012/08/03 02:42:59

+1
Nobody ever wrote "separation of church and state" into our constitution.
The first amendment says congress shall not establish a national religion.
We had just freed ourselves from an empire with an official church, Anglican.
Nations with a national religion can raise taxes for that religion and can discriminate against those who are not members thereof.
The constitution does not prohibit free speech. It guarantees free speech, even proselytizing speech. It also guarantees "the free exercise of religion".

reply
Squatch to Cat 2012/08/03 09:39:27

Agreed - now someone just needs to tell the Federal Judges that

reply
Kingarthurup 2012/07/29 17:41:20

God willing, America and Hercules.

reply
DuncanONeil 2012/07/29 14:43:43

+1
After reading this does anyone believe that this administration deserves a second bite at the apple?

reply
Helmholtz 2012/07/29 14:26:14 (edited)

+3
I'm pretty sure that the Court ruled that a person can believe whatever s/he wants, but that that doesn't mean that they can act on any belief that they want -- I believe that this was part of how the Court ruled against polygamy.

I think that plenty of people could legitimately say that war of any kind is against their religion, for example, and that they don't want their money to support it. But they still have to pay taxes that help to provide for the common defense. Or maybe a very conservative Muslim in this country genuinely believes that girls shouldn't go to school beyond the second or third grade. Their property taxes are still going to go to fund that, no matter how much it violates their conscience. And so on.

reply
DuncanO... to Helmholtz 2012/07/29 14:45:19

+3
Actually they don't have to support war, or as you put it the "common defense". But that is a tough case to prove. Don't forget Alvin York was a Quaker!

reply
Helmholtz to DuncanO... 2012/07/29 15:21:55

Before I forget him, I'll have to look up and find out who he is :)

reply
DuncanO... to Helmholtz 2012/07/29 18:35:32

LOL Ok! Just forget a US hero!

reply
Cat to Helmholtz 2012/08/03 02:54:40

Highly decorated war hero, WWI, killed and captured lots of German soldiers. Sergeant York the turkey hunter turned army sniper...Remember now?

reply
classic 2012/07/29 14:23:37

+4
This is why Religion and law are seperate issues... No one is denying them the right to practice their religion.. What one does with their beliefs is their business, but they have no business shoving their beliefs on their employees,,, If the laws call for such insurance coverages,,,provide them, that doesnt stop them from encouraging their employees not to use them... Hmmmmmmmm Extremists are Idiots....

reply
DuncanO... to classic 2012/07/29 14:47:17

+1
But there is a law that is FORCING them to compromise their beliefs. They are being required to PROVIDE for activities that they believe are immoral. That is a violation of the first amendment. They are being restricted.

reply
Guru_T_... to DuncanO... 2012/07/29 16:08:50

Their religious beliefs do not give them the freedom to deny their employees' pursuit of happiness.

reply
DuncanO... to Guru_T_... 2012/07/29 18:37:18

There is no issue of pursuit of happiness involved in this issue. The Newlands, by Government edict are being required to go against their religious beliefs. That is unconstitutional. PERIOD!

reply
Guru_T_... to DuncanO... 2012/08/01 05:01:40

Says you. Personally, I wouldn't take your word for anything.

reply
Cat to Guru_T_... 2012/08/03 03:01:50

OOOHH, a personal attack. How uncool!

reply
Guru_T_... to Cat 2012/08/03 04:16:40 (edited)

No, not uncool and certainly not an attack; just stating a fact.

reply
DuncanO... to Guru_T_... 2012/08/05 20:18:13

No! So says the Constitution!

reply
Guru_T_... to DuncanO... 2012/08/06 02:40:59
Cat to Guru_T_... 2012/08/03 02:59:45

The constitution does not mandate employers to buy anything for their employees pursuit of happiness.

reply
Guru_T_... to Cat 2012/08/03 04:21:39

Way to take things out of context, Sis. We weren't discussing the Constitution. We're talking about employer discrimination based on sexual orientation which can most certainly cut into an employee's ability to find long-term happiness. An intelligent business owner knows that hiring and retaining employees is a give and take situation, so to say that the pursuit of happiness is irrelevant is naive at best.

reply
classic to DuncanO... 2012/08/01 14:15:51

Their personal beliefs will allow them to not participate by paying into the system,, however they cannot use those beliefs to deny others.... Period

reply
DuncanO... to classic 2012/08/05 20:19:41

And they are not "denying" others. They are not stopping anyone from following a belief system different from theirs. They are saying they should not be forced to pay for things their religion sees as "sinful".

reply
classic to DuncanO... 2012/08/05 20:32:56

No one is telling them they have to buy into, or participate in birth control themselves.. however they do not have the right, religiously or otherwise to make the decision for others... PERIOD.. One in business cannot tell his workers, when it comes to insurance, we will allow this but not this, because I dont believe in it.. It is call keep your religious crap to yourself. and let individuals choose what they want....

reply
DuncanO... to classic 2012/08/05 20:46:42

Sorry but they can so do that. If the employees, who are not getting such coverage now, feel that is just too much of a problem they have the right to purchase their own birth control. It is not like it costs $100 per pill! Insurance is a cost of doing business and there is nothing wrong with tailoring such coverage. Besides birth control is not a medical necessity. And remember all employer provided health insurance is a benefit, not a requirement.

reply
Cat to DuncanO... 2012/08/03 02:57:47

+1
Would that equate with Muslim and Jewish taxpayers contributing to pork products in the school caffeteria, or is it much worse?

reply
bags the Indigenous Guru 2012/07/29 13:16:29

+4
Even employees of the Catholic Church proper are covered. The people are just an example of extremism. They aren't the first to have to leave a business because they refuse to comply with Federal law. Too bad, so sad. No sympathy from me.

reply
DuncanO... to bags th... 2012/07/29 14:48:13

+1
Actually those employed by the Church proper are exempt, but not the Catholic runs charities & hospitals.

reply
bags th... to DuncanO... 2012/07/29 14:55:15

+1
I do know the local RCC does cover for the maintenance folk.

reply
DuncanO... to bags th... 2012/07/29 14:58:09 (edited)

+1
No way to verify that. Especially since we don't know where you reside.

reply
ray 2012/07/29 10:57:05

+3
The corruption will be blackmailing the judges.
Americans need to rally around this family .

reply
Cal 2012/07/29 09:34:20

+3
Obviously the family being declined their constitutional rights.

reply
XZQZQ 2012/07/29 08:54:33

+3
SUX

reply
ruralntex 2012/07/29 08:40:09

+4
Obama has simply got to go. However, he is just the most recent festering on this hemorhoid we call Washington DC. What we really need is something well beyond what another election can accomplish. State and local governments are a pain too, but more manageable than far away Mount Olympus.

reply
'Zedd 2012/07/29 07:56:37
jt 2012/07/29 07:44:15

+4

reply