Okay, I'm trying my best and I still can't parse your sentences in any coherent way.
you think the facts involve people who aren't public employees being designated as such and being forced to pay union dues favor the government and not those individuals,
Can you break that down into something simpler, and possibly also show why you think it "favouring the government" would be a relevant thing, even if it was true?
(FYI: It's not true, it favours the worker and the consumer.)
Same deal here: the facts that individuals who run corporations have religious freedom rights under statute favor the government, and not those individuals?
That's.... not English, man. Can you try to make that clearer? Maybe try bullet points?
Just want to make sure this is clear.
Indeed. In the mean time, I'll restate my objections, so you have a clearer idea of what you're supposed to be objecting to.
Hobby Lobby: "The owners of a corporation should not be allowed to enforce the tenets of their religion on employees. They get the legal benefits of being a corporation, they accept the legal detriments of being a corporation. That's HOW IT WORKS."
Harris v Quinn: "Health care workers paid for by the government should be held to 'government health care worker' standards and should obey the contracts the government has with their health care workers."
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2014-06-30 07:34 pm (UTC)you think the facts involve people who aren't public employees being designated as such and being forced to pay union dues favor the government and not those individuals,
Can you break that down into something simpler, and possibly also show why you think it "favouring the government" would be a relevant thing, even if it was true?
(FYI: It's not true, it favours the worker and the consumer.)
Same deal here:
the facts that individuals who run corporations have religious freedom rights under statute favor the government, and not those individuals?
That's.... not English, man. Can you try to make that clearer? Maybe try bullet points?
Just want to make sure this is clear.
Indeed. In the mean time, I'll restate my objections, so you have a clearer idea of what you're supposed to be objecting to.
Hobby Lobby: "The owners of a corporation should not be allowed to enforce the tenets of their religion on employees. They get the legal benefits of being a corporation, they accept the legal detriments of being a corporation. That's HOW IT WORKS."
Harris v Quinn: "Health care workers paid for by the government should be held to 'government health care worker' standards and should obey the contracts the government has with their health care workers."