6 Stupid Liberal Arguments on Hobby Lobby?

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

I thought some of you might be interested in the challenge:

"6 Stupid Arguments About Hobby Lobby From Dumb Liberals" by Sean Davis at The Federalist.com

Comments

[telemann.livejournal.com]

That Sean Davis article is showing up all over my Facebook time line, and it's pretty bad logic.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

And now a counterpoint: I'm writing to inquire whether you are statistically illiterate or dishonest. (http://open.salon.com/blog/aemathisphd/2014/01/29/a_letter_to_sean_davis_of_the_federalist)

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

But maybe he's better on Supreme Court decisions;
he could have a crackerjack legal mind. :D

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

I never did get on the Facebook bandwagon.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

You're missing nothing.

[moonshaz.livejournal.com]

Nope, not a thing.

[blackdwarv.livejournal.com]

You got to love someone who refutes arguments by posting his own tweets.

[blackdwarv.livejournal.com]

...actually, no. You don't have to love someone like that at all.

[blackdwarv.livejournal.com]

...what was it..? Oh, yeah. "Kick in the junk". You got to kick in the junk someone who refutes arguments by posting his own tweets. There. Much better.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Split personality?

Maybe Obamacare can help. ;)

[blackdwarv.livejournal.com]

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure he was talking about Sean Davis.

[moonshaz.livejournal.com]

And the "you tried" graphic applies either way! :D

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

+1

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

It's almost as if The Federalist has no standard of fact that they require an article to meet before hitting "publish".

[aviv-b.livejournal.com]

I think this article should be re-titled: 6 Great Arguments For Single Payer Healthcare

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

But doesn't it hurt to be called anti-science from someone
who is defending a Christianist conception of Abortion?

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Not when the source is a troll-idiot hybrid.

[deborahkla.livejournal.com]

No shit, Sherlock. *Yawns*

[mudryikot.livejournal.com]

First of all - congratulations to all you US people on the 4th July.

Secondly - is it truth that the decision relates only to contraception that destroys already existing pregnancy if there is such? What about the morning-after pill?

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

is it truth that the decision relates only to contraception that destroys already existing pregnancy if there is such?

No, because none of the contraceptives in question do that.

What about the morning-after pill?

That also doesn't do that.

Hobby Lobby claimed that their objection was based on a "sincere" religious belief that blatantly, objectively untrue things, like "destroys already existing pregnancy if there is such", were true.

[moonshaz.livejournal.com]

Which means basically, if religion says one thing and science says another....too bad for science!

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

The decision itself only related to a few contraceptives,
but the Court has opened the way for all contraceptives.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Radical dissent against authority created this nation.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Secondly - is it truth that the decision relates only to contraception that destroys already existing pregnancy if there is such? What about the morning-after pill?

"Let’s take that phrase “human life begins at conception” apart.

What do you mean by “life begins”? Was there some step between your parents and you where there was a dead cell? Life is continuous — there hasn’t been a transition from non-life to life for about 4 billion years. So, yes, I’d agree that the zygote is a living cell, but so were the sperm and egg that fused to generate it, and so were the blast cells that were precursors to it, and so were the zygotes that developed into your parents. We can trace that life all the way back to early progenotes with limited autonomy drifting in Archean seas, to self-perpetuating chemical reactions occurring in porous rocks in the deep ocean rifts. It’s all been alive, so this is a distinction without meaning.

What about “human”? It’s a human zygote, we’d all agree; but it’s also human sperm and human ovum. You can pluck a hair from my head and determine with a few tests that it’s a human hair; you can take a blood sample from me and check a few antigens and determine that it is human blood; you can similarly swab a bit of saliva or earwax or tears from me, and analyze its biochemistry and find that it is specifically human spit or earwax or tears. That we can tag something with the adjective “human” does not in any way imply that my earwax deserves all the protections and privileges of a full human being. “Human zygote” imposes as much ethical obligation on me as “human spit”.

And don’t even try to pull that BS about a unique, novel genetic individual being created at conception. One of the key properties of meiosis is a genetic reshuffling of alleles by random assortment of the parental chromosomes and recombination by crossing over — every sperm and egg is genetically unique as well, and we spew those profligately with no remorse. Conception just adds another level of semi-random rearrangement of a random assortment of genes that were made during oogenesis and spermatogenesis.

So what are we left with? An obvious attempt at distortion or incomprehension in which the common modifier “human” is used as an absolute signifier for sociological and historical and psychological of an entity as being a complete member of a higher level community. It’s a lie cloaked in ambiguous language."

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/05/17/marco-rubio-is-already-gish-galloping/

[mudryikot.livejournal.com]

I am all pro-choice, actually I am CF. What I wanted to understand is whether it is true that the ruling in HobbyLobby case is limited to some kind of contraception or does it cover all kinds and types of contraception.

[moonchylde.livejournal.com]

As mentioned, yes only certain types, but the REASONS they gave for WHY they shouldn't have to cover it were based on lies and misinformation. They have set a precedent for being able to violate the law if you believe that you should be allowed to. Because "religion".

[moonshaz.livejournal.com]

That is a great piece! Thanks for the link.

[funnygurusdca.livejournal.com]

With the recent decision by the Supreme Court, in favor of Hobby Lobby, I thought you'd all be interested in the news of some upcoming new store grand openings in July.

You should be there -- especially since Hobby Lobby says they're concerned with a "right to life" (pre-viable, of course - after that, you're on your own). You'll want to be at these locations to loudly protest & to get right in the faces of all the Hobby Lobby patrons, as they enter the store.

Remember: The Supreme Court also ruled that the 35-foot "buffer zone" at women's reproductive health clinics, is now defunct, so protesters are free to show up & "counsel" all those who enter. After all, Hobby Lobby buys the vast majority of its shitty merchandise from China, a country with a policy of forced abortions to limit the size of families. Oh -- and their suppliers also use forced prison labor.

Below is the list of July Hobby Lobby Store Grand Openings ...


New Stores Opening Soon

• Burbank, CA
641 N. Victory Blvd
07/04/2014.

• Mountain Home, AR
725 US Highway 62 East
07/11/2014

• Hemet, CA
2200 W. Florida Avenue, Suite 600
07/11/2014

• Harahan, LA
5151 Citrus Boulevard, Suite C
07/11/2014

• West Covina, CA
2753 E. Eastland Ctr Dr, Ste 2100
07/18/2014

• Miami, FL
13899 S.W. 88th St
07/25/2014

• Cedar Rapids, IA
180 Collins Road NE,Suite D
07/25/2014

• Woodridge, IL
7370 Woodward Ave
07/25/2014

And here's a link with all the planned grand openings later in 2014 ...
http://www.hobbylobby.com/stores/

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

...a "right to life" (pre-viable, of course - after that, you're on your own).