Schadenfreude, Sweet Schadenfreude

National Catholic Reporter

 

Go here to read the often hysterical, and frequently unintentionally humorous, comments on the Hobby Lobby decision at the National Catholic Reporter.

 

One of my personal favorites:

No, Pete, this decision is not good and it is not a start. Thanks to Congress and the US Supreme Court it is a continuation of the slide from a pluralistic society into a theocratic one. And not just a theocracy, but a Christian theocracy. (Judaism and Islam is not included.) And not just a Christian theocracy, but a so-called Christian theocracy embraced by a small minority who hold certain “sincere beliefs.”
With this decision all tax payers of whatever belief or no belief will have to allocate part of the US budget to pay for medical benefits for women who are denied those benefits so their corporate employers can be free to exercise their “sincere beliefs.”
As we celebrate this Independence Day 2014 it might be beneficial to ask if this is what the founders had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment U.S. Constitution.
George McCartin
priest/lawyer

 

 

More to explorer

10 Comments

  1. Outstanding!

    Thank you!!

    First thing this morning you give us a perfect example of the oxymoron: priest/lawyer!!!

    McCartin,

    Actually, the waning plurality of Americans that have jobs and pay taxes . . .

    The real slide/slippery slope is from liberty to tyranny of the libidinous, liberal busybody (at best) or Big Brother/1984 (at worst). How is it a free state when the all-powerful state orders its serfs to buy something regardless of it being against your conscience?

    T. Shaw
    Trying with varying degrees of success to be a Christian.

  2. T Shaw said:

    “The real slide/slippery slope is from liberty to tyranny of the libidinous, liberal busybody (at best) or Big Brother/1984 (at worst).”

    Here, here! Mr. Shaw. 😀

  3. “…it might be beneficial to ask if this is what the founders had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment U.S. Constitution”
    Agreed. Let’s ask! Here’s the answer: “Yes. Indeed.” See, it’s simple.

  4. I’ve seen Fr. McCartin’s fuzzy logic being dismantled by Fr. Z about a year and
    a half ago. Check out the “priest/lawyer’s” trip to the woodshed in the final
    comments on Fr. Z’s 30 January 2013 post “Confession to SSPX Priest a Sin?”.

    Ouch. That dressing-down might have left a mark.

  5. “And not just a theocracy, but a Christian theocracy.”
    .
    Yes, our Founding Fathers brought forth this nation on Christian pinciples. If any citizen is not content, he is free, really free, to change these founding principles by getting three quarters of the states to ratify any change he proposes. Put it on the ballot, hear the will of the people, get informed consent of the governed.

  6. Cannot employees purchase contraceptives out of their own pockets? Money from employers to pay for them is cash withheld from net pay. Healthcare benefits are not an addition to one’s salary. And why do people who exclaim “keep your rosaries off our ovaries” believe they are suddenly entitled to their neighbor’s income when they find themselves in trouble due to their actions?

  7. Charlie wrote, “Healthcare benefits are not an addition to one’s salary”
    That rather depends on how they are treated for tax purposes. I do not know the US Tax Code, but, in most countries, one finds benefits in kind are used when they are more favourably treated than equivalent cash payments.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: