Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 64

Thread: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

  1. #51
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorgasm View Post
    Science can't measure good and evil. Those are hypothetical constructs. Hypothetical constructs don't lend themselves to empirical data. Scientists can analyze data and then offer their opinion as to whether it was good or evil, but science itself cannot measure good nor evil.
    We can measure harm. We can measure pleasure and pain. We can measure better or worse outcomes. Those are not hypothetical constructs and those are the practical meanings of good and evil. Anything else is just armchair philosophy and we can certainly do better than that. This idea that the big ideas are somehow closed to science is nonsense. There's nothing mysterious about kindness, love, or hate. All of them can be measured and understood. Any effect they have on our lives and our existence can be measured. There is nothing closed off to the scientific method. Or at least no evidence of anything.

    Cannot is an assertion. Please provide evidence to back up this assertion.

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    Because facts do not in themselves disclose values, which have to be assumed in order to interpret facts as having a moral valence.

    I watched a Ted Talk by Sam Harris in which he made a similar claim about religion and its treatment of women. While his claim seemed to be that facts alone gave us a basis for morality, he had to constantly refer to what causes "human flourishing" and "human suffering"--as if it were also a fact that these aren't values, but are rather found in some natural law somewhere.

    Now, to be clear, I more or less agree with the values he seemed to advocate (though I can think of some counter-examples). That's not the point, however: the values must be present in order for the rest of the argument to work, and those values are not in the world, but rather, a product of human intention.
    It is merely an assertion that there are some kind of values beyond our experiences. Or values are based on our physical reality. They are not transcendent. Nothing apparently is. If you have some kind of evidence that suffering and flourishing, or some similar model, are bad indicators of good and evil, please share them.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  2. #52
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by TobyOne View Post
    This is the crux of it. The same tests used in the Hobby Lobby case would be used in a case like if it went to federal courts - which I doubt it ever would. My guess is that its thrown out of any lower court if it even gets to a court.

    A) The Satanists would need to show if this was a sincerely held belief and would have to accurately define their belief. It seems to be that they're saying they object to scientific studies in the material mandated. So, is their sincerely held belief that they should not be expose to science they disagree with? Good luck with that. If people don't "believe" in GW science should they be forced to follow regulations or pay taxes that address it? You betcha.

    B) If somehow they managed to clear the hurdle stated above, then they would need to show that the way to communicate what was in the mandated material way was not the least restrictive way to provide the material. Here we get into some stickiness because of the word "restrictive". What religious freedom is specifically being "restricted" by being presented with a pamphlet or whatever abortion candidates are given?

    Also proscribed in the law is that the restriction of the religious freedom must be "substantial". Plus, as noted by the courts in other cases their is no right to not be offended. As in the case of offensive media, the court would say don't read it or don't watch it.
    They do not have to show anything about scientific studies since that is a separate part of their beliefs, much as Hobby Lobby did not have to weigh in on their opinion regarding the Flood. All they have to show is that the sincerely believe "One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone", which should be pretty trivial. That is not the big question with the case.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #53
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    You might want to read the decision a little more closely. The Court certainly did not use rational basis review in Hobby Lobby--or apply any other level of scrutiny--for the simple reason that it declined to decide the case on constitutional grounds. Hobby Lobby is not a First Amendment Free Exercise Clause decision, but a decision interpreting a federal law that is, if anything, even more demanding.

    The Court held that the HHS rule requiring the contraceptive coverage violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. (Incidentally, the unattributed quote in the original post incorrectly states that the ACA itself imposed this requirement. It does not, as the Court discussed in Hobby Lobby.) Congress enacted the RFRA in reaction to Employment Division v. Smith, a 1990 decision in which the Court raised a lot of eyebrows by drastically narrowing its interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause.

    The RFRA was meant to restore the broadly protective interpretation of the right to free exercise the Court had developed in several decisions before Smith. It did that with a vengeance, specifying that when government acts in a way that substantially restricts a person's right to free exercise of religion, it has to show not only that its action furthers a compelling government interest, but also that it is the least restrictive means of doing that.

    The HHS rule flunked this test, the Court held, because HHS already had a less restrictive means of providing contraceptive coverage, in the form of an accommodation another HHS rule provides for religious nonprofits.
    I did not claim the courts used Rational Basis review. You might want to read my posts a little closer and argue about what I actually did say.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #54
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,868

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale
    We can measure harm. We can measure pleasure and pain. We can measure better or worse outcomes.
    Harm according to whom? Better or worse outcomes according to whom? Surely you're not saying that good and evil are equivalent to pleasure and pain...

    I realize the above was not addressed to me, but it seemed relevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale
    It is merely an assertion that there are some kind of values beyond our experiences.
    I'm not sure I follow you. Beyond our experiences? When did I say anything about that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale
    Or values are based on our physical reality.
    "Based on" and "in" are two different propositions. "In" has a relatively restricted and clear range of meanings. "Based on" has a very broad range of meanings that aren't so clear. My point, simply, was the values are not in physical facts. They have to be imposed by human mental activity. That such activity can (let us say) take into account physical data doesn't imply (at all) that such activity is itself physical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale
    They are not transcendent. Nothing apparently is.
    I'm not sure what this means, but if you mean that values do not transcend physical facts, then I disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale
    If you have some kind of evidence that suffering and flourishing, or some similar model, are bad indicators of good and evil, please share them.
    We suffer quite a bit to undergo a course of training. We suffer to attain some end. I suffered rather a lot getting my Ph.D. But it was good.

    Conversely, there are plenty of people who flourish because of our prosperity whose attitudes are deleterious to not only human society as a whole, but in fact to all life on the planet. See, for instance, any of the recent stories on "coal rolling." I think their flourishing is bad.

    But such examples should be unecessary. The words "suffering" and "flourishing" already imply value judgments. I call having to claw my way through Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding a kind of suffering. But that's my judgment, not a physical fact about reading Locke.

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    The statements "We can measure harm," "We can measure pleasure and pain," and "We can measure better or worse outcomes" are only your assertions. So is the statement the "those are not hypothetical constructs." So is the statement that "there is nothing closed off to the scientific method." So is the statement that "there's nothing mysterious about kindness, love, or hate." So is the statement that "cannot is just an assertion." So is the statement that "it is merely an assertion that there are some kind of values beyond our experiences."

    Where is your evidence for any of those statements? I'll tell you: You have none, because they are not facts. They are only your opinions on issues that are by nature not amenable to scientific proof. You might as well claim it's a fact that your view on the beauty of marigolds is the correct one, that any others are false, and that you can prove it.

    Dismissing opinions on this subject that you don't like as "mere assertions" and calling on people who expressed them to back them up is a convenient substitute for reasoned argument, and anyone can do exactly the same to your opinions on it. Your opinions don't become unquestionable facts just because you say they are.

    Next you'll be asserting that these Satanists would win their abortion case, and demanding that anyone who thinks otherwise prove they would not.

  6. #56
    I am the pretty one.
    TobyOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,320

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Yes I agree. I was just trying to figure out what their belief actually is. They say one of their beliefs is that they respect science over religion but that doesn't explain their objection to the mandated materials. They also say they don't believe the studies in the materials. Well, are they not scientific studies? A more accurate description is that they're religious beliefs are against science they disagree with but for science they believe it.



    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    They do not have to show anything about scientific studies since that is a separate part of their beliefs, much as Hobby Lobby did not have to weigh in on their opinion regarding the Flood. All they have to show is that the sincerely believe "One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone", which should be pretty trivial. That is not the big question with the case.

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I did not claim the courts used Rational Basis review. You might want to read my posts a little closer and argue about what I actually did say.
    Okay by me. Here is what you actually did say:

    "The Hobby Lobby ruling is where I took that from. The reason a level of scrutiny applies(though it is probably not rational basis review) is that religion is at issue. Again, see the Hobby Lobby ruling."

    It would have been pretty silly to suggest that by speculating that what the Court applied was "probably not rational basis review," you were claiming it did apply RBR. And nowhere did I suggest that. Instead, I pointed out that what it applied not only was probably not RBR, it was certainly not--for the simple reason that in Hobby Lobby the Court didn't apply constitutional scrutiny of any kind. So your statement that "a level of scrutiny" applied in Hobby Lobby is flatly incorrect.

    Levels of scrutiny--i.e. "rational basis review," "strict scrutiny," or "intermediate scrutiny"--refer to tests the Court applies only when reviewing laws under the Due Process Clauses or the Equal Protection Clause. In due process and equal protection challenges to laws that restrict fundamental rights, the Court applies strict scrutiny--and it considers all First Amendment rights fundamental.

    So if the Court in Hobby Lobby had been deciding whether the HHS regulation violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, the regulation would have had to pass the Court's strict scrutiny test. But that wasn't the case. Instead, the Court held that the regulation violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, a federal statute :

    "The contraceptive mandate, as applied to closely held corporations, violates RFRA. Our decision on that statutory question makes it unnecessary to reach the First Amendment claim raised by Conestoga and the Hahns." 573 U.S. at 49.

  8. #58
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Okay by me. Here is what you actually did say:

    "The Hobby Lobby ruling is where I took that from. The reason a level of scrutiny applies(though it is probably not rational basis review) is that religion is at issue. Again, see the Hobby Lobby ruling."

    It would have been pretty silly to suggest that by speculating that what the Court applied was "probably not rational basis review," you were claiming it did apply RBR. And nowhere did I suggest that. Instead, I pointed out that what it applied not only was probably not RBR, it was certainly not--for the simple reason that in Hobby Lobby the Court didn't apply constitutional scrutiny of any kind. So your statement that "a level of scrutiny" applied in Hobby Lobby is flatly incorrect.

    Levels of scrutiny--i.e. "rational basis review," "strict scrutiny," or "intermediate scrutiny"--refer to tests the Court applies only when reviewing laws under the Due Process Clauses or the Equal Protection Clause. In due process and equal protection challenges to laws that restrict fundamental rights, the Court applies strict scrutiny--and it considers all First Amendment rights fundamental.

    So if the Court in Hobby Lobby had been deciding whether the HHS regulation violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, the regulation would have had to pass the Court's strict scrutiny test. But that wasn't the case. Instead, the Court held that the regulation violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, a federal statute :

    "The contraceptive mandate, as applied to closely held corporations, violates RFRA. Our decision on that statutory question makes it unnecessary to reach the First Amendment claim raised by Conestoga and the Hahns." 573 U.S. at 49.
    Once again, I did not say the court applied Rational Basis Review. You are drawing that out of your imagination.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #59
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,691

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Luftwaffe View Post
    #1 Gather a huge amount of people

    #2 Show them and discuss about abortion, absolutely no bias allowed, only discuss the procedure and state of the fetus

    #3 Ask people afterwards their view on abortion in terms of their morals

    #4 Record data from the experiment

    #5 Publish data which then can point to whether or not abortion may be seen as ethical or not.

    ^ Basically the scientific method but I left the hypothesis part out.
    Formulating the hypothesis is the science. You are doing statistics.

    Also, a poll isn't an experiment. You aren't manipulating any variables.
    Last edited by jmotivator; 07-30-14 at 12:38 AM.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  10. #60
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,691

    Re: Satanists Cite Hobby Lobby In Campaign For Religious Exemption To Abortion Laws

    Also, this is the DUMBEST lawsuit ever for two reasons:

    1) The law requires the clinic provide the information, it doesn't require the Satantist to take the information.

    2) They are claiming that "science" is their religion and then objecting to something they haven't even read. They are idiots.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •