So far today, they have announced two wins from SCOTUS... the first:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday voted 7-2 to uphold rules established by the Trump administration that would allow employers with sincerely held moral or religious objections to deny their employees access to free contraceptive coverage.
The rules broadened a carve out to the contraceptive coverage mandate included in the Affordable Care Act, the health-care overhaul commonly known as Obamacare. According to government estimates, the religious exemption would lead to possibly as many 125,000 women losing their coverage.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who authored the opinion of the court, wrote that the Trump administration “had the authority to provide exemptions from the regulatory contraceptive requirements for employers with religious and conscientious objections.”
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the Little Sisters of the Poor is exempt from an Obama-era mandate to provide contraception in their healthcare plans.
The case, Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, marked the Catholic religious order’s second time before the Supreme Court, after nearly 10 years of legal dispute. It arose when the New Jersey and Pennsylvania state governments sued the Trump administration for exempting the Little Sisters from the contraception mandate.
The exemption, issued in the form of a 2017 executive order from President Trump, stated that the religious order is protected from “undue interference from the federal government.” Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar recommitted to that position the following year with guidelines exempting religious nonprofit groups from contraception requirements outlined in the 2010 Affordable Care Act.
Note: Can anyone here in a concise way, explain the difference between this case, and hobby lobby which was just a few years ago? In a cursory perusal, they look pretty much the same, why would the supreme court take up this case, so close to the last?
The Second Win coming from the issue of Religious Schools being targets of law suits from teacher's whose lifestyle themselves, conflict with the teachings of the schools..
Supreme Court shields religious schools from discrimination suits brought by teachers
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled 7-2 in favor of two religious schools that argued they should not have to face employment discrimination lawsuits brought by former teachers.
The case concerned the “ministerial exception” to employment discrimination laws that protects religious employers from certain lawsuits brought against them by employees.
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on Wednesday in favor of two religious schools that argued they should not have to face employment discrimination lawsuits brought by former teachers.
The case concerned the “ministerial exception” to employment discrimination laws that protects religious employers from certain lawsuits brought by employees. It was brought by two Catholic schools in California that were hit with discrimination lawsuits by teachers whose employment was terminated.
“The religious education and formation of students is the very reason for the existence of most private religious schools, and therefore the selection and supervision of the teachers upon whom the schools rely to do this work lie at the core of their mission,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the court.
“Judicial review of the way in which religious schools discharge those responsibilities would undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way that the First Amendment does not tolerate,” he wrote.
These religious cases always give me some pause due to the infiltration of Islam and Shari'a Law. We need to work on getting Islam classified as the political system it is, rather than a religion it masks its political processes in.
What say you?
And whenever I justify that Islam is a disgusting religion, people just bring up what some Christians did hundreds of years ago, and it wasn't as bad as Islamic atrocities in their conquests of North Africa, Iberia, Persia, Northern India, and Anatolia in those same time periods.
They ignore the slavery in the Middle East that still exists to justify their "diversity" narrative.
We can thank Islam for the creation of the US Navy.
Isn't it funny that as the Bible became more widely available in common translations for the masses to read, the number of religious wars fought for Christianity steadily decreased.
Meanwhile, as the Quran became more publicly accessible linguistically, Islam became more and more violent.
The Crusades were not only justified, but dammit we need another one right now. This is how you know you're in the right, when your enemies have to bring up things from hundreds of years ago to call you 'evil' and you can bring up things from a week or 2 ago to prove they're evil.
Christians are held responsible for the actions of any Christian in any part of the world at any point in time while Muslims aren't considered responsible for their own actions.
Not to mention many of the slave traders selling to the North Atlantic Slave Trader's, were Islam also.
Islam is the ones who would go into africa and steal people from tribes, selling them in the slave markets.
Give Africa some credit here. The Ashanti Empire made Britain bleed when Britain forced them to end slavery.
There are more slaves today in the Middle East than were ever held in the United States.
A bit off topic but you can buy a black man for $200 in Liberia.
"Liberia is the only black state in Africa never subjected to colonial rule and is Africa's oldest republic."
Funnily enough, Liberia was a country set up by the United States and filled with freed slaves, of those that chose to go.
The difference is that, while the Christian faith has done some fucked up things in the past, it has since undergone a reformation.
The same cannot be said about Islam. As a matter of fact, there are several fundamentalist sects and followers of Islam that argue vehemently against such a reformation. Totally messed up to argue against actual, potentially meaningful reform.