Guest / Limited Access /

Changes announced today by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to its contraceptive mandate are likely to focus attention even more on for-profit companies that object to the mandate on religious grounds.

While several churches and ...

Read More

Displaying 1–14 of 14 comments

Ken johnson

February 10, 2013  7:21pm

J. Thomas, why is the religious organizations' money more "rightfully theirs" than my money is rightfully mine? It's a matter of fairness, as was discussed during the election, on the income continuum. Right or wrong taxation is frequently used as a form of subsidy and penalty. Look at the taxes on alchohol and cigarettes, something the government wants to discourage. Then look at the lowering of taxes on small businesses, something the government wants to encourage. If you don't agree with that last example, I'm sure you can think of other examples, such as tax breaks for new energy sources.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 09, 2013  7:33pm

Jim, a corporation is just a collection of people with common goals. To dehumanize them is a particularly nasty tactic of the crazy left. As if these people do not have the inalienable rights afforded them in the constitution simply because they share common goals. It doesn't make any sense, but then again not much that comes out of the Saul Alinsky left makes much sense.

Report Abuse

Jim Gustafson

February 07, 2013  3:27pm

Well, if corporations are people, as some on this board suggest, I console myself knowing that Enron, Halliburton, and Exxon will be roasting in hell, along with all the other unregenerate corporations -- and humans -- who reject Christ. But which corporations will be with other believers in heaven?

Report Abuse

Nancy Danielson

February 06, 2013  9:32am

Jack, although groups of persons cannot be married to one another because they cannot exist in relationship as husband and wife, have different sets of parents, can consist of males and females, citizens and non citizens, those who are eligible to vote and be drafted and those who are not, this does not change the fact that an employer or group of employers have the right to shape the mission of their company or corporation, as Religious Liberty and The Freedom to Assemble apply to individual persons and groups of individual persons.

Report Abuse

Nancy Danielson

February 06, 2013  9:11am

Has there ever been a corporation that employed things or places? Corporations consist of persons. Has there ever been a person who conceived a place or thing? A person can only conceive a person, not a place or a thing.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 05, 2013  10:02pm

Ken, when the government chooses not to levy taxes, it is not subsidizing anything. It is allowing people to keep what is rightfully theirs.

Report Abuse

Ken johnson

February 05, 2013  6:45pm

Religious folk are always worried about subsidizing something that they don't agree with. They seem to forget that a lot of their religious activity is subsidized by the fact that the religious organizations they belong to do not pay taxes. That shortfall is made up by higher taxes on individuals and other organizations. I'm sure not everyone paying higher taxes to subsidize these religious organizations agrees with everything they do. In effect, I'm supporting your ability to promote religious dogma ("an activity condemned by a particular religious belief") that I very well may disagree with. And , by the way, "finding no substantial burden" is not avoiding the issue. It's a legitimate judicial decision. "Substantial burden" is the principle or doctrine courts use in determining religious freedom cases.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 04, 2013  7:30pm

Yes, Jack. They can. Corporations are just people.

Report Abuse

Jack Ratekin

February 04, 2013  11:40am

Can corporations be drafted? Can they get married? are they male or female? Who were their parents? Are they citizens? Immigrants? Can they vote?

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 02, 2013  9:20pm

Jim, a corporation is just a collection of people seeking a common end. They are created and maintained by people. They are not unattached from humanity. We should advocate the implementation of Christian philosophy in corporations because it makes them just a little more of a reflection of Christ to the people served by the corporation and of those who are employed by the corporation. Vilifying corporations and dehumanizing them in Saul Alinsky style is something I would expect to find in the Screwtape Letters.

Report Abuse

Jim Gustafson

February 02, 2013  11:25am

Corporations are not people. SCOTUS failed us on that score. And Corporations are not religious or faith entities, and therefore do not have religious rights. My proof? Jesus did not die to save corporations, and no corporation will be in heaven (or hell). Only people will be. And while people are part of corporations, people are more than just the corporation they are a part of, and corporations are more than just the people who own and/or are employed by them.

Report Abuse

J Thomas

February 02, 2013  12:36am

You should not be forced to give up your spiritual convictions when you decide to run a business or become employed by a business. That is religious discrimination of the worst kind, because it completely removes religious moral and ethical behavior from the economic engines that produce the world we live in.

Report Abuse

Dwight Moller

February 01, 2013  11:23pm

A corporation is simply a person or group of people who are recognized as a single entity to conduct a particular activity such as a business. There is no reason to abridge religious rights when people engage in the formation of a corporation. If religious freedom could be abridge in this situation, it would only be a right under whatever conditions as determined by others, i.e. the government. This would make religious freedom a privilege granted by the government, not a right. And that is inconsistent with our Declaration of Independence and Constitution among other founding documents.

Report Abuse

Brad barber

February 01, 2013  4:30pm

I think that religious freedoms should be extended to corporations. After all, the Supreme Court has extended other First Amendment rights (namely speech) to corporations. However, despite the lateral precedent, corporations are made up of people. If the people have a religious right, why shouldn't they be able to confer this right when they organize as a group (corporation)? If anything, losing rights is a disincentive for groups to incorporate. Losing something like speech may be worth the profits incorporation generally brings, however it is much harder to "buy" religious rights from people, which is what would be happening. Great article. I hadn't thought of this debate as a corporate personhood debate. Definitely gives me new ammunition and point of view when I argue with my friends.

Report Abuse