<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Hobby Lobby wins	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2014 19:52:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Edward		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173291</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Edward]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2014 19:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173291</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, I thought this ruling was an example of the Supreme Court being on our side.  What a difference a good night&#039;s sleep makes.  

The Supreme Court struck down the mandate only in certain cases, and it didn&#039;t even use the (almost) immutable First Amendment but a 50%+1-majority-vulnerable 1993 law as the basis for its ruling.  The government is still allowed to tell companies and the rest of us what we must do -- that is the meaning of &quot;mandate.&quot;  Each mandate is a loss of freedom for us, and Obamacare allows the government to impose any mandate it chooses, since there is a tax associated with it, and the Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the government may apply any tyrannical law/regulation/rule as long as there is a tax associated with it.  

This ruling is not as good as advertised, it only puts off further tyranny a little bit, and only for a few people and their companies.  Because the government is now allowed to compel us to spend our own money in ways that *it* sees fit, rather than in ways that we see fit, is the very definition of a tyranny.  What other tyranny in all of history has ever had the audacity to do that to its people?  We are not losing our country; it has already been lost.  

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tyranny?s=t 
tyr·an·ny 
noun, plural tyr·an·nies.
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. Synonyms: despotism, absolutism, dictatorship.

Welcome to Obama&#039;s America -- Land of the formerly free.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday, I thought this ruling was an example of the Supreme Court being on our side.  What a difference a good night&#8217;s sleep makes.  </p>
<p>The Supreme Court struck down the mandate only in certain cases, and it didn&#8217;t even use the (almost) immutable First Amendment but a 50%+1-majority-vulnerable 1993 law as the basis for its ruling.  The government is still allowed to tell companies and the rest of us what we must do &#8212; that is the meaning of &#8220;mandate.&#8221;  Each mandate is a loss of freedom for us, and Obamacare allows the government to impose any mandate it chooses, since there is a tax associated with it, and the Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the government may apply any tyrannical law/regulation/rule as long as there is a tax associated with it.  </p>
<p>This ruling is not as good as advertised, it only puts off further tyranny a little bit, and only for a few people and their companies.  Because the government is now allowed to compel us to spend our own money in ways that *it* sees fit, rather than in ways that we see fit, is the very definition of a tyranny.  What other tyranny in all of history has ever had the audacity to do that to its people?  We are not losing our country; it has already been lost.  </p>
<p><a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tyranny?s=t" rel="nofollow ugc">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tyranny?s=t</a><br />
tyr·an·ny<br />
noun, plural tyr·an·nies.<br />
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. Synonyms: despotism, absolutism, dictatorship.</p>
<p>Welcome to Obama&#8217;s America &#8212; Land of the formerly free.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pzatchok		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173263</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pzatchok]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173263</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[(Sarcasm on)
I am so glad The SC decided this case the way they did.
Women are now back under the thumb of men just like they should be.
(Sarcasm off)

Libs think inconvenience is the same as oppression.

Please I just wish the libs would say exactly what they want. All they want is free abortions.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Sarcasm on)<br />
I am so glad The SC decided this case the way they did.<br />
Women are now back under the thumb of men just like they should be.<br />
(Sarcasm off)</p>
<p>Libs think inconvenience is the same as oppression.</p>
<p>Please I just wish the libs would say exactly what they want. All they want is free abortions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hermit		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173231</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hermit]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173231</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Since when in this country did the government get the right to force religious people of any religion into doing things that directly violate their religious beliefs?&quot;
Being forced to participate in gay marriage (Arizona and elsewhere) comes to mind.  And I even support (at least I used to until gays became fascist pigs) gay marriage.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Since when in this country did the government get the right to force religious people of any religion into doing things that directly violate their religious beliefs?&#8221;<br />
Being forced to participate in gay marriage (Arizona and elsewhere) comes to mind.  And I even support (at least I used to until gays became fascist pigs) gay marriage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Cotour		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173225</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cotour]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 20:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173225</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173224&quot;&gt;Cotour&lt;/a&gt;.

And I support that forcing a crisis proposition with this.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381589/obama-announces-less-interior-immigration-enforcement-joel-gehrke]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173224">Cotour</a>.</p>
<p>And I support that forcing a crisis proposition with this.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381589/obama-announces-less-interior-immigration-enforcement-joel-gehrke" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/381589/obama-announces-less-interior-immigration-enforcement-joel-gehrke</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Cotour		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173224</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cotour]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 20:20:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173224</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The president is actively attempting to force a Constitutional crisis with this issue and the illegal immigration issue.

If a person feels that there is a common sense solution to a problem does not at all mean that that solution is Constitutional, a distinction must be made.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The president is actively attempting to force a Constitutional crisis with this issue and the illegal immigration issue.</p>
<p>If a person feels that there is a common sense solution to a problem does not at all mean that that solution is Constitutional, a distinction must be made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: BSJ		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173221</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BSJ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 19:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173221</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Which bureaucrats will be deciding if the &quot;sincerely held religious beliefs&quot; are sincere enough to count?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which bureaucrats will be deciding if the &#8220;sincerely held religious beliefs&#8221; are sincere enough to count?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: DK Williams		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/hobby-lobby-wins/#comment-173207</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DK Williams]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:58:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=29188#comment-173207</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If Hobby Lobby had lost this case, it would mean that Federal bureaucrats would be free to shred Constitutional protections as they wish.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Hobby Lobby had lost this case, it would mean that Federal bureaucrats would be free to shred Constitutional protections as they wish.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
