That’s what the president judge of the 3rd Circuit used to call Sam Alito, who was one of their judges. Via Booman:
From Alito’s opinion in the Hobby Lobby case:
The Hahns and Greens believe that providing the coverage demanded by the HHS regulations is connected to the destruction of an embryo in a way that is sufficient to make it immoral for them to provide the coverage. This belief implicates a difficult and important question of religion and moral philosophy, namely, the circumstances under which it is wrong for a person to perform an act that is innocent in itself but that has the effect of enabling or facilitating the commission of an immoral act by another. Arrogating the authority to provide a binding national answer to this religious and philosophical question, HHS and the principal dissent in effect tell the plaintiffs that their beliefs are flawed. For good reason, we have repeatedly refused to take such a step. See, e.g., Smith, 494 U. S., at 887 (“Repeatedly and in many different contexts, we have warned that courts must not presume to determine . . . the plausibility of a religious claim”)
Justice Samuel Alito just wrote that taking birth control is an immoral act. Then he said that the Court should take no position on whether or not taking birth control is an immoral act.
Maybe that’s just sloppy writing, but he wrote what he wrote. It’s certainly a core feature of religious freedom that the government does not make decisions about whether or not Joseph Smith was a con-artist or Jesus really walked on water or the moon is made of cheese that is occasionally grated onto the plates of devout Pastafarians. But, in this opinion, Alito is conceding the point that taking birth control is immoral and then saying that the Court shouldn’t make a determination like that.
I’m pretty sure NASA has an opinion on the structure of the moon, but I guess that wouldn’t hold up in Court if it conflicted with the beliefs of devotees of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Thanks to DC Criminal Lawyer Jason Kalafat.
The religious right in America has morphed into Wahhabist Islamists. It’s curious that nobody has called for a boycott of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood. We should call on groups of people to instruct HL and CW customers about why they shouldn’t support either company with their dollars. According to the Supreme Court you are no longer required to keep your distance as long as you are passing out valuable information. The Right has deployed ‘shock troops’ around abortion clinics and the Left should deploy ‘shock troops’ around Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood stores. Don’t picket—-educate. Consumers gave life to HL and CW and consumers can make them go away.
There have been calls for girlcotting Hobby Lobby. The vast majority of their customers are women, and such boycotts could have a significant effect.
BTW, what parts of the country are their stores in?
I’ve never seen an HL big box in my life.
The closest one to me is 30 miles away. I never saw one, either.