Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am fine with Hobby Lobby's decision and Target's. I don't have a problem with either one of them asserting their right to run their business the way they see fit.
I support Hobby Lobby's right to be exempt from a law that violates their religious values. We have an established right to follow the religion of our choice. We do not have an established right to free birth control. If we forced Hobby Lobby to pay for birth control that violates their religious beliefs we are infringing on their freedom of religion. On the other hand, by allowing Hobby Lobby to be exempt from that law we are not violating any rights of their employees. Ultimately, employees are free to seek employment elsewhere if this issue is that important to them.
The Target case is a little more difficult, because there are two rights involved. We have an established right to "keep and bear arms." We also have property rights that generally allow property owners to determine who is allowed on their property, and under what conditions that access is allowed. Since gun carrying shoppers have other shopping alternatives besides Target, they are still free to exercise their 2nd amendment rights, just not at Target. So, based on that I'm OK with Target's position as well.
Just wondering if you support Target's right to provide a family friendly and safe environment, free of firearms?
For the record, before the name calling starts, I'm not sure how I feel about either company's decision. (HL is hypocritical, but I'm not sure that I disagree with their rights, as business owners. Same with Target)
I don't support hobby lobbies right (Public companies aren't people who have religious beliefs no matter what this stupid court says)
with that being said, a company does have the right to dictate rules for their business and should be able to turn away anyone for any reason
Hobby Lobby is NOT a "Public company" , it is privately held and has no stock holders. That's why the SC ruled the way it did. And you being from Chicago how do you feel about all the gang-bangers right to carry ? I'll guarantee you that there are a heck of a lot more people carrying illegal guns in Chicago than legal ones.
Private property means they decide how to conduct their business within the framework of the law. If people don't like it, go elsewhere.
+1, I own a gun myself and I would still shop at Target.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
