At Christian Companies, Religious Principles Complement Business Practices
In June, a federal court ruled that Hobby Lobby, the art-supply chain, could not be fined for refusing to offer its employees morning-after contraception coverage. This challenge to the Affordable Care Act will surely go to the Supreme Court, where Hobby Lobbyâ€™s lawyers will argue that a commercial company can, legally speaking, be Christian â€” with the same rights to religious freedom that a person has.
Hobby Lobby is not alone in identifying itself as a Christian business. In-N-Out Burger, Chick-fil-A, the trucking company Covenant Transport, and the clothing store Forever 21 all call or market themselves as Christian or faith-based....
UPS, no, I want corporations to stay out of the areas where real people are suppose to function--such as government. I should see if the Full Show: United States of ALEC has a transcript to it, since Listening to Mr. Moyers may irritate you, and a transcript would faster to read, and I just checked and it did have a place to select the transcript.
I have little doubt Unions especially teacher unions had something of the same techniques as ALEC, and I never appreciated that idea either. However, companies are even a further step of away from being real people. Just like they had to put up rules banning monopolies, I think there need to be rules banning companies buying elections. Another interesting show was the Frontline Show, "Big Sky Big Money," a commentary about that one, Frontline documentary, Idaho secret donor list highlight need to protect campaign finance laws.
corporations are made of individuals who will stand before God and give an account for their lives. corporations cannot be saved from its sins. it is not a person and it does not live. it is an organization of sinful men.
it has no value outside of how it serves individual men and families.
some churches are corporations due to how they register themselves and some pastors are CEOs, and I guess some Christians think this is some kind of protection for the Kingdom of God... and it is for this reason many, many are leaving the churches... for they see how communism played out in China, the state churches turn in those who will not conform... and in our day the conformity is through the corporate system.
I am for Liberty and Hobby Lobby pursuing these suits and relieving themselves of inhumane dictates forced on their employees..... but in the name of indl rghts, the right of a CEO of a company or even a one man show selling tomatoes on the street corner to operate under his conscience -- not because they have a collective right that others in the country do not have. then they become an oppressor to others who do not qualify, instead of a leader in shedding off the shackles put on people.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Ah, but you should have copied the comment by Steve Strauss...
Exactly, a corporation is legal protection for the person(s) who are risking THEIR money to start a company to push a service or product which they have NO guarantee anybody will buy. It is the protection that fuels the entrepreneurial spirit so that people will take the risks. That is how the economy grows. You want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg? Ask Microsoft who had no lobbyist in Washington if it is not important to have them there. They got sued by the government. Just like you exercise your free speech rights if you spend your money to support the candidate of your choice, so corporations and unions do the same. They obviously have more money to spend.
From the article... This idea of "corporate personhood" is now written into the United States Code: "In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise . . . the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals." (1 U.S.C. section 1).
Ah, but you should have copied the comment by Steve Strauss, who said, "As we all know, the main, some say sole, purpose of a corporation is to make a profit. Sure, the people in the corporation have other goals - to make a difference, to earn a living, to create something of value - but the corporation has one job: To make money.
"As such, the decisions people make are different than the decisions corporations make."
Jim Lincoln wrote: Well, UPS, as wit said, "I won't believe Corporations are people until Texas executes one!" UPS, another reason I'm happy to see Romney loose! Thank God! Ask an Expert: Corporations are not people, my friend, in contrast to what Mitty said. from which,
Appreciate your sense of humor However, notwithstanding, we do have a recent example of a corporation being killed, actually by a union. The PEOPLE at Hostess lost their jobs, and it didn't just affect them, other PEOPLE lost their jobs or business because of it. The PEOPLE who had invested in the company lost their money. Also, the PEOPLE who consumed the product (although back on shelves now) lost the ability to enjoy those food items. (now jpw would probably say that was good) Once again proving, that corporations are people.
Steve Strauss wrote: As we all know, the main, some say sole, purpose of a corporation is to make a profit. Sure, the people in the corporation have other goals - to make a difference, to earn a living, to create something of value - but the corporation has one job: To make money.
As such, the decisions people make are different than the decisions corporations make.
human beings deserve human rights because they are not God (although created in His image) and have no right to destroy others by the breaking of God's 10 Commandments.
they must not need and do not need a collective power to give them value...
this is the transition of our society. communitarianism, corporate gov conglomeration.
I'm glad they will not be forced to pay a few things, but what of the manager or owner of a store that is not Hobby Lobby? what of the man's right to not have to pay for his own eugenics?
it seems that man progresses from one form of insanity to the next, and freely gives away his heritage.
corporations having rights? then how does a man stand a chance when that corporation abuses him? what of personal responsibility of one man to another man, regardless of the collective power behind him.
end of equal protection under the law. and freedom of association.
A corporation per say is a way of legal protection of the assets of the PERSON/PEOPLE starting the company. Just like your church is not the building in which it meets, the corporation is not the legal entity but the PEOPLE that are involved in it. The shareholders are PEOPLE, the employees are PEOPLE, the customers are PEOPLE. It is incorrect to say corporations are not people. If you tax a corporation, they have to either lower the profit the company makes and therefore not get the money from investors and that affects the people who work there or the shareholders who have invested in the company. Either the dividend is smaller to the PEOPLE who invested, or the PEOPLE who work there get less money, fewer hours or loss their job. Or the PEOPLE who purchase the product of service have to pay a higher price. Corporations are not nebulous entities that run themselves but the people involved.
One of the ways I can express myself politically is by donating money to the candidate or party of my choice. I am exercising MY free speech rights by "voting" with my dollars. If you take away my ability to speak with my money your are infringing on my first amendment rights. The SCOTUS just reinstated what congress wrongfully took away, the right of political free speech.
Barnes gave some interesting commentary on Mark 10:19
Barnes wrote: Mark 10:19: Verse 19. Defraud not. Do not take away your neighbour's property by fraud or dishonesty. To cheat or defraud supposes a covetous desire of a neighbour's property, and is usually attended with falsehood or false witness against a neighbour in obtaining it. It is thus a violation of the ninth and tenth commandments; and our Saviour very properly, therefore, condensed the two, and expressed their substance in this--not to defraud. It is, besides, expressly forbidden in Lev 19:13--"Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour."
It is definitely thought provoking.
By the way, I'm not even suggesting or hinting these company leaders are anything like those of Enron, that were mentioned in my first message.
Any business boss, who is a Christian is going to treat his employees better than one who isn't, and this is not even saying some non-Christian bosses aren't thoughtful and kindly to their employees.
Wow! the sermon we had to Church today has certainly been helpful on more than one message! Should this help good business?
Mark 10 18 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. 19 "You know the commandments, 'DO NOT MURDER, DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, DO NOT STEAL, DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS, Do not defraud, HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER.'"---NASB
Since Jesus was talking to a person of means, he had another Commandment in that list, "Do not defraud," which is very important in a business relationships. In other words, a lot should have been learned from Enron Scandal, though I doubt it. I suppose some of those sent to jail were professing Christians?
By the way, the conclusion of the article that SA referenced is quite good. Even if he remarks are no doubt from a liberal Presbyterian minister, they make some good sense.
I almost bet that the Supreme Court will agree with Hobby Lobby, e.g. corporations now can act like individuals by flooding the communication systems with money to get political prostitutes elected, because these corporations have been given life by the Supreme Court -- not God.