US SOCCER HAS ARRIVED

U.S. soccer has arrived. No question about it. The team has distinguished itself.

What made me a believer was what I viewed at Roostica last night while having dinner. The TVs were on. The game playing. Each time the U.S. team did something good, the people jumped up and cheered. The same reaction I experienced three years ago at an outdoor cafe in Athens while watching Greece play in a European soccer tournament.

When I was a youngster, there was no soccer. We knew nothing about it. Everything was baseball and football. When I was a young lawyer in Utica, I noticed that some immigrants had created a make shift field just outside the city limits and were playing soccer. I thought at the time the game would never fly. How wrong I was!

My compliments to the U.S. team. They distinguished themselves. They also garnered respect for their country.

When I woke yesterday, I thought I would be tired and achy all day from my exercise routine on monday, I was not. First time the day after was ok. I must be making progress. I go again this morning. I hope I am in as good shape tomorrow as I was yesterday.

A good show last night! I love doing blog talk radio!

The Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision disturbed me. It was wrong. I chatted about the case for half the show. This corporate person thing the Court has relied on in the Hobby case and a couple of years ago in Citizens United is neither good nor proper.

What of the rights of the Hobby Lobby employees who are being denied their right not to have their religious beliefs infringed upon? They may find abortive contraceptives not inconsistent with their beliefs. In the end, the Court gave deference to the five people owning the company over the 7,000-8,000 female employees Hobby Lobby has.

There is a bit of hypocrisy involved also. Hobby Lobby sells toys. Most the toys are purchased in China. A China that has a one baby per family limit, recommends contraception, and mandates forced abortion whenever there is a second pregnancy.

Hobby Lobby should buy their toys elsewhere. Or is money the compelling factor? Perhaps they cannot buy them as cheap elsewhere. Religion appears not to come into play on their part as regards China purchases.

One other consideration. When our forefathers wrote the Constitution, they were concerned with people having the right to be whatever they wanted. Whether Calvinist, Puritan, a Knox follower, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Catholic, Jew, or what have you. Sperm, the egg, the uterine wall, a woman’s vagina…..none of these things came into consideration. I believe we have gone many steps too far as regards Constitutionally protected religious rights.

Additionally, the framers of the Constitution did not appear to intend nor did they spell out one person’s right to impose his/her religious beliefs on another. And that is precisely what Hobby Lobby does.

Olivia de Havilland turned 98 yesterday. A beautiful woman when a young actress. A beautiful woman in her senior years. She played the younger sister in Gone With the Wind and Maid Mariam in Errol Flynn’s The Adventures Of Robin Hood. She also won two Academy awards.

The gym at 11. Albert is Dracula in gym clothes.

Enjoy your day!

4 comments on “US SOCCER HAS ARRIVED

  1. Frankly what disturbs me most about the hobby lobby decision is how the media is portraying it, including yourself. No one is being deprived of anything. Hobby lobby still provides 16 types of birth control. This affected 4 they do not want to pay for, like the morning after pill and iuds. The court agreed that they do not have to pay for the four. What is the big deal? This is akin to my gran kid wanting a hot wheel and demanding I pay for it. Women can still get any kind of contraception they want, this does not deprive then if that. The media and yourself are truly distorting this ruling, for what purpose I am not sure. In this case the supremes got it right.

    • For PATRICK and CARA…..

      My blog commented on the decision. I did not rewrite it or analyze it as the media moguls do.
      For purposes of our discussion, I referred to contraception only once (other than the China issue). In the paragraph beginning “What are the rights of Hobby Lobby employees…..” I referred to “abortive contraceptives” in the paragraph and not contraceptives in general.

      I enjoy and respect criticism. I get it from Patrick frequently. The difference between you two and me is that we basically disagree. I thought the decision was bad and you two, good. Fine. However, please give me the consideration of reading what I say clearly.

      Thank you for writing.

  2. The media and yourself are truly distorting this ruling, for what purpose I am not sure
    end quote

    For their purpose, like most people do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.