That's sort of inconvenient for them, eh? Have they made moves to divest themselves of these companies?


Also, I believe that I've heard that they used to cover many of the same things that they are now objecting to. It gets harder and harder to believe that there motives on this are completely genuine/sincere and that they are more likely motivated by anti-Obama/anti-ACA sentiments more than anything else.

they didn't "know" all of their "investments" because their "accounts" have "so many," is my guess.

What will be most revealing is if they move to divest themselves or not.

"While I may not agree with the legal position Hobby Lobby has taken in their lawsuit, I always stand in admiration of those willing to fight for their constitutional rights when they believe they are being taken.

Hobby Lobby is entitled to no such admiration—only contempt. You simply can’t say that you will give your all in defense of your closely held beliefs when it suits you while seeking to make money in violation of those beliefs. You also cannot pretend you were simply negligent in learning what investments you hold if you are going to hold yourself out as an example of righteousness.

By setting this perfectly awful example, Hobby Lobby’s hypocrisy will do little to aid—and much to deter—others willing to stand up for the Bill of Rights in the future. All they have accomplished is to provide more air to the cynicism that already envelops the nation, cynicism that exists precisely because of entities like Hobby Lobby."

Wheaton University is no better.