Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Well, if Alan is right that there is a "substantial burden" every time tax
dollars are used by the state on something proscribed by someone's
;
> -Original Message-
> From: conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:
> conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Walsh, Kevin
> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:11 PM
> To: Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Richard Dougherty; Marci Hamilton
> Cc: Con Law Prof list
> Subject:
list
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
This explanation of the bishops' view from the NYT seems revealing of the
actual goal: "The bishops will also renew their call for lawmakers to pass the
“Respect for Rights of Conscience Act,” which would exempt both insurance
ols was in FAIR? If not, why not?
_
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 11:04 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives a
sues for Law Academics;
conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Having been accused (perhaps justly) of being a source of dispirit in my
earlier posts (about religious institutions' ability to switch to
co-religionist hiring, and about measuring the sin
u] *On Behalf Of *Ira Lupu
> *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2012 5:50 AM
> *To:* Marc DeGirolami
> *Cc:* Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Walsh, Kevin; Law & Religion issues for Law
> Academics; Con Law Prof list
>
> *Subject:* Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
>
> ** **
>
aw Academics; conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Howard Friedman is correct that the USCCB has extended its concerns to secular
employers, who could not take advantage of the Title VII provision permitting
religious entities to hire only co-religioni
ons when possible, no? Or am I misunderstanding what the rule is?
Eugene
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contra
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Sanders
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 12:51 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
What if a hospital is run by a religious group that believes doctrinal
Sent: Mon 2/13/2012 8:49 AM
To: Marc DeGirolami
Cc: Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Walsh, Kevin; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics;
Con Law Prof list
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
On the burden question -- Religious entities may limit hiring to
co-religionists, and then
s for Law Academics;
conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Having been accused (perhaps justly) of being a source of dispirit in my
earlier posts (about religious institutions' ability to switch to
co-religionist hiring, and about measuring the sincerity
religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Ira Lupu
> *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2012 5:17 PM
> *To:* Crowley, Donald; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics;
> conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
>
> *Subject:* Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
>
> *
ebruary 13, 2012 10:27 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
I have to admit that as long as we are talking about private resources, I
have a hard time understanding the argument that there is no burden on
religious institution
s.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 11:25 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Any legitimate issue can be manipulated politically. That doesn't stop it
from
lf Of Ira Lupu
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 6:43 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
When government steps between private parties, there may be distributional
consequences of Religion Clause significance (TWA v. Hardison
#x27;
Cc: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'; 'Con Law Prof list'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
The wars of religion were very much about the locus of religious authority. Men
fought for, and men and women died for, the right to have a hierarchical
eligionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]<mailto:[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]>
On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Well, if Alan is right that there is a "sub
k
Mark S. Scarberry
Professor of Law
Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:30 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Contraceptives a
igionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 10:27 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
I have to admit that as long as we are talking about private resources, I have
a hard time u
ary 13, 2012 12:51 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
What if a hospital is run by a religious group that believes doctrinally and
sincerely in not using advanced technology or extraordinary interventions to
prolong h
help someone obtain an abortion (this despite
> the continuing existence of the Hyde Amendment).
>
> ** **
>
> Take Care
>
> ** **
>
> Don
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:
> conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucl
un...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Sanders
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:36 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Alan, I'm not denying the sincerity of those who
f list
Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
On the burden question -- Religious entities may limit hiring to
co-religionists, and then make their best efforts to enforce religious norms
against employees. Doesn't that option make the burden of the HHS policy far
less subs
ugene
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 11:04 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Contraceptives and gender discrimination
Isn't there a difference here between (1) accepting specific
subsidies ("federal funds") that the government insists be used f
iginal Message-
> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu on behalf of Ira Lupu
> Sent: Mon 2/13/2012 8:49 AM
> To: Marc DeGirolami
> Cc: Zietlow, Rebecca E.; Walsh, Kevin; Law & Religion issues for Law
> Academics; Con Law Prof list
> Subject: Re: Contraceptives and gender
25 matches
Mail list logo
