Ted Rall by Ted Rall

Ted Rall

Comments (40) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. wcorvi

    wcorvi said, 5 months ago

    Now it ALL makes sense.

  2. mikefive

    mikefive said, 5 months ago

    Ted, the panel on birth control is an extraordinary distortion of the decision on Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., even for an editorial cartoonist.

  3. brine

    brine GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    Very logical!!!

  4. MangeyMoose

    MangeyMoose said, 5 months ago

    “Rich supporters get two swings at influencing politics, one as voters and one as donors.”

    -from an article by Stein Ringen, Emeritus Professor at Oxford University, “Is American Democracy Headed for Extinction”

  5. masterskrain

    masterskrain GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    I’ll believe Corporations are People when Texas executes one!

  6. neatslob

    neatslob said, 5 months ago

    @SEC

    Yes, they are made up of people who already have rights AS people. To give more rights to the CEO or board as a corporation essentially says these people deserve more rights than the average person.

  7. donaldrk30

    donaldrk30 GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    God! I can’t stand it! Reading Rall’s strips is like reading the entire Sunday Times. Rall baby, Brevity, Soul of wit! Got it?

  8. lonecat

    lonecat said, 5 months ago

    @mikefive

    Here’s my question: Is it possible to make a coherent argument that will distinguish the decision about these four types of birth control at issue from other kinds of birth control; and is it possible to make a coherent argument that will distinguish the decision on birth control from other kinds of religious/moral questions, such as transfusions. I haven’t read the whole decision, but the parts I have read make assertions rather than arguments.

  9. phredturner

    phredturner said, 5 months ago

    One of your best toons Ted.

  10. Gary Kleppe

    Gary Kleppe said, 5 months ago

    @lonecat

    All of that is completely beside the point. The employer mandate, including contraception, is the law. If someone wants to argue whether that law is moral and just, the legislative branch is the right place to do that. The judicial branch’s responsibility is to adjudicate the law as it exists, not to hand out selected exemptions to people (or corporations) on the basis of their religious beliefs.

  11. packratjohn

    packratjohn said, 5 months ago

    @Gary Kleppe

    Agree, to a point. When the Judicial interprets the law, they are in essence MAKING the law.

  12. Ted Rall

    Ted Rall GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    @mikefive

    Details, please.

  13. Ted Rall

    Ted Rall GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    @SEC

    Anyone who doesn’t hate rich people and corporations that use their power to oppress us is stupid and/or not paying attention.

  14. Ted Rall

    Ted Rall GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    @phredturner

    Thank you.

  15. mikefive

    mikefive said, 5 months ago

    @lonecat

    “Here’s my question: Is it possible to make a coherent argument that will distinguish the decision about these four types of birth control at issue from other kinds of birth control;…”

    The four drugs in question are classed scientifically as abortifacients and can be used to induce abortion even after an embryo has attached itself to the placenta, even days and months later.

    A contraceptive is a substance or device capable of preventing pregnancy.

    As you can see, there is a considerable difference in function.

    The decision and dissension is readily available at " supremecourt.gov ". Have fun. It’s 95 pages long.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (25).