So in your mind it's just flat-out impossible that the decision-makers here didn't fully grasp the complexities of the arena they were entering into?
The linked article says that the most we know for sure is that "an expert on cultural property law retained by Hobby Lobby" warned the company of some things and the company ignored those things. It doesn't say who heard the warning, who called the final shots, or what their motives were.
Do you know something these we don't? Perhaps you read a source that I didn't here.
The linked article says that the most we know for sure is that "an expert on cultural property law retained by Hobby Lobby" warned the company of some things and the company ignored those things. It doesn't say who heard the warning, who called the final shots, or what their motives were.
Do you know something these we don't? Perhaps you read a source that I didn't here.