Today, June 30, 2014 -- a date that will live in its own particular infamy -- five United States Supreme Court justices declared for the court and therefore for the nation that family-owned corporations need not be bothered to obey the laws of the land if the religious beliefs of such families dictate otherwise.

The piety of the Hobby Lobby people demands that the company not pay for insurance coverage of contraception for its women employees. Though the Affordable Care Act demands such payment, the court has said that religious freedom trumps the law.

I have a few religious beliefs of my own. I believe that the moral code that has its basis in the Hebrew Bible and the related midrash attributed to Jesus of Nazareth are universal in their philosophical scope and essential to human life on Earth:

"Turn the other cheek." That is, if struck by a blow from an enemy, do not strike back but "love your enemy." When that enemy requires you to carry his soldier's gear one mile, "walk the second mile voluntarily" and "forgive his stupidity not once, not twice, not seven times, not seven times 70 but as often as it takes."

If I, a citizen of this country, oppose on such religious grounds such a thing as the pre-emptive invasion of another country, will Messrs. Justices Roberts, Alito, Kennedy, Scalia and Thomas grant me the right to withhold the percentage of my income tax payments equal to what could be determined to be have been my share in the interminable Iraq war? -- If not, why not?

The ethics-based religion that is derived from the Hebrew Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim and the gospels of Jesus Judaism is reasonably clear about economic justice, i.e. that it should be distributive in nature. He who has much shall not have too much at the expense of them who have too little. "If a man with no coat or shirt asks you for your coat, give him your shirt as well."

Therefore, if I, a citizen of this country, oppose on those religious grounds a tax structure that is essentially retributive rather than distributive, allowing those with much to have more while those with little must settle for even less, would the court allow me to contribute the amount I now pay in income tax to aid the tens of thousands of poor families who live within a half-hour's drive of my home? -- If not, why not?

Like my fellow citizens of Hobby Lobby, I long for the religious freedom to act in accordance with the moral expectations of my chosen religion.

How many of you who will read this essay would join in civil disobedience by putting in escrow tax payments pending a class-action suit that would bring this issue to the federal court system, perhaps even to the high court itself?

Are there attorneys reading this essay that would represent such people in such litigation pro bono publico? Or, speaking of infamy, is it just a sorry fact that the religious beliefs of the Hobby Lobby-type families enjoy greater constitutional protection than my own and those of other humanists?