Jon Stewart pokes fun at the idea of cooperation's being "people" in the wake of the Hobby Lobby vs. Obamacare, Supreme Court battle. He mockingly names the retail chain of arts and crafts store, "Jesus Christ Super Store" during a skit on his late night television show.

Stewart sarcastically weighs in on the Hobby Lobby lawsuit claiming that the store is really a "person of faith," so it should be exempt from the Affordable Care Act's order to cover contraception in employee health plans.

He then frustrated by the mandate begins to criticize these "God fearing" cooperation's (hobby Lobby, chick-fil-a, eHarmony).

"Even if private companies are legal people they're not alive they weren't born," he exclaims, "What does it mean to be a cooperation with conservative religious beliefs then, no same sex mergers?"

His commenter Jordan Klepper then chimes in and says, "These companies have the first amendment right to run their cooperation's according to biblical principle."

Stewart unrelentingly responds, "What would a biblically based insurance plan even cover? Leprosy!" He goes on to say, "even if a cooperation believes this stuff I still don't see why they should be able to force those beliefs on their workers! Why should hobby lobby be able to deny its worker access to contraception?"

Hobby Lobby Stores are concerned with Obamacare's "contraceptive mandate." The mandate requires that businesses offering their employee's health insurance must provide plans that cover all federally approved contraception methods at no extra cost to their employees.

Hobby Lobby Stores is owned by Christians who believe that some of those contraceptive methods are equal to abortion, because they can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. The owners seek an exemption to the contraceptive obligation under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), a statute that Congress passed almost unanimously in 1993.

This says, "Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability"