The Latest Obamacare Overreach
Many religious conservatives understandably are upset with the latest Obamacare mandate, which will require religious employers (including Catholic employers) to provide birth control to workers receiving healthcare benefits. This mandate includes certain birth control devices that are considered abortifacients, like IUDs and the "morning after" pill.
Of course, Catholic teachings forbid the use of any sort of contraceptive devices, so this rule is anathema to the religious beliefs of Catholic employers. Religious freedom always has been considered sacrosanct in this country. However, our federal bureaucracy increasingly forces Americans to subsidize behaviors they find personally abhorrent, either through agency mandates or direct transfer payments funded by tax dollars.
Proponents of this mandate do not understand the gravity of forcing employers to subsidize activities that deeply conflict with their religious convictions. Proponents also do not understand that a refusal to subsidize those activities does not mean the employer is "denying access" to healthcare. If employers don't provide free food to employees, do we accuse them of starving their workers?
In truth this mandate has nothing to do with healthcare, and everything to do with the abortion industry and a hatred for traditional religious values. Obamacare apologists cannot abide any religious philosophy that promotes large, two parent, nuclear, heterosexual families and frowns on divorce and abortion. Because the political class hates these values, it feels compelled to impose—by force of law—its preferred vision of society: single parents are noble; birth control should be encouraged at an early age; and abortion must be upheld as an absolute moral right.
So the political class simply tells the American people and American industry what values must prevail, and what costs much be borne to implement those values. This time, however, the political class has been shocked by the uproar to the new mandate that it did not anticipate or understand.
But Catholic hospitals face the existential choice of obeying their conscience and engaging in civil disobedience, or closing their doors because government claims the power to force them to violate the teachings of their faith. This terrible imposition has resonated with many Americans, and now the Obama administration finds itself having to defend the terrible cultural baggage of the anti-religious left.
Of course, many Catholic leaders originally supported Obamacare because they naively believe against all evidence that benign angels in government will improve medical care for the poor. And many religious leaders support federal welfare programs generally without understanding that recipients of those dollars can use them for abortions, contraceptives, or any number of activities that conflict deeply with religious teachings. This is why private charity is so vitally important and morally superior to a government-run medical system.
The First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty is intended to ensure that Americans never have to put the demands of the federal government ahead of the their own conscience or religious beliefs. This new policy turns that guarantee on its head. The benefits or drawbacks of birth control are not the issue. The issue is whether government may force private employers and private citizens to violate their moral codes simply by operating their businesses or paying their taxes.
Posted by ThomasJSzeles on 03/12/12 02:48 AM
I think the Catholics use condoms to keep there naughty parts clean, not for birthcontrol. At least that's what I did.
Posted by ThomasJSzeles on 03/12/12 02:30 AM
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government fora redress of grievances.
Lets not forget: The Supreme Court first considered the question of financial assistance to religious organizations in Bradfield v. Roberts (1899). The federal governmenthad funded a hospital operated by a Roman Catholic institution. In that case, the Court ruled that the funding was to a secular organization-the hospital-and was therefore permissible.
Lets not forget that the government is the regulated by the governed in all. That's you. You could a hospital, a pregnant teen, an health care institution as old as time. Sense the foundations of all the religions as far as thousands of years have all care for ill and the sick.
The Establishment Clause was established mainly as a consensus among all of the religious groups in America during 1787,to prevent one religion from having too much influence.
Lets also not forget when a cult hide it practices, claim Christianity, but butchers the core belief of Christianity, such as the devil is Jesus 's brother, and dividing the Trinity, claiming God is the third current God who came all where human and that you will be God if your missionsary works is completed. Not yo mention the second most important believe of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism is the virgin Mary... .how an I talking about... ..yes the Mormons ... ... Joseph Smith or as the counts labeled is file.."Joseph the Glasslooker" was charge and convicted for fraud around 1823. This crazy and later thought preverted 20 year old claimed to find missing things by looking in his hat which had a glass-like stone in it. Sounds to me he may have got caught misplacing or stealing from others to help then find it again. Its believed that within the next 18 month after his recorded fraud,the Book of Mormons was plagiarized into existence. Three fiction works published 7 or so years prior. Spalding was one author, and the other two works were by a Ethan Smith(unrelated), one of which is titled "View the Jews" .
MITT ROMNEY BELIEVES in these cult practices to be involved with Mormonism of any kind. Reminds you of the other scam of Scientology, doesn't it. What gives these"impending impostures of patriotism" there power? Your individual liberty to be ignorant. After getting ouster from Ohio, then Missouri with a war, and then Utah with another war. But they still exist. Remember not a religion so there is no right of one. If you hide your practices and your writings and the right of children being violated from there founder having sex slaves as wives, than how can we allow Mitt Romney hide these facts behind main stream media.
Please challenge me. George Washington said on April 7th 1789, "... Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall be forever encouraged" which is law. The April 30th 1802 Ohio Anabling Act must agree to this law to be a state, by Thomas Jefferson insistence. If my state of Ohio is violating just this, we have the right to take it back. Read the Declaration of Independence carefully and you see many of these original issue with Great Britain apply today with politician on all side.
Posted by Bluebird on 02/16/12 08:03 AM
I simply have to disagree with your "logic". Birth control products have been easily available for free for many years. In fact they are passed out like candy at any health department, most clinics in every city in the US and yet abortion grows like the ugly black cloud it is, and will get worse, no matter what else is implemented. People are too lazy to take their pills and most men refuse to wear protection. This has NOTHING to do with abortion, but is about control.
Posted by TPaine on 02/15/12 11:48 PM
More proof of*
Posted by TPaine on 02/15/12 11:45 PM
More of proof the kind of right-wing, conservative statist that rob paul is.
Too bad some people consider him to be a libertarian
Posted by rossbcan on 02/15/12 11:55 AM
"What is the consequence to an Oathkeeper who doesn't keep it?"
Throw the perps out after four years and, let their tag team in to continue "business as usual".
Posted by GrandpaSpeaks on 02/15/12 11:07 AM
Over reach indeed. What is the consequence to an Oathkeeper who doesn't keep it?
Posted by DwightJohnson on 02/15/12 09:10 AM
"Will you support me if I refuse, on moral grounds, to refuse to pay for the military?" In a New York minute!
Posted by Merridth80 on 02/15/12 06:39 AM
I am of the mind, that if people can't live with these "Mandates", close those Hospitals, Schools, Etc. And let the chips fall whereever! As a friend of mine did, When obamacare was passed, he closed his medical practice. The fewer places to get soetoro's "Free" care there are, maybe that will open peoples eyes!
Maybe we do need another 4 years of obama/soetoro/soebarahak or what ever he chooses to call himself!
But the worse it gets, the Greater the outcry!
There Has to be one "Man" in America, who will stand up & be counted on!
Posted by gamma ray on 02/14/12 10:06 PM
I would venture that most Catholics today practice some kind of non-natural birth control. Why isn't that a big deal for the Vatican? Could it be that the Vatican and Catholic leaders are part of the New World Order and believe that population control is necessary and, therefore, all the talk about the indignity of having to provide contraceptives is nothing more than posturing, more fodder for political theater in the realm of "religious conservatism"?
The bottom line is that free market advocates should recognize the folly of employer based insurance which only further subsidizes and distorts health care market forces. The end result is less transparency, and an increase in distortions associated with moral hazard and government subsidies.
Why is the Catholic church buying up so many major hospitals? After having battled docs in a Catholic hospital who wanted to euthanize (the euphemism is "terminal sedation") an elderly relative rather than release him from the hospital to die peacefully at home with access to basic needs such as water, my impression is that this Catholic hospital didn't seem to be in the medical care business for the purpose of promoting compassion or personal autonomy. It looks more like an entity that is supporting the centralization of health care along with rationing and the concept of social utility.
Without all of these distortions, the price of most health care would be just one-fifth or 20 percent of current retail pricing.
Posted by kenn on 02/14/12 09:14 PM
People often talk about the high cost of medical care. I had a 'suspected' heart attack awhile back... the total cost if I paid... $54,000. Total cost to the insurance company... $ 13,000.
That should point out the scam they're running on all of us. The costs should be the same regardless of who pays... maybe even less if you pay cash,,, course you'd be classified a terrorist by the FBI so do so at your own risk.
Posted by seer on 02/14/12 08:32 PM
Posted by laceja on 02/14/12 08:02 PM
This should have absolutely nothing to do with religion. There is no constitutional reason (or any other reason for that matter), why I should be forced to subsidize another persons sexual fantasies. If you want to have sex, without the likelihood of creating another human being, then it is your responsibility to take the proper protections and pay for it yourself. Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare!
Posted by seer on 02/14/12 07:51 PM
Sadly many religious leaders (Vatican etc.) urge large families in order to propagate their own religious dominance. The Muslims and Mormons also tend to discourage birth control. The world's population is exploding. The planet cannot handle so many people. Ironically, the underclass in China is the leader in ignoring the one child per family mandate and in the US the welfare class often use children as a means of income via government assistance. I usually agree with Ron and I agree employers should not be forced to provide birth control but surely the government should. It is immoral to bring children into the world when one does not have the means to raise them.
Posted by Maxim K. Rice on 02/14/12 06:44 PM
Posted by jkluttz on 02/14/12 06:14 PM
Huh? What's that got to do with the price of eggs? All I said was that religions have used government force on the rest of us. Is that not a fact? Didn't the Catholic Bishops support the health care law? I don't personally support the use of force upon those who have not encroached upon my person or property. I did get a little guilty enjoyment out of some religious organizations getting hoist on their own petard.
Posted by Maxim K. Rice on 02/14/12 06:07 PM
i don't understand the logic here. If a religious institution can't follow the secular laws of our country then they should not be in the business sector. And easy access to contraception will lessen the number of abortions. I do not believe in war, yet I have to pay (a lot) of taxes that go to the military. Will you support me if I refuse, on moral grounds, to refuse to pay for the military?
Posted by Dietrich Luther on 02/14/12 06:03 PM
"Many religions have used the government to force their particular visions on the rest of us."
Ah, the religion of secular humanism: a form of legal postivism (Romanism, or civil law romanism, administrative law et al) that has as the source of all law, man. Secular humanism has been working for 100 years or so, accelerating it appears to move from a republic of free people to a regulatory authoritarian democratic regime that is encubating economic chaos. The secular humanist religion cannot exist in a world with God ordained inalienable rights, where the right to contract without government interference and suppression. Secular humanism's inevitable end is totalitarianism and self-annilihation. It uses hatred of Christianity as a distraction to supplant inalienable rights with statutory, man-made rights. This is being done so as to supplant God's creation order with man-made chaos.
The Daily Bell is the source of information documenting these events.
Posted by tlmartin on 02/14/12 05:08 PM
Frank, I don't think that there is any question that we have past that point. I fear the civil disobedience will be violent. Just look at trends for the purchase of weapons and ammunition as a strong clue.
Posted by free on 02/14/12 05:04 PM
Ron Paul is the only chance for America.