Conscience Rights and the Obama Administration

Standing Against Christian Persecution

The USCCB released a new video today discussing the war on the right of conscience in America.

I think it’s a powerful video that expresses the issues far better than anything I could say. All Americans should be upset about what the Obama administration is doing to our First Amendment liberties.

YouTube Preview Image

  • Heloise1

    Thanks. I will.

  • TheodoreSeeber

    Except, of course, those who cheer him on in this. If liberals had their way, every mother earning less than poverty level would be sterilized.

    • Bill S

      ” If liberals had their way, every mother earning less than poverty level would be sterilized.”

      Really. I’ve never heard any liberal suggest anything of the sort. It actually sounds very fiscally conservative to me. Surely, there are many more fiscal conservatives who don’t oppose sterilization that would advocate what you are suggesting that liberals would do. Liberals would give them welfare, not sterilize them. You have a very skewed attitude toward liberals.

  • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

    I’m beyond upset. Between this and a few other things that have happened these last couple of years, i’ve lost my sense of patriotism. This isn’t my country any more.

    • cary_w

      I totally agree with you, I am fearful of the direction my country is headed.

      If you are going to be a nurse you must be willing to treat ALL your patients, even those who have made choices you don’t agree with. If she were a Jehovah’s Witness would she refuse to treat a patient getting a blood transfusion?

      How, exactly, does providing comprehensive medical coverage to your employees offend your own conscience? If you don’t want to use contraceptives, you don’t have to use them! What gives you the right to make that decision for anyone else? What about your employees who are not Catholic? Do we really want to live in a totalitarian state where your employer gets to decide what health care you are allowed to receive? Where the Government tells you what you can and can’t do to your own body? It’s un-American. As an American, I demand my freedom!

      • Fabio Paolo Barbieri

        The saddest sight in all the world is a man trying to be funny when God did not make him so. Cary, I suggest you leave that sort of thing to Jay Leno and Tina Fey and all that sort of people, who know how to do it. As for the rest, if you imagine for one second that we haven’t heard it all, every last stupid self-righteous obfuscating mendacious and self-regarding word of it, an infinite amount of times, you are living on the moon. Yours is ignorant boilerplate that nobody should bother answering because we have answered it so many times before.

        • Bill S

          “Yours is ignorant boilerplate that nobody should bother answering because we have answered it so many times before.”

          Actually, it seems like boilerplate because so many people feel the exact same way as Cary and have stated as such. They are common sense responses to what comes down to nothing more than whining. The courts haven’t come down to definitive rulings as to whether plaintiff’s First Amendment rights are being violated. If they are then the plaintiffs won’t be required to provide health care plans that cover contraception. I their First Amendment rights are not being violated, per the courts’ determinations, then they should stop whining and give their employees the coverage.

          • Fabio Paolo Barbieri

            What wonderful confidence in the wisdom and uprightness of the courts. You don’t believe in God, but you believe in judges. What delicious confidence in the excellence and unstained honour of human nature.

            • Bill S

              “You don’t believe in God, but you believe in judges.”

              I don’t believe in your concept of God. Of course I believe in judges. Why wouldn’t I? They are the most qualified to decide if someone’s First Amendment rights are being violated. People who think their rights are being violated are the least qualified because they are biased.

              • TheodoreSeeber

                And isn’t that a moral belief, Bill S, and thus you are imposing your scrupulosity on others?

      • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

        If you don’t like your employer’s compensation, take another job. But you are forcing employers to violate their religious conscience. Freedom works both ways, not just for you.

      • Dave

        Putting artificial chemicals into your body to override how a healthy female body was designed to work does not strike me as “medical care” or “health care.”

        This reminds me of C.S. Lewis’ statement, “For the wise men of old, the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. [But] for magic and applied science alike, the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men; the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as [terrible and] impious . . .”

  • FW Ken

    Clearly, these poor misguided women don’t know they are being exploited by the eeeeeeevul Catholic bishops as the latter pursue their War on Women (TM). And you, Rebecca, are their unwitting accomplice!

    That was sarcasm, for those who don’t know me. :-)

  • Ryan Hite

    I just had a conversation about this. I don’t think the state should force organizations to provide coverage against their beliefs but the employee should be allowed to add it if they so choose to and they should have the means to get what they properly need.

    • FW Ken

      I don’t disagree with that, but I find it amazing that contraception and sterilization should be FREE. I’ve said elsewhere that only a fool wants the government back in the sterilization business, but I pay a bundle in co-pays and co-insurance for medications and procedures that are actually life-threatening. My appendix burst a couple of years back and cost me $2000 in co-insurance, plus a couple of hundred in co-pays for the hospital room. I’m still paying that off. But the Pill is free?
      And, of course, some of the contraceptives induce an abortion, which is objectionable on it’s own, and suggests the president’s underlying agenda is tax-payer funded abortions.

      BTW, the Hercules Corp. get an injunction to stop the tyranny imposed by the national government.

      • Bill S

        “And, of course, some of the contraceptives induce an abortion, which is objectionable on it’s own, and suggests the president’s underlying agenda is tax-payer funded abortions.”

        I’m tired of people saying that some contraceptives induce abortions. Abortions of what? A week old fertilized egg? So what?

        • TheodoreSeeber

          And there’s an example of Bill S. scrupulosity, demanding that others follow his moral teachings.

        • FW Ken

          An actual scientist (not a Christian at the time) believed if was a human being.

          ***************************
          Foetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires
          all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.
          *************************

          http://www.aboutabortions.com/Confess.html

          • Bill S

            “Foetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires
            all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.”

            That is nonsense. We are talking about microscopic cells that have no consciousness, no personality, nothing.

            • FW Ken

              Your credentials for discussing this are… What exactly? Dr. Nathanson was a medical doctor and abortionist. Where did you earth your medical our research degree?

              You might consider reading what he says.

            • TheodoreSeeber

              Oh, so you’re scruples don’t allow you to admit to the humanity of people who have no consciousness or personality.

              No wonder you believe in euthanasia!

              • Bill S

                Yes. That is a safe assumption. To be truly human, you need consciousness and personality. To be a vegetable, you don’t. Please don’t keep me alive if I ever become a vegetable. A fertilized egg loses nothing if it is terminated before it becomes conscious or develops a personality. I realize that the Church and many professionals would disagree, but I am sticking to my opinion about that.

                • TheodoreSeeber

                  “but I am sticking to my opinion about that”

                  And thus you’re forcing your scruples upon others.

                  • Bill S

                    If you would just substitute the word “opinions” for “scruples” when talking about me, your comments would make more sense. I don’t have scruples. Ok. There. I said it.

                    • TheodoreSeeber

                      Scruples are just strong opinions about morality, nothing more. Your opinions ARE scruples. There is no difference other than you want to lie to yourself.

  • BrandonUB

    This seems like it’s plainly a situation of competing rights. I do not think a caregiver’s right to act in accord with their religious beliefs outstrips an individual’s right to receive health care. I can see why it would be regarded as in dispute rather than clear cut though.

    • FW Ken

      Brandon, this was discussed on another thread. What you are talking about is a hypothetical situation that someone, somewhere might not get some service if THIS nurse, doctor, pharmacist, or whatever MUST perform EVERY service. If you think that violating another person’s conscience is justified by hypothetical situations… well, I know what to say to that.
      In the real world, these things work themselves out. Urban areas have many options; rural areas don’t have many options about anything, so people drive to the nearest urban area for most things.
      In any case, that a fetus is a human being is not a “religious belief”, but a question of science. Whether the law should give the fetus human rights is a matter of philosophy, which is, in fact, informed by religious belief for religious folks, but not all pro-life people are religious.

      • Bill S

        “Whether the law should give the fetus human rights is a matter of philosophy”

        Well said. And Catholicism offers just one of many different philosophies. It may be presented as the one true philosophy that everyone should adopt, but that doesn’t make it so.

  • TheodoreSeeber

    “We can’t have Catholics imposing their scrupulosity on others.”

    Because only Obama is allowed to impose HIS scrupulosity on others!

    • Bill S

      Scrupulosity is a psychological disorder characterized by pathological guilt about moral or religious issues. It is personally distressing, objectively dysfunctional, and often accompanied by significant impairment in social functioning.

      That sounds like some people I know, but not the President.

      • TheodoreSeeber

        It sounds exactly like every left wing liberal I know- including the President.

        • Bill S

          The President has no tolerance for Catholics trying to impose their scruples on others. And I don’t think Hillary does either. So save your complaints for 2024. However, by then, I don’t think anyone will be willing to put up with it. It’s called “progress”. You can’t stop it.

          • TheodoreSeeber

            It’s called regress.

            It is absolutely NO different than Julius Caesar insisting that one of his titles was God.

    • FW Ken

      No, BillS is going to impose his own scruples on us, if he can. Pres. Obama just happens to serve his purposes.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X