Epistle of Obama 1:10 (Formerly Ephesians)


Found this floating around twitter; wish I knew who to credit.

As concerns the Obamacare HHS Mandate forcing religious entities to pay for insurances covering employee sterilization, contraception and abortifacients, the more worn-out and tired non-thinking, knee-jerk phrase I’ve encountered this week in my email or in various comboxes and more than a few op-ed pieces or columns is “it’s just birth control.”

As Kathleen Parker neatly informs: No, it ain’t

Actually there may be a tie between that and “you neanderthals just have it in for Obama.”

I mean, it’s like they use a template.

These folks should realize that among the neanderthal Catholic voices crying out against this ruling are so-called “progressive” Catholics with sterling credentials as Obama supporters, including Michael Sean Winters, former Ambassador Doug Kmiec, Bob Casey, Sister Carol Keehan, former Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, Timothy Kaine and many others. These are the Catholics who helped deliver 54% of the Catholic vote to Obama and one can hardly lump them in with your ordinary despised reactionary.

And in “doubling down” on his decision, Obama has managed to do what no bishops or popes could: it has united the Catholic “left” and “right” (how I hate these labels) in opposition to the mandate. He’s even brought in the Protestants, and the Orthodox, both Christians and Jews!

Well, he did tell us he would be a uniter of a president.

So, to be clear, as of right now if church-related entities (hospitals, schools and charities — many of which were serving the poor in their community before local or state governments had anything in place or had even thought to do so) do not comply, their choices are to either offer NO insurance at all, which violates Catholic social teaching, or to close up shop, altogether, which goes against the mission of the church since the time of the Apostles.

This is the government telling the church to knuckle under or cease to be who and what she has been for 2,000 years, as mandated by Christ himself.

A few people have said, either in conversation or via cyberchat that they feel the language of war — “Obama declares war on religion” — is too extreme.

You bet it’s war, and the reason you know it’s war is because this HHS mandate and this fight was entirely unnecessary. If the government really wants to make tubal-ligations, vasectomies and pills and condoms available for everyone, they did not need to go after the churches to do it. Or, they could have extended an exemption (God knows, over a thousand have been extended to businesses via Mrs. Pelosi when she was speaker), or self-insuranced entities could have been excused (because it’s not only churches who have consciences, as Julie has pointed out). That the administration refused to do so tells me this isn’t about “women’s health and equality” or (to quote Jay Carney) “striking a balance between a church’s rights and a woman’s” but a direct push against the church, her conscience and her right to the free exercise of religion in the public square. It is, as Michael Gerson has written, the government deciding what the mission of the church is, and is not.

The mandate is also a naked power grab; if the church-related entities follow the examples of Catholic child-placement services in Illinois, Massachusetts and elsewhere, and decide to close up shop, the government will likely acquire the hospitals, schools, charities and so forth.

Just as Christ wishes to gather us all unto himself (Ephesians 1:10), the Obama government wishes to gather all things unto itself.

It’s war if you bother to remember that this same administration, through its EEOC, recently argued before the SCOTUS that the Lutheran Church had no right to decide who it could or could not name and employ as a minister (Hosanna-Tabor vs EEOC) – it was an argument so broadly intrusive, and so clearly meant to set a precedent by which the government would control the ministry of the churches that Obama’s own recently appointed Justices voted against it, as did the entire court, 9-0.

For those who are wincing at issues of “language” or who would prefer to remain in denial and call this “a controversy of the week” or “typical reactionaryism” while still making excuses for this administration, it’s time to take off the self-imposed blinders and look at how committed this administration is to telling the churches what to do, in direct contradiction to the first amendment.

Rights lost are rarely if ever restored. I know there is a huge divide between “left” and “right” in this country, and I write all of this as someone who was raised in a blue-collar, union-loving home and who spent the first forty years of her life as a politically involved “liberal Democrat”. I was raised as a “classical liberal” and it stuns me to see people who call themselves “liberal” today endorsing this most illiberal of ideas simply because they are impulsive ideological tribalists or, and this is much worse, pure emotionalists.

Oh, and do you know what the third most tiresome meme in my email box is? This: “oh, and a majority of Catholics support birth control”!

No, really? You know what else? It doesn’t matter if every Catholic in the world “supports birth control” — the church teaches against it. This is not about whether or not Catholics dissent; many of the “progressive” Catholics who are decrying this mandate openly dissent from the teaching.

They are liberal-minded enough, however, to understand that whether they agree or not, the church has the right to its teaching; it has the right to be who she is.

And keep your polls to yourself, okay? Because for every poll you shove in my face saying “see? See?” I can shove one back in yours. Polls are the easiest thing in the world to manipulate. Its why you rarely if ever see them featured on this blog.

And by the way, no, I don’t think Obama is going to reverse himself on this. His ego is too big to do it and even if he wants to, his substitute mom Valerie Jarrett won’t let him.

Meanwhile, in describing the shark-jumping of the ACLU, Ed Morrissey writes:

The First Amendment is pretty clear on what the government can and cannot do in dictating the actions of religious organizations. Heck, this should be so clear that even the ACLU should figure it out: “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 for a redress of grievances.” Dictating to Catholics that they have to fund contraception for their employees when our religion specifically prohibits it — including the use of abortifacients, which is equivalent to killing children in our faith — is prohibiting the free exercise of a core doctrine for Catholics (and many other Christian denominations as well), which is to defend the sanctity of human life.

Is that a “view” of Christians in general, and Catholics specifically? Yes. Are we “imposing” it by practicing our religion, including our outreach to the community through the provision of health care to the indigent and charitable works? Not at all. Those are voluntary associations, not mandated, unlike ObamaCare, which makes it impossible for the Catholic Church to avoid this mandate by simply ending employer-provided health insurance coverage. If a religion cannot express its views and live by its tenets because “views” are not protected, then the religious freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment doesn’t exist at all.

Some have tried to claim that because the Catholic Church gets government funding through Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements, their First Amendment rights are no longer applicable. Really? Does the government have the right to censor AARP because it participates in Medicare Advantage? How about Social Security recipients? I’d love to see the ACLU brief supporting those arguments, although that may become a reality if Obama remains in office for a second term, based on the ACLU’s statements. Do government contractors lose their First Amendment rights to petition their government? Considering the activities surrounding Solyndra investor George Kaiser and his frequent visits to the White House, the Obama administration doesn’t appear to think so, and the ACLU was curiously quiet if it believes that.

Here is the latest from Cardinal-Designate Dolan — it’s a video I wasn’t able to embed

Related:
A Look Back: What Democrats were saying in November of 2011
Kathryn Jean Lopez: The Abortion-Rights Advocates who Complied this Mandate
Kathryn Lopez and Me: Talking about it here (two minute preview here)
Obama’s Compromise: could make things worse. Why do compromise? It’s not the government’s place to dole out constitutional freedoms.
Max Lindenman: We’re facing a Trojan War
Optimistic NY Post: This may be O’s Undoing
Deacon Greg: Most people are both, not either-or
Bishop Lori: Referral is not the answer; rescinding is
Politico Op-Ed: Obama’s Assault on Religious Freedom
Nashville Dominican Nuns: Doing a Novena!
She the People: Two good pieces
Mark Shea: Obama Loses Catholics for the Common Good
WSJ: The Real Trouble with the Mandate
Janet Daley: Obama moves Closer to Post-Religion Europe
First Things: The Feminist Shaming of Fertility
The Hill: Obama admin struggles to contain uproar, yeah, right.

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • fiestamom

    re: the war talk: Kathleen Sebelius is the one who used the term first. In October, in a speech to NARAL (surprise surprise) she said “We are in a war.” So to the progressives all verklempt over the war talk: Please.

  • Peggy R

    Good post. Lots to comment on. I will respond to one point from Ed Morrissey’s column. My husband is an employee of a defense contractor. He is not permitted to make contributions to elections for federal offices. But I am…

  • Teresa

    I agree with you Elizabeth as I don’t think Obama will ever rescind his HHS mandate. Practically every woman in his administration as well as a few Senators urged him to implement the mandate. He has his marching orders. Even if by some chance he rescinded the HHS order, it is far too late now. He must be defeated in November. On another note the Beckett Fund for Religeous Liberty will take the case against HHS by EWTN and thery are working pro bono. They defended the Lutheran Church in the recent case before the Supreme Court and they won. The vote was 9 to 0 against the government. I’m giving them a donation.

  • Stargazer

    The Anchoress said:
    If the government really wants to make tubal-ligations, vasectomies and pills and condoms available for everyone, they did not need to go after the churches to do it. Or, they could have extended an exemption (God knows, over a thousand have been extended to businesses via Mrs. Pelosi when she was speaker), or self-insuranced entities could have been excused (because it’s not only chuches who have consciences, as Julie has pointed out)
    ——-
    This part of the argument, I think is short-sighted. If I were a small business owner, and I didn’t want to commit the sign of subsidizing contraception and abortion, I would face the same unpalatable choices as The Church faces.

    Protecting The Church is a good thing, but this affects more then just The Church and I think that is being lost here. While I wholeheartedly support this fight, it does annoy me to see it limited in this way. It leaves others unprotected.

  • archangel

    Its been a long while since I have been compelled to comment. First off, it is a war and its an ancient one. I have come to abhor labels but I think its apt here. This administration is essentially a retread of the Jacobins of France, complete with the “State controls the Church” mentality. Their tactics are tired, yet enflaming. This entire episode is simply a continuation of what ObamaCare was all about and why it was rushed the way it was. It has been and still is about POWER. That’s what the individual mandate is about and that’s what THIS is about. To have total control of every facet of the person’s life, the gov’t must literally control the “individual” and his “conscience”.

    The 9-0 decision actually rocked me to my core and actually made me think that perhaps, just perhaps, Justices Kagan and Sotemayor aren’t the statist lap dogs they are thought to be. Many seem to be looking at BHO and viewing him as some controlled puppet. Maybe his soul is but functionally, I see him more as a person of power with absolutely NOTHING to lose right now. IMO, I think his polling data is showing him very vulnerable, having lost the very independents that put him in. I’m not saying a loss by him is a sure thing. What I am saying is that he is more vulnerable than he lets on. They are saturating the web ads and frankly, IMO are hurting themselves by doing so this early. This current episode doesn’t help. I believe you are right about Biden and Daley. I’m not so sure I would be pissing off the Chicago-machine of Daley, if that is indeed what happened. They MADE Obama… I’m pretty sure they can unmake him just as easily.

    This president has been anti-Catholic from the get-go and simply played on the sympathies of the left-leaning wing of the church. They were wrong, we were right… end of story. I don’t care how long it took for them to come around; I’m happy they have. Now let’s unite and put an end to this BS in November.

  • http://Janehartman.com Jane Hartman

    As a pastor’s wife, I routinely talk with my children about issues like same-sex unions, contraception/abortion and the repercussions that can ensue if the government continues to over reach. If preaching the scriptures regarding same-sex unions becomes “hate speech” and traditional marriage becomes a form of discrimination, or my husband is forced to do same-sex marriages, (He wouldn’t) then our church would lose its tax-exempt status, and like you said, Elizabeth, we would have to close up shop and the government would own our buildings. Already the Catholic church was forced in Illinois to stop its Catholic Charities adoptions by trying to force them to place children in places they consider immoral. Just forced to close shop. This particular mandate is really no different. They are forcing the church’s hand and by doing so could force them to close. You are completely right on this. We are being bombarded on all sides. It truly is diabolical.

  • Manny

    The left declared war on religion a long time ago, way before Obama was even born. It’s only now with a radical in the White House (previous Democrats had way more moderate roots to take on religion bluntly) that we are under a direct assalt. In one respect this is a better situation than the clandestine stripping away that has been going on for the past century. At least Obama is honest enough to come forward with a full facial attack. Perhaps the left thinks that religion is now weakened enough to where they can finally go for the throat. I don’t know. But this is clearly a point of no return for us. This is a battle where we must risk all.

  • Kevin

    This administration is like a bad condo board.

  • Kevin

    This administration is like a bad condo board.

  • soozer

    First they came for the Catholics…….

    I’m a conservative Episcopalian *yes, there are more of us than you realize* and I can see down the road. This administration is just like the ones trying to take over our denomination. We will not sit idly by and let them steamroll us. Many of us have already made the move toward Rome…talk about cut off nose to spite face.

    Why couldn’t they see this coming? I told my husband the day the Stup(id)ak crap came out that they would NEVER abide by it.

    Lay down with dogs….

  • doc

    Will those “united Catholics” be untied enough to remove this president in November? It still boggles my mind the the most pro-abortion nominee in our history got 54% of the Catholic vote last time. I am deeply frustrated that pro-life organizations (40 Days for Life, Knights of Columbus, etc, etc) refuse to name Democrats as the source of abortion support in this country. I have a feeling that if Republicans suddenly enacted a policy of physically tossing illegal aliens from Mexico back into the Rio Grande America’s Catholic bishops and institutions would suddenly have no problem condemning Republicans individually by name and as a Party for such a heartless policy. Yet, returning Mexican citizens to their homeland and getting them wet in the process is nowhere near the moral state of the slaughter of the innocents in which we are now engaged.

  • GP

    After watching Cardinal Dolan’s TV interview on CBS and listening intently on what he shared/revealed, the first thought that came to my mind was the encounter of King Herod with the Three Wise Men. A lot of “endearing intentions” but so full of “empty promises” which lead to the destruction of human life. Don’t think the Prez will ever confess to anyone that he lied blatantly during his meeting with Cardinal Dolan. I hope Cardinal Dolan “dusted his feet” when he left the white house.

  • http://@dau1776 dau1776

    Please do not fall into the trap of settling for the birth control/abortion/sterilization items being taken off the plate or any other compromise as to cost, measures, implementation, etc. It ALL MUST GO. It’s a liberty thing. Get govt OUT of health care decisions.

  • Pingback: You bet it’s war, and the reason you know it’s war is because this HHS mandate and this fight was entirely unnecessary « Newsbeat1

  • Adam

    I wonder where our Protestant brethern are in all this. I see bits of it–thank you, Rick Warren–but we need to get more aid and vocal opposition to this. Surely there’s comparable issues that they should see coming from the slippery slope of this issue. If the government can mandate that Catholics provide contraception, then can it also mandate protestant private schools to teach evolution or alternate viewpoints to the Bible?

  • Steve Colby

    Thanks for the link to Cardinal-Designate Dolan. I had not seen or heard him before. What a delightful guy!

  • Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » DANIEL HENNINGER: A LESSON FOR THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS: The American Catholic Church, from left to …

  • Over50

    I have zero sympathy for the Catholic church in this fight. I went to Catholic schools for grade school, high school and college. Over the decades the clergy and their teachings moved further and further left. Some sermons I heard before I stopped attending mass could have been made by Lenin. Hey bishops, you lie down with dogs…

  • Pingback: Obama Dodges Contraception Question In Oval Office - The POH Diaries

  • Dantes

    Good chance Obama will figure out a way to defuse this, probably by tossing some bones to Sister Carol “Half my brain is a clinking cash register” Keehan. Having worked in a Catholic Health care system and knowing its hypocrisy on matters of health care and charity, the money comes first. The Catholic Health care organizations have been straying from the Catholic reservation for some time, but since they make so much money, I guess the Pope looks the other way.

    Don’t take this to mean I support Obama in this. Far from it. I wish more people were mad even not considering the religious aspects of this edict. Obamacare is filled with provisions for command and control medicine. That should scare people, but it isn’t real for most of them…yet.

    [I have no interest in picking on Sister Carol or anyone else who supported Obamacare and trusted this president. It seems to me everyone has their role to play in the workings of God's ways, which are not our ways and we do not comprehend. For all we know, everything that is happening was meant to happen, for the sake of clarity or something -admin]

  • Mark

    I have one question…where’s all the folks who regularly complain about separation of church and state in this issue?

    If we were requiring prayer before each abortion I bet they’d have a voice…

    And would Obama be ok if the insurance was provided but each participant was told they would be excommunicated if they used it?
    At what point is any of this allowed in our Constitution? (And yes I am aware the separation issue is much different than most folks assume)

    I am a mainline protetant and I think its high time we lived up to our name and supported our catholic Brethren…we need a “Occupy the Constitution” Movement…

  • Rob Ives

    So many people missing the boat on this. It does not matter if there is a valid 1st Amendment objection. How have we gotten to the point that the Federal government is telling ANY organization, ANY group what the MUST insure? Now is the time to fight not just for religious freedom, but to rather to fight for freedom for all.

  • loyola

    Obama doesn’t respect Catholic beliefs or Catholics. Intolerance.

  • http://joesund.net Joe

    As it is often said, under persecution we unite!!! The Church has had its strongest moments when it was persecuted. Though I wouldn’t sell the bishops short on bringing Catholics together, though it was Obama who forced us to unite, the Bishops have united in one voice and by their example Catholics are able to see for the most part that we are to come together. I think the President’s lease on the White House is up come the beginning of 2013!

    http://blog.joesund.net

  • http://recoveringlutheran.blogspot.com/ Recovering Lutheran

    These folks should realize that among the neanderthal Catholic voices crying out against this ruling are so-called “progressive” Catholics with sterling credentials as Obama supporters, including Michael Sean Winters, former Ambassador Doug Kmiec, Bob Casey, Sister Carol Keehan, former Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, Timothy Kaine and many others.

    But in the end, they will roll over. Bank on it. They will reverse their criticism of the Obama administration, or at least lower their voices to the point that no one can hear them. Solidarity against the “religious right” trumps the teachings of the Catholic Church (or any other church for that matter), and progressive politics always has priority over religious freedom.

    If you doubt me, or think I am being too cynical, just revisit this issue in a few weeks. I’ll bet none of the aforementioned “progressive” Catholics will be saying squat against it at that time.

  • Luc

    Why would anyone question have difficulty understanding the reasons for 0 WAR on religion if one remembers what he said in 2008: “So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion….” After all, religion is the opium of the masses….

  • Mahon

    The American Left has long since ceased to be “liberal” in any sense having to do with liberty. They are Progressives, meaning that they believe in the control of money and power by an vanguard class that knows what is good for the mere citizens far better than those citizens know themselves, and that any constraints on the Progressives’ ability to implement their preferences are reactionary and regressive. This is very far from an America of individual liberty, pluralist democracy, free market economics, and the rule of law, and as a political philosophy is something that needs to be expunged.

  • Robbins Mitchell

    Well,pardon me all to hell,but people like Sister Carol Keehan have snapped one mackerel too many this time…now that her political and “moral” support are no longer required to get Obamacare passed,Barokeydoke is tossing her in the trash like a moldy host….no doubt she still believes that the end justifies the means…..she needs to be a good little conventeer now and take a perpetual vow of silence with the Sisters of the Easily Chumped

  • Proud Southerner

    We have come to the point where the Left, and its enabler the Democrat Party, represents absolute evil. Their horrid and corrupt philosophy, like its cousin Nazism, must be totally repudiated and eradicated from our civil society. The Democrat Party deserves total destruction, and I will gladly do my part in November.

  • Stan

    It seems to me that the Roman Catholic Church is essentially a leftist European political organization that strongly supports the power of the state over the individual and is strongly pro-socialism. It has supported state power over individual freedom and liberty and has no problem with governments forcing people to its will until those government decisions adversely effect things that the church itself particularly likes. Then all holy hell beaks loose.

    I agree with the position the church has finally come around to at this late hour and welcome allies against arrogant and unnecessary state power, but since the church facilitated and supported this whole situation in the first place, I don’t think you can honestly paste any sort of higher moral position on top of it. It’s pure self interest. Nothing wrong with that….but.

    The church could have been an agent for independence of conscience, freedom and liberty from the beginning and avoided this whole needless mess, but it chose not to be. You’ve been caught in your own morally blind and short sighted trap.

    As I said, I’m glad the church has finally woken up to the vital importance of American style liberties, but I’m afraid it will only be a temporary change and then the church will speak up only in its own self interest.

  • Pat Dooley

    Have I commented here before? My browser thinks so.

    I’m not religious but I refuse to say I’m an Atheist, because they all run around acting like their own exclusive religion. I can’t disprove the proposition that God exists so I respect those who have faith. I also recognize and love the fact that America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. The most important of those is that God endows rights; not man. If you do not believe in God, you should interpret this is as a declaration that all men are born equal. An Atheist should also delight in the motto “In God We Trust” because it implies we should trust no mortal. They don’t, of course, because they see the word “God” and go ape-sh*t.

    The Obama administration has revealed the monstrosity that is Obamacare before its full inception. We weren’t supposed to see much of it until after Obama’s reelection. But here we see the monster in daylight, trampling on religious freedom and requiring people to do what their faith and their conscience forbids.

    My father remembers the last time that happened, So does my father-in-law. They risked their lives to defeat that monster.

  • Micha Elyi

    …offer NO insurance at all, which violates Catholic social teaching…

    Huh?

  • TomD

    I am thrilled and proud to see the backlash by the Church and her flock against this mandate.

    But here’s what REALLY needs to happen: The argument needs to be not against this particular provision of this particular law. The argument needs to be against the very IDEA of government involvement in “health care.”

    As big as this HHS/contraception imbroglio is, it ultimately is just an arbitrary skirmish in a bigger battle. These government health-care mandates are wrong not because they may happen to intrude upon a particular religious doctrine. They’re wrong *because they are government mandates.*. Period. This particular situation is merely evidence of the impropriety of the very IDEA of government involvement in health care. It is not the end-all-be-all, and it would be both a tactical and moral mistake to treat it as such.

  • http://fkclinic.blogspot.com tioedong

    FYI: Here in the Philippines, if Wikileaks is to be believed, it is American money including money and pressure from the US Government pushing our “reproductive health” bill. This bill will similarly force Catholic and Muslim physicians and Catholic hospitals to give out birth control…yet this civil rights violation isn’t covered in the major English language newspapers or network news. We even have to use Facebook etc. to get out news of where the prolife demonstrations are being held.

  • Pingback: All you need to read about the war between the Obama administration and the church … « Post Republica

  • Maus

    I find it very hard to care about this particular point. Carving out exemptions from law for Random Religion of the Week is no different than any other carve out or exemption for the notion that the laws should apply to all people. It is not a ‘Right lost’ when the law applies to your sacred oxen and not to others. Nor is it a ‘Right retained’ when your sacred oxen is out from under the yoke others are under.

    The first problem is forced commerce. The second is carve outs and exemptions for politically favored groups. Follow the law or follow your conscience as you see fit. But it’s unbecoming to raise Cain when the law is applied to you instead of your neighbor.

  • j k

    This is not about birth control, nor is it about sex. It’s about freedom to believe what you want to believe. It’s about the freedom to practice your religion and decide what you want to do with your own life.
    If the federal government doesn’t back down on this, next time it will be worse and even more invasive.
    Even if you don’t think this applies to you, take this to heart:
    First they came for the socialists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.
    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
    Then they came for the Catholics,
    and I didn’t speak out because I was Protestant.
    Then they came for me
    and there was no one left to speak out for me.
    -a famous statement attributed to Martin Niemöller about the inactivity of German intellectuals during the first years of the Third Reich. They simply didn’t believe it applied to them, and they didn’t believe their eyes. They should have. It happened.

  • Thomas R

    I’ve been arguing on a progressive blog about this and even for the more reasonable ones I think at base they feel something like one or more of the following.

    *Contraception is a necessary part of being a healthy woman. Not covering contraception is like not covering mammograms, blood-tests, or vaccination. (Not saying I buy this, but they’re sincere about it I think)

    *Contraception is such a part of being a 21st century woman that not funding it is a form of religious or cultural discrimination against modern women. (I’ve tried to bring up that this is not about whether Catholic organizations can fire women for using birth control and also that Catholic organizations are not required to fund actions of other religions or philosophies. This hasn’t gotten much support)

    *The Church ends at the door of the church. Everything outside of it is the “public sphere” so things like schools, charities, or hospitals are inherently irreligious. Religious groups are allowed to run them, but their beliefs must never play a role unless they only serve their own. (I’ve tried to argue this is more like the French than the US way as we do recognize a “private” sphere where religions can run organizations)

    *On this issue Catholicism is in error against the common-good and errors against the common-good have no rights. Just as the state has every right to force Muslims to abandon a plural wife when they immigrate here and to force Christian Science organizations to provide health-insurance. (I don’t know if the state does force that on CS, but they seemed to think they must either way)

  • Thomas R

    “Not saying I buy this”

    I should have said “I don’t buy this”, I just buy that they really believe it.

  • fiestamom

    Per Ed Henry on Twitter: Last night at a fundraiser, Obama singled out Kathleen Sebelius and said “one of the stars of the cabinet is sitting right here, Kathleen Sebelius.”

    No, they will not back down.

  • kevin

    Not to open a can of worms, but this whole episode is another reason to see the wisdom in the Founders’ insertion of the natural born citizen clause in the Constitution. They wanted to protect against diluted loyalty to the nation and its governing documents.

    If anyone has shown diluted loyalty to our system it has been Barack Obama. Father was a Kenyan communist who believed that 100% taxation was permissible. Barack honors by writing a book called “Dreams of My Father.” Calls our Constitution a “charter of negative liberties.”

    I’m sorry but all the evidence is there for anyone who cares to see it.

  • conservativemama

    Elizabeth, I’m glad to see you make the point that if the Church recedes from the public square and no longer offers its services to the poor and others in need, then the government steps in. This is my greatest frear. For then we lose our dignity as human beings, creations of God.

    Christianity teaches us that we are made in God’s image. And because it values and fights for life, it fights for each one of us. And because it is opposed to birth control and abortion it welcomes all of us into the world. And because Christ reached out to and loved the least among us we know the worth of every soul, from the moment of conception to the time of death. Life is welcomed and life is mourned, from beginning to natural end.

    If government removes the Church, indeed all people of faith from the public square, it moves closer to robbing us of the inherent dignity we have because we are here, we are alive. The founders were right, we have inalienable rights because we received them from the Creator. Remove the Creator and government becomes God. And government would rather have you be less an individual and more a cog in the machine. Easy to control and manipulate. Easy to mold into their image of what man should be.

    I just keep seeing images of China back in the Mao days, when everyone, male and female wore the same suit. A soul-crushing, banal, and ultimately sad existence. Equality yes, gender neutrality yes…………but at what price?

    This is war. Freedom of religion is an underpinning of this country. The Pilgrims, the Puritans, the Catholics who came to Maryland, the Jewish synagogue in Rhode Island that corresponded with George Washington, the many faiths who are here today, freely practicing, if we lose this freedom how long can we expect to hold to any other freedoms? If we don’t defend against this attack, then we don’t deserve this magnificent country.

    How did we get here?

  • Pingback: Good. And. Hard. » Cold Fury

  • Lavaux

    I believe that referring to our struggle with the statists as “war” is empty bluster because our side is not willing to do what war requires, i.e. destroy the enemy, destroy his will to fight or resist, raze his sanctuaries, take his sustenance, and reduce him to a state of such desolation that life loses all meaning for him beyond mere survival. Until enough of us are ready to actually engage in war with the statists, I suggest we refer our struggle as, say, a polite disagreement.

  • CV

    In his recent interview on CBS, Archbishop Dolan was asked about “the polls” that show the majority of Catholics use and/or are in favor of contraception.

    His answer was short and sweet, something along the lines of “well, we’re not in the business of polls, we’re in the business of moral principles.”

  • Gerry

    Latest news is that Barry (his advisers, really) is trying to come up with an accomodation”

  • Rosie

    It seems to me that the church could rethink its mission to align itself to the current situation. We want our young people to follow catholic teaching, but it is prohibitively expensive. You can get the pill at target for $9 a month, but add on maternity insurance is $1,000 a month. Why doesn’t the church put its money where it heart lies. Subsidize maternity care for Catholic couples and then provide FREE Catholic education. Pull ourselves out of the snake pit of government tyranny and provide the resources our young families need to raise the generation.

  • Rosie

    Next generation!

  • Brian English

    “If preaching the scriptures regarding same-sex unions becomes “hate speech” and traditional marriage becomes a form of discrimination, or my husband is forced to do same-sex marriages, (He wouldn’t) then our church would lose its tax-exempt status, and like you said, Elizabeth, we would have to close up shop and the government would own our buildings. ”

    The ultimate goal of these types of “progressive” initiatives.

  • Brian English

    “But in the end, they will roll over. Bank on it.”

    I doubt Winters will. He understands what is at stake here.

    You are definitely right about Kmiec, and probably right about the politicians.

    I am not sure about Sr. Keehan. It might come down to whether she realizes that this is just the beginning of the encroachments, and not just an isolated incident.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X