I’m with Ace on this — Barack Obama is an arrogant moralist. And his absolute view of morality is one that I don’t think any previous president has shared. Through ObamaCare he has imposed a demand on religious institutions that defy their beliefs and consciences, in forcing them to provide contraceptives and abortions.
Catholic organizations are Obama’s primary target. And some of them are not bowing to the king.
At least three Catholic bishops have said they will not comply with the mandate the Obama administration put in place recently in Obamacare that will force religious employers to pay for birth control, contraception and drugs that may cause abortions in their health care plans.
The Obama Administration issued a statement re-iterating the “contraceptive mandate” requiring all insurance providers cover the full range of FDA-approved drugs and devices would remain intact. This mandate, originally proposed in August, includes drugs that work after conception to destroy life rather than prevent it. The statement included a postponement of one year for religious groups that do not already carry contraceptives and additionally would not be exempted under last year’s narrow definition of “religious employer.”
The mandate not only violates such existing conscience protections on abortion such as the Hyde/Weldon Amendment (in so far as Plan B and Ella are covered), but also violates the principles of the Church Amendments which protects conscience rights for those who object to contraceptives and other services on moral or religious grounds.
Simply put, Obama doesn’t care about mainstream Christians. If he did, he would not do what he is doing. He knows that his edict violates the consciences of millions of Americans, Catholic as well as Protestant. And he does not care. He has revealed himself as a man of faith of sorts, though, in serving the left’s most cherished sacrament: Ending the lives of “unwanted” innocents.
Maybe he’ll care in November, when Catholics hopefully vote en masse to kick the abortionist tyrant off his throne.
Simply put, Obama—or somebody to whom he listens—has figured out that there are more subtle ways to repress mainstream religion than by dynamiting churches and shooting priests and nuns, as the communists did in the Russian and Spanish revolutions.
Simply put, Baracky only cares about Baracky.
All others are merely tools and are thus expendable if needed to advance himself.
It all depends upon whether the voting Catholics are truly Catholic or Catholic in Name Only. CINOs are members of all parties. The vast majority of CINOs are members of leftist parties such as the Democrats and Greens but there are, unsurprisingly, many who claim Libertarian.
Whether or not the American Catholic Church actually holds these people accountable for their votes is also something that is in serious doubt – witness the entire Kennedy family and Nancy Pelosi. The issue for the Church with these folks is these people don’t believe their support/vote for candidates that espouse a pro-abortion policy is mortal sin. The Church can refuse the Sacraments to such as these at a minimum and could, conceivably, go all the way to Excommunication. However, history has shown the Church will not go even as far as withholding the Sacraments or even disciplining their own priests for providing the Sacraments.
I believe the Church’s recent statements to be absolutely correct yet, unfortunately, hollow. Unless the Church actually follows through with their stated remedies, as a Catholic I find it extremely difficult to respect the hierarchy.
You know I think the Catholic church as well as other churches within the Untied States are all waking up. Their argument about abortion does go along with their edict about healthcare for eveyone. To me, it is oxymornic to have a health discussion while touting abortion as a womans personal freedom.If they cared about a womans personal freedom then they would care about the millions of woman that find abortion contrary to their moral compass or beliefs. They are not saying freedom to choose, they are saying you will get an abortion if they deem it so. So whatever side you are on, in my dictionary freedom to choose means exaclty that.
A lot of American Catholics are deeply liberal due to their ideas of social justice. When Obama was running, I looked up the US Council of Catholic Bishops position statement on the issues, and on economic issues their position was clearly liberal, but on social issues it was clearly conservative. This is the essential tension in the modern Church.
I was struck by their statement that no one issue should make or break the viability of a candidate. To me, that was clear pandering to the liberals on the concept of abortion. I would say that most lay Catholics I know are more conservative than the national leadership. I think many of them would agree that abortion IS a make or break issue.
I’ve known too many catholic girls on birth control to give your thoughts creedence.
therefore it is a violation of the spirit of the Constitution.
This administration is now moving out of the terrain of legality.
The answer by the GOP is non-existent.
The Republic is being subverted, silence is complicity.
The Bishops are on the right track with this. Just ignore the edict. After all, what makes the government think it has the right to dictate what kind of health insurance an employer must provide? For that matter, what makes them think they can tell an insurance provider what they must cover?
We really need to make the conversation about what the government has or has not the authority to do. This is the way to undo everything the Statists have done. Just talk about the authority, or lack thereof, of government. There is not much room for demagoguery by the Left in that. “Heartless” has no more meaning than “racist” these days.
The problem is, when GOP candidates–and their supporters–say there’s nothing wrong with government mandating that everyone have health insurance simply because they are citizens of this great nation, the discussion of “authority” will necessarily devolve into “my candidate supports it, therefore government must have the authority to do it.”
Using the right to abortion as a means to mount a collateral attack on mainstream religion recalls the genius of banning pre-1985 children’s books on the “safety” grounds of alleged traces of lead in the ink.
Many classic children’s books have been pulped or otherwise trashed, their beautiful bindings and magnificent illustrations along with the unbowdlerized text, all in service of this bogus determination. In the meantime, classic children’s literature such as the Dr. Doolittle series, the Mary Poppins books, Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys, to name a few, are unavailable save in revamped PC versions.
“Safety” is being used to destroy cultural memory. The alleged rights judicially cobbled together from “penumbras” and “emanations” of the Constitution are being used to subvert and undermine the First Amendment’s plain meaning.
priests are giving barn-burner homilies and getting standing ovations. I’m not catholic, but I’ve heard from my friends who are.
O is nuts. the american gov’t is 200+ years old. the Vatican is millenia. He’s about to get schooled.
We see Roman Catholics at least saying something. What about Christian groups, are any of them speaking out?
I’ve been on the board of a Catholic hospital and peripherally involved at the healthcare system level, and while each hospital’s own adherence to Catholic teachings might vary (especially depending on how many actual religious men and women are involved in the running of the place) I can completely see them telling Obama to take a walk.
The thing is, an issue like this is up to the bishops of the diocese. It is not common knowledge, but they really do control nearly all of the Catholic goings-on, up to and including the property within their domain. For instance, my kids’ school exists at the pleasure of the Bishop. Fortunately, he’s a cool guy and doesn’t interfere with local issues. But he could.
The bishops will make the call on this, and they may very well do what they did in Massachusetts when the government told the Catholic adoption agencies they had to place kids with gay couples. They quit providing adoptions. Between this and the deal with denying funding to the Catholic human-trafficking prevention effort, It is shaping up to be a battle royale between the Church and the state that would make Sts. Thomas More and Beckett proud.
Here’s the deal with the Church- they’ve been developing their philosophy and theology for over 2000 years. Obama, and indeed the whole US, is but a recent blip on the screen to them. On the other hand, Catholic healthcare is a HUGE provider of charity care. If Obama sticks to his guns on this, he will lose.
I agree. Captain Zero has started a war that he will definitely lose.
Personally, I lean pro-choice, but it is unconscionable to me to force pro-lifers on this issue.
I don’t think they understand how the Catholic Church works, or how many institutions (and individuals) this will affect. I just hope this all comes to a head before Nov. 6th.
In other words, if the bishops take a stand, every Catholic institution from local schools to universities to hospitals will also take a stand- or lose their right to be called Catholic.
I didn’t know the First Amendment got trumped by a “right” to free, Democrat vote-buying healthcare that’ll bankrupt us and be crappy… Supreme Court?
By the way, regardless of whatever you think about the desirability of legal protections for your homosexual cousin and his/her companion, if you don’t think that the purpose of the push for same-sex marriage (as opposed to domestic partnership) is to provide another political platform from which to shrink the borders of First Amendment protection for traditional religion, you’re dreaming.
Which nicely reiterates my original point above. It would be nice to see the bishops actually take the stand.
The above should have been a response to Dana…don’t know if I clicked wrong or if the thread decided to change.
Dana’s exactly correct in her statement(s).
– Ambrose of Milan.