Judge overturns Mo. law on birth control coverage [LINK]
Looks like this one will be heading to the Supreme Court
Rob
Looks like this one will be heading to the Supreme Court
Rob
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Birth Control Coverage Mandated
- Thread starter Deacon
- Start date
Obama has openly attacked religious freedom in this country. Catholics knew about this before the election, but still voted in the majority for Obama.
Phyllis Schlafly in her recent book No Higher Power: Obama's War on Religious Freedom said on page 2, 'Obama had arrogated to himself the right to define which organizations qualify as "religious" and which do not. Most religious schools, hospitals, and charitable groups don't meet his definition, as it turns on narrow and unconstitutional criteria. Under Obama's definition, a religious institution mast have "the inculcation of religious values as its purpose" and must "primarily" employ and serve "persons who share its religious tenets." That would obviously exclude Catholic hospitals, as well as many Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish schools and charities.'
It will be very expensive for the charities to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court, which is what the Democrats have in mind--costing the charities a lot of money for lawyers. Secondly, the Supreme Court is very likely to support Obama as they did with Obamacare. Obama really wants to force all hospitals, doctors, nurses, and medical staff to perform abortions.
Schlafly endorsed Romney as the best choice last year. Here is the link to her organization, Eagle Forum:
http://www.eagleforum.org/
Phyllis Schlafly in her recent book No Higher Power: Obama's War on Religious Freedom said on page 2, 'Obama had arrogated to himself the right to define which organizations qualify as "religious" and which do not. Most religious schools, hospitals, and charitable groups don't meet his definition, as it turns on narrow and unconstitutional criteria. Under Obama's definition, a religious institution mast have "the inculcation of religious values as its purpose" and must "primarily" employ and serve "persons who share its religious tenets." That would obviously exclude Catholic hospitals, as well as many Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish schools and charities.'
It will be very expensive for the charities to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court, which is what the Democrats have in mind--costing the charities a lot of money for lawyers. Secondly, the Supreme Court is very likely to support Obama as they did with Obamacare. Obama really wants to force all hospitals, doctors, nurses, and medical staff to perform abortions.
Schlafly endorsed Romney as the best choice last year. Here is the link to her organization, Eagle Forum:
http://www.eagleforum.org/
Free contraception means fewer abortions which for me is a Good Thing.
Obama could care less about the issue. For him, it is merely breaking the historical religious freedom granted to Catholics on this issue. American Catholics do not agree with the Vatican on the issue, but when you run a charity, as you know, it is run on a shoestring and extra expense can be the straw that breaks the camel's back. If Obama can force Catholics to provide birth control to their hospital and other charitable employees, then Obama can force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions, which is what he wants.
In that case it is a Bad Thing. Can the one not be separated from the other? Or would that be too sensible for government hacks?
Moral objection has always been a hallmark of the American experiment.
Even though I think people ought to have access to birth control as needed (the stats are clear...we live amongst profligate pagans) companies should be able to opt out.
If this ends up at the SC we'll be seeing the clear evidence that we are longer the nation our founders intended.
Even though I think people ought to have access to birth control as needed (the stats are clear...we live amongst profligate pagans) companies should be able to opt out.
If this ends up at the SC we'll be seeing the clear evidence that we are longer the nation our founders intended.