In today's Sacramento Bee:
"President Barack Obama's health care law is headed for a new Supreme Court showdown over companies' religious objections to the law's birth-control mandate.
Amid the troubled rollout of the health law, and 17 months after the justices upheld it, the Obama administration is defending a provision that requires most employers that offer health insurance to their workers to provide a range of preventive health benefits, including contraception.
Roughly 40 for-profit companies have sued, arguing they should not be forced to cover some or all forms of birth control because doing so would violate their religious beliefs."
Guess what? These companies are right. Why should they be forced, BY THE GOVERNMENT, to violate their religious precepts? What is this, separation of church and state except if it is to the advantage if the state?
The employees who work there signed on knowing that they were working for entities whose basis, while not affiliated with any specific faith as a faith-based employer, like the Catholic Church's Catholic Health Services, nevertheless, was formed by deeply religious people, who held to specific religious precepts, like the owners of Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood Specialties, Autocam, Corp and so many others.
On June 17, I wrote a commentary called "The Constitution, the Church and Obamacare", which I said in part:
"So, because it is technically an insurance company, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act mandates that the insurance company provide sterilization, reproductive, and pregnancy prevention and termination services as part of its plan offering to the employees of the employer's insurer. Got that? The Church is required to provide abortion services to its female employees, in violation of its sanctity of life tenet. And yet, in its hospitals, abortions are not performed nor permitted.
From a Constitutional standpoint, this is a violation of the premise of separation of church and state, as well as, a violation of the first amendment, to wit: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Currently, the Church and others are suing the federal government over the the violation of those rights under the Constitution by being forced to comply with this part of obamacare.
There are at least a dozen separate cases pending in the federal courts, and ultimately one or more of these cases will end up in the Supreme Court. The exemption that HHS issued last year will expire on August 1. If the Supreme Court does not rule on any pending case before then, the Church will be in technical violation of the law at that time, unless Secretary Sebellius issues an extension of the exemption."
Amid the troubled rollout of the health law, and 17 months after the justices upheld it, the Obama administration is defending a provision that requires most employers that offer health insurance to their workers to provide a range of preventive health benefits, including contraception.
Roughly 40 for-profit companies have sued, arguing they should not be forced to cover some or all forms of birth control because doing so would violate their religious beliefs."
Guess what? These companies are right. Why should they be forced, BY THE GOVERNMENT, to violate their religious precepts? What is this, separation of church and state except if it is to the advantage if the state?
The employees who work there signed on knowing that they were working for entities whose basis, while not affiliated with any specific faith as a faith-based employer, like the Catholic Church's Catholic Health Services, nevertheless, was formed by deeply religious people, who held to specific religious precepts, like the owners of Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood Specialties, Autocam, Corp and so many others.
On June 17, I wrote a commentary called "The Constitution, the Church and Obamacare", which I said in part:
"So, because it is technically an insurance company, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act mandates that the insurance company provide sterilization, reproductive, and pregnancy prevention and termination services as part of its plan offering to the employees of the employer's insurer. Got that? The Church is required to provide abortion services to its female employees, in violation of its sanctity of life tenet. And yet, in its hospitals, abortions are not performed nor permitted.
From a Constitutional standpoint, this is a violation of the premise of separation of church and state, as well as, a violation of the first amendment, to wit: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Currently, the Church and others are suing the federal government over the the violation of those rights under the Constitution by being forced to comply with this part of obamacare.
There are at least a dozen separate cases pending in the federal courts, and ultimately one or more of these cases will end up in the Supreme Court. The exemption that HHS issued last year will expire on August 1. If the Supreme Court does not rule on any pending case before then, the Church will be in technical violation of the law at that time, unless Secretary Sebellius issues an extension of the exemption."
The government has overstepped its authority with this law, as it pertains to people's faith. Let's hope, finally, that the Roberts-led Supreme Court gets it right this time and states that the government cannot force an employer to do something which is an anathema to its core principles. If if rules in favor of the government this time, any semblance of religious freedom is gone forever in this country.
We have come a long way since 1620 when the pilgrims and others came here to practice their religions freely, without interference from the state. The state, with this law, has found a loophole that even the King of England didn't think of. And the pilgrims left anyway.
And by the way, to those of you who consider yourselves atheists and agnostics, in the same commentary, I also said the following:
"Understand that when I use the term "Church" in this commentary, I mean all religious entities, faith-based employers, and others whose views while not mirroring the Catholic Church, certainly are not secular in any way. Even atheistic views are respected here, since there are some atheistic views which are not state-based. And, also understand that, at best, I am a cafeteria Catholic, so I don't agree with all of the Church's positions."
So, this law in essence is a violation of our own, personalized moral views which each of us lives as we see fit, while not violating another's or society's views of right and wrong. Therefore, this law should be found unconstitutional, based on its violation of the First Amendment, you know, the one which guarantees that no law will be made to make us violate our own precepts.
Mr Chief Justice, just remember that if you take away the religious freedoms for one, you have taken it away for all. And the pilgrims will be rolling over in their graves.
And by the way, remember this as you sit down to your Thanksgiving dinner, the reason why you can give thanks.
"Understand that when I use the term "Church" in this commentary, I mean all religious entities, faith-based employers, and others whose views while not mirroring the Catholic Church, certainly are not secular in any way. Even atheistic views are respected here, since there are some atheistic views which are not state-based. And, also understand that, at best, I am a cafeteria Catholic, so I don't agree with all of the Church's positions."
So, this law in essence is a violation of our own, personalized moral views which each of us lives as we see fit, while not violating another's or society's views of right and wrong. Therefore, this law should be found unconstitutional, based on its violation of the First Amendment, you know, the one which guarantees that no law will be made to make us violate our own precepts.
Mr Chief Justice, just remember that if you take away the religious freedoms for one, you have taken it away for all. And the pilgrims will be rolling over in their graves.
And by the way, remember this as you sit down to your Thanksgiving dinner, the reason why you can give thanks.
Happy Thanksgiving!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment