Posted on 07/18/2014 8:32:54 PM PDT by Morgana
West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin (D) has some explaining to do. Although the senator has proclaimed to be pro-life, his recent support of a Democratic bill to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling on Hobby Lobby v. Burwell, suggests otherwise.
This failed legislation would have reversed a decision that protects the Christian company’s religious freedom and avoid providing employees abortion-inducing drugs.
Click here to sign up for daily pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com
joemanchin2Manchin explained his support for the bill as such:
“Today, I voted in support of overturning the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision that ruled for-profit companies can opt out of providing contraceptives to their employees because of religious beliefs,” Manchin said. “As Governor and U.S. Senator, I have always fought to protect the sincerely-held religious views of non-profit organizations, like soup kitchens, colleges, hospitals and similar non-profit organizations. However, for-profit corporations do not have the same legal privileges as non-profits, and therefore they should not have the same protections as non-profits recognized by law as being a religious organization. This legislation strikes a balance between allowing non-profit organizations to hold onto their religious views while ensuring that Americans have access to safe, affordable and reliable preventative health benefits.”
I don’t understand how someone who considers himself pro-life can add his name to this bill.
The drug ella, one of the four contraceptives Hobby Lobby refused to offer employees, can cause the demise of an embryo already implanted in its mother’s womb, according to the Family Research Council. It should not fall under the term “health benefits.” Clearly, the pro-life movement is overwhelmingly on the side of Hobby Lobby, who is simply trying to avoid violating its religious convictions by offering drugs that could cause abortions.
We’re waiting for an explanation, Mr. Manchin.
Good morning Morgana,
Why do the good folks of W.V. Support Joe?
He is fully behind obammy and does little but pay lip service to his war on coal which essentially IS W.V. Economy.
SCOTUS ruled based on the RFRA, another federal law, rather than based on the First Amendment. Because of that strategy (chosen to keep the ruling as narrow as possible), a new law modifying RFRA can overturn the SCOTUS decision. That will lead to a new court case and another SCOTUS decision on whether the First Amendment still applies to Christians in the sick world of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, but it kicks the can down the road several years. That's a win for the far left.
That's been going on for many decades. The Hobby Lobby decision was based on application of a statute RFRA, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (which was itself a reaction to SCOTUS decisions).
The other example that comes to mind is the creation of the snooping law, FISA, in reaction to a SCOTUS decision that suppressed evidence based on a wiretap. The first SCOTUS decision on wiretapping said it was perfectly legal without a warrant, because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a phone call.
SCOTUS and Congress are all over the map on decisions. "Living Constitution." One thing about living things, they all die.
When a Leftist claims to be “pro-life”, what he means is that he doesn’t want to die - could care less about you/me/babies.
There is no such thing as a pro-life member/supporter of the party of death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.