Posted on 11/16/2013 8:32:56 AM PST by marshmallow
Chicago, Ill., Nov 15, 2013 / 04:12 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Obama administration’s defense of the HHS mandate is “unsound and extraordinary” for contending that business owners cannot have religious freedom protections.
“The government’s argument is premised on a far-too-narrow view of religious freedom: Religious exercise is protected in the home and the house of worship but not beyond,” the court’s Nov. 12 decision in Grote Industries v. Sebelius said.
“Religious people do not practice their faith in that compartmentalized way; free-exercise rights are not so circumscribed.”
Compelling businesses owners and their companies to provide services such as abortion-causing drugs and devices, sterilization, and contraception “substantially burdens their religious exercise rights,” the court wrote.
The government’s argument that religious exercise claims are irrelevant to commercial activity would “leave religious exercise wholly unprotected in the commercial sphere.”
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
The government’s argument that religious exercise claims are irrelevant to commercial activity would “leave religious exercise wholly unprotected in the commercial sphere.”
Uhh... I think that's the idea, Judge.
That is why the far left fringe is trying to introduce the phrase “freedom of worship”. They do not want us to have any freedom, just free stuff paid for the rich - under their supervision and orders.
Further, even in the old Soviet Union, that kind of government-prescribed "exercise" was allowed.
For over 200 years, in America, the founding principle left the rights of conscience and free exercise of religious belief outside the purview of government officials.
When one considers the implication of the overreaching statement contained in this ruling, one must conclude that what Christians have, for centuries, considered to be the "Great Commission" would now, in America, be prohibited by law and superseded by government edict.
The Obama administration’s position comes from the socialist view that all businesses belong to the government.
If you can do this to religion, then you can do it to all the other freedoms in the First Amendment that government is restricted from interfering with. The left and even some on the right are short-sighted when tampering and redefining what these rights mean and how they should be executed. I am constantly amazed at how eager the press is the participate in their own demise. This is what you get when ideology goes to war with liberty.
“would “leave religious exercise wholly unprotected in the commercial sphere.”
That’s the plan.
welcome news. Let’s see if it protects photographers, florists, and catering halls from being forced to take clients that don’t want to (e.g., gay weddings). If they want to pass on this commerce, they shouldn’t be sued over it.
Well put.
"You didn't build that!"
**the Obama administration’s defense of the HHS mandate is “unsound and extraordinary” for contending that business owners cannot have religious freedom protections. **
BTTT
The Establishment Press considers itself “the Fourth Estate.” Nobody told them that the idea of “Estates” is anathema to the framers of the Constitution, who outlawed titles of nobility in the US.
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.