Posted on 12/29/2012 6:57:48 PM PST by Olog-hai
In a legal argument formally presented in federal court in the case of Hobby Lobby v. Kathleen Sebelius, the Obama administration is claiming that the First Amendment—which expressly denies the government the authority to prohibit the “free exercise” of religion—nonetheless allows it to force Christians to directly violate their religious beliefs even on a matter that involves the life and death of innocent human beings. …
The Obama administration is making a two-fold argument for why it can force Christians to act against their faith in complying with the regulation it has issued under the Obamacare law that requires virtually all health care plans to cover, without co-pay, sterilizations, contraceptives, and abortion-inducing drugs.
The first argument the administration makes against the owners of Hobby Lobby is that Americans lose their First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion when they form a corporation and engage in commerce. A person’s Christianity, the administration argues, cannot be carried out through activities he engages in through an incorporated business. … The second argument the administration makes to justify forcing Christians to act against their faith is more sweeping. Here the administration argues it can force a person to act against his religion so long as the coercion is done under the authority of a law that is neutral and generally applicable—in other words, as long as the law was not written specifically to persecute Christians as Christians, the government can use that law to persecute Christians. …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
*shrug* muslims are exempt.
Most Protestants do not oppose birth control.
I don't know where this figure comes from but the O-care fines for employers are significantly less if the employer just doesn't offer ANY health insurance, one source says $3K per year. Seems like that is what they should do and tell ALL their employees why.
And that can be reduced to zero if they cut back their hours to <30 per week.
sopeople lose their right to free expression of religion if they form a corporation...
what about the freedom of speech? do they lose that as well?
what about right to bear arms? I’m sure a few gun lobbies and security companies would sure like to know
strangely enough, your right to free association is the fourth amendment... which would be where a corporation falls
do people lose their rights once they start associating with each other??
this ‘administration’ is staffed by the kids the short bus left behind
Ok fine- just so we know. Obama care is turning out to be the Mark of the Beast.
Obama may as well be honest about it.
*sigh*
I would think that most large religious organizations are set up as corporations. Does Obama’s argument mean that church corporations have no religious rights?
I wish the lame stream media would actually report on this administration’s legal arguments on the 6:00 news. A lot of Democrats would be surprised at what “their side” is arguing these days. Pipe dream, I know.
$3K per year per employee, but they probably pay close to that in the heal care benefits anyway.
It’s starts when you back away from the keyboard and actually do something.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
“Ok fine- just so we know. Obama care is turning out to be the Mark of the Beast.
Obama may as well be honest about it.”
Obama MUST have his sacrifices to Molech.
The progressives are going even nuttier with their Obama-is-Lincoln! mania. Here's a clue why. Obama. Obama! Mmmm mmmm mmm.
When a man confined at Fort McHenry sued for a writ of habeas corpus Chief Justice Roger Taney ordered the government to show cause why the man should not be released. Chief Justice Taney was advised that the writ of habeas corpus had been suspended. Taney issued an attachment -- law Legal seizure of property or a person. The writ ordering such a seizure -- for the commandant of Fort McHenry but the marshals were denied admission to the fort.
Taney then "issued an opinion in the case declaring that the President alone did not have the authority to suspend the writ of habeas corpus -- only Congress could do that -- and holding that [the man's] confinement was illegal. The Chief Justice, knowing that he could not enforce his order, sent a copy of it to Lincoln."
from "Civil Liberty and the Civil War: The Indianapolis Treason Trials." William Rehnquist. www.repository.law.indiana.edu.
Obama.. er, I mean Lincoln was not impressed and other victims -- mayors, police chiefs, journalists, everyone -- soon followed.
Obama.. er, I mean Lincoln asked about writ of habeas corpus: Should everything fail because that one law ". . . made in such extreme tenderness of the citizens' liberty that practically it relieves more of the guilty than of the innocent . . . [cannot] to a very limited extent be violated?" You want "the government itself go to pieces?"
So here is yet another guide for Obama to follow to handle those pesky, constitutional matters and citizens' religion-based inalienable rights -- which of course makes inalienable rights unconstitutional. Obama. Obama! Mmmm mmmm mmm. Hot damn! cry the progressives.
Well, for almost 2000 years, Christianity taught that the primary purpose of marriage was to have children, God willing. In fact, for a couple of hundred years, Protestants and Catholics both agreed that there were three purposes to marriage: 1) Children; 2) companionship; 3) avoidance of illegitimate sexual temptations.
The change came quite late, beginning with the Anglican Church. And, of course, acceptance of birth control soon led to acceptance of abortion and perversion.
But to some extent, this is beside the point, since Obamacare demands that everyone must pay for morning-after pills, which are abortificients. In other words, abortion is involved as well as contraception. And we can be pretty sure that abortions all the way up to late term will be included—as they now are under Romneycare in Massachusetts. For that matter, Obama is fond of killing babies who are born alive—he voted for it three times, and we can soon expect him to demand that we pay for it.
Not to mention killing off old people.
No; they have authority from God and are abusing it. Such is the core of rebellion against God anyhow, going back before us humans existed.
As with the cross of Christ, so now, God temporarily allows the devil to be active for God's greater purposes.
Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, John Adams, Samuel Adams, George Washington, Thomas Paine, tens of thousands of other's of their day; millions of their descendants; thru millions and millions and millions of today's patriots, tea partiers, and conservatives.
No, it’s a religious issue when you have Christians that don’t want to be forced to sell it being forced to do so, when it goes against what they believe as a religion. And that’s aside from the state getting into any of this anyhow.
Judges 13:1
Well... Roe V Wade will be 40 years old in 2013.
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.