RELIGIOUS FREEDOM—WHAT ABOUT IT?

11/4/12
The promulgation of the free birth control rule indicates the regulatory road ahead. The government now requires every covered employer to provide health insurance that offer birth control and sterilization surgeries free of charge—even if such drugs and procedures violate the religious beliefs of the employer. Only houses of worship and monastic communities are exempt.
In a lawsuit—Newland v. Sebelius (a catholic) the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) enacted in 1993 to remedy a supreme court decision allowing federal drug laws of “general applicability” to supersede Native American religious ceremonies in which peyote is used. Clinton signed the bill.
RFRA states that the government “shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion” unless it can demonstrate that the law “is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest”. Newland said it did indeed constitute a substantial burden on the owners’ free exercise of their Catholic faith.
Another case—O’Brien v. US Department of Health, judge Jackson reached the opposite legal conclusion. Jackson dismissed O’Brein case on the basis that forcing his company to buy insurance covering cont5raception was not a “substantial burden” on his faith.
The core of the ruling:
The challenged regulations do not demand that plaintiffs alter their behavior in a manner that will directly and inevitably prevent plaintiffs form acting in accordance with their religious beliefs. He is not prevented from keeping the Sabbath from providing a religious upbringing for his children or from participating in a religious ritual. He remains free to exercise their religion by not using contraceptives and by discouraging employees from using them.
Jackson reasoning if this view prevails will shrivel the “free exercise of religion” guaranteed by the 1st amendment into mere “freedom of Worship”.. religious rites behind closed doors. The court ruled that O’Brein is the aggressor in the matter, that it is he who is seeking to violate the rights of his employees. “RFRA is a shield, not a sword, Jackson wrote, “it in a means to force ones’ religious practice upon others” (but the other way is ok—double standard??)
O’Brein is not forcing his believes on his employees, he is merely choosing not to be complicit in what he considers sinful activities. According to the Obama adm. the realm of commerce is a religion-free zone.
Look at the dems platform—they strongly and unequivocally support Roe v Wade and a womans’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. (HAVE YOU EVER WONDER IF SEBELIUS, REID, PELOSI AND COUNTLESS OTHER DEMS WONDER WHAT IF MY MOTHER DECIDED TO GET AN ABORTION????—WHOOPS)
If dems regain the control of congress it won’t take long for HHS to promulgate a free abortion rule along lines similar to the free birth control mandate.
What’s next free—assisted suicide, sex changes and who knows what else.
Source—weekly standard—wesley smith

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s