created by: Knightkore | Mar 19, 2012

Albuquerque, NM

132 votes

Does ObamaCare Violate Freedom Of Conscience?

Click on an option to vote

  • Yes.
  • No.
Comments
1 - 20 of 263 Comments Last updated Jul 6, 2012
First Prev
of 14
Next Last

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#1 Mar 19, 2012
Can you support your vote?

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#2 Mar 19, 2012
http://greenmountainscribes.wordpress.com/201...

Washington, D.C.– Calling it a valuable safeguard of religious freedom in America, National Center for Public Policy Research Adjunct Fellow Horace Cooper says an amendment up for a vote in the Senate Thursday is necessary to protect the First Amendment against new regulatory mandates included in Obamacare.

“Religious liberty is an individual right that applies to all Americans. There should never be a popularity contest or any other restrictionon free people being able to exercise their faith,” said Cooper.”Forcing people to choose between honoring God or falling down to honor idols mandated by the government is fundamentally wrong and violates the First Amendment.”

On March 1, a vote is expected on a bipartisan amendment offered by Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO) to the highway bill (S. 1813) that would amend Obamacare regulations to stop regulations from forcing church-supported soup kitchens, schools and other charities to provide coverage for contraception, sterilization procedures and early abortifacients to all employees as part of their insurance plans.

“The Blunt Amendment recognizes that the First Amendment protects everyone,” said Cooper.”Today’s majority view can easily become tomorrow’s minority. Freedom of conscience is precious and a right that all Americans must be vigilant to defend.”

Cooper, a legal commentator who taught constitutional law at George Mason University, is the author of the recently-released ” The Birth Control Mandate is Unconstitutional” published by the National Center.

In his paper, Cooper notes that a unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed relevant religious freedom protections only a few weeks ago in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC.

Cooper explains that religious schools, charities and health care providers will be forced to choose between the moral dictates of their conscience and creed, or following the President’s health care mandate-of-the-month. Such a choice is antithetical to the freedom of religion rooted in our constitutional tradition, and the fundamental protections of the First Amendment.

Cooper is also a spokesman for the Project 21 black leadership. He was a senior counsel to U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank with over 100,000 recent supporters. Contributions to National Center for Public Policy Research are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.
dpb

Westcliffe, CO

#3 Mar 19, 2012
Oximoron = "conservative + think" Just conservative propaganda by a group who is expert at propaganda. Try reading the ACT and thinking for yourself: I know that's a novel idea to you.

“Kees Mee, I's Ireesh”

Since: Jun 09

Ol' Juarez

#4 Mar 19, 2012
dpb wrote:
Oximoron = "conservative + think" Just conservative propaganda by a group who is expert at propaganda. Try reading the ACT and thinking for yourself: I know that's a novel idea to you.
What these fools don't realize is that medical professionals aren't ALL going to be employed by Religiously run hospitals. So what are they going to do then? Not do their jobs because it is against their beliefs? Phooey!! If you are in the health care field your religious beliefs don't have any place in your field of work. You worship on your own time and you don't force your beliefs on anyone. These fools don't get it and are insistent on turning this country into a Theocracy.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#5 Mar 19, 2012
fmer505-1951 wrote:
<quoted text>What these fools don't realize is that medical professionals aren't ALL going to be employed by Religiously run hospitals. So what are they going to do then? Not do their jobs because it is against their beliefs? Phooey!! If you are in the health care field your religious beliefs don't have any place in your field of work. You worship on your own time and you don't force your beliefs on anyone. These fools don't get it and are insistent on turning this country into a Theocracy.
On this we have to disagree...freedom of conscience is paramount in a free society. When our founding fathers came up with the idea for this country England was forcing people to do just that in various ways. You can't separate your beliefs...which are your life from any part of your life...you can't compartmentalize your beliefs...

It isn't about having a theocracy...it is about excercising freedom of conscience without having our freedoms be dictated by laws.

Question: An extreme parallel...but a very apt one...in Nazi Germany there were soldiers and medical people that did not believe the way the Nazi's did but they still did what the Nazi's did...did they have an excuse?

NO.
Really

Santa Fe, NM

#6 Mar 19, 2012
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Nazi Germany?

Geez - there is no parallel. It is extremeist nonsense stuff like that is maddening.

This is minimun, basic health care insurance for half the population. They have proposed a system where religious organizations can opt out for their religious activities and for secular, business activities, they can avoid any direct participation.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#7 Mar 19, 2012
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
Nazi Germany?
Geez - there is no parallel. It is extremeist nonsense stuff like that is maddening.
This is minimun, basic health care insurance for half the population. They have proposed a system where religious organizations can opt out for their religious activities and for secular, business activities, they can avoid any direct participation.
Huh-uh...we'll see if the Supreme Court agrees.

“If it ain't broke don't fix it”

Since: Jul 09

Arcadia, LA.

#8 Mar 19, 2012
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
Nazi Germany?
Geez - there is no parallel. It is extremeist nonsense stuff like that is maddening.
This is minimun, basic health care insurance for half the population. They have proposed a system where religious organizations can opt out for their religious activities and for secular, business activities, they can avoid any direct participation.
Seems kind of unfair that religous organizations can opt out, Oblunder can waive corporations from participation, but the inividual citizen is stuck making insurance corps. even richer.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#9 Mar 19, 2012
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/article_p...

Where We Stand
The Supreme Court's Religious Freedom Reality Check
A recent unanimous ruling reveals deep commitment to our 'first freedom.'
A Christianity Today editorial | posted 3/13/2012 09:34AM

Few subjects prompt louder cries of anguish than suppressed religious liberty. Many Christians worry that precious freedoms are "under assault." Talk about a "war on religion" trips off the tongues of many activists.

We are right to be concerned, because religious freedom is vital and necessary for the health of society. This is why the 2009 Manhattan Declaration considers it a core concern, and why key Catholic and evangelical leaders now work together to protect it. The question is: Are we on the verge of secular totalitarianism, as some activists seem to suggest?

Christian concerns about a suffocating secularism go back decades. Yet activists who sound the alarms today fear more than the loss of a religious perspective in public life. Religious identity itself is at stake, and along with it, freedom of conscience.

Colleges and universities pressure campus fellowships to admit leaders hostile to Christian moral teaching. Governments that partner with Christian groups are now severing ties because faith groups refuse to place needy children with homosexual couples. Hospitals seek to strip medical workers' conscience protections; they strong-arm nurses into assisting with abortions. Bureaucrats bully religious employers into bankrolling health plans that include contraceptives or the morning-after pill.

Attempts to constrict religious liberty are indeed terrifyingly real; hence we understand the rhetoric of grave threats and imminent dangers. But in the midst of all this, a blessedly reassuring Supreme Court decision has arrived. We hope it will rouse the doomsday prophets from their fatalistic crouch.

In mid-January, the court issued the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC ruling. The case pitted a Missouri-Synod Lutheran school in suburban Detroit against a disgruntled former teacher. After battling back from narcolepsy, Cheryl Perich requested her job back. School officials doubted Perich's fitness to teach. So they found a replacement and asked her to resign. Then, Perich threatened to file an employment discrimination lawsuit. But school officials fired her, because she transgressed a denominational rule to resolve disputes internally.

The court unanimously sided with the church and school. Religious institutions must retain the right to decide, in Chief Justice John Roberts's felicitous phrasing, who will "personify" their beliefs. The opinion affirmed a "ministerial exception" to workplace-discrimination law. It grounded this exception in both the no-establishment and free-exercise clauses of the First Amendment. Perich taught secular subjects, but she also gave doctrinal and moral instruction. She did so as a commissioned Lutheran minister. Allowing her suit to proceed would empower the courts to second-guess the school's assessment of her ministerial competence.

"The interest of society in the enforcement of employment discrimination statutes is undoubtedly important," Roberts concluded. "But so too is the interest of religious groups in choosing who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith, and carry out their mission."

We wholeheartedly endorse the Supreme Court's opinion. Government micromanagement of faith-based hiring and firing undercuts free-exercise rights intolerably. But many people don't see things this way. They sympathize with Perich. They abhor the church's exemption from rules that protect workers from prejudice. Our culture instinctively recoils at the notion of discrimination.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#10 Mar 19, 2012
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/...

“Instead, they advised the bishops’ conference that we should listen to the ‘enlightened’ voices of accommodation.… The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers.

“Meanwhile, in our recent debate in the Senate, our opponents sought to obscure what is really a religious-freedom issue by maintaining that abortion-inducing drugs and the like are a ‘woman’s health issue.’ We will not let this deception stand,” Cardinal Dolan wrote.

It bears noting that Cardinal Dolan reassured the community of bishops and the Catholics they serve that a recent unanimous Supreme Court decision, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, reaffirms the right of a church to define its own ministry and services.

That such a decision even was necessary when our Constitution opens with the premise of religious liberty is a sign of the times - and not a good one.

This administration is using everything it can find to obfuscate from the issue at hand. Freedom-loving Americans - not only those who value religious liberty, but also those who value liberty as has been defined by our history and our heritage - need to keep our eyes on the ball.

“I Am No One To Be Trifled With”

Since: Jun 09

Dread Pirate Roberts

#11 Mar 19, 2012
http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/H...

The First Amendment protects the freedom of religious groups to engage in certain key religious activities, including the conducting of worship services and other religious ceremonies and rituals, as well as the critical process of communicating the faith. Accordingly, religious groups must be free to choose the personnel who are essential to the performance of these functions.
dpb

Westcliffe, CO

#12 Mar 19, 2012
The Supreme Court has turned down an appeal from Christian groups that challenged a discrimination policy at California state universities.

The justices on Monday are leaving in place a federal appeals court ruling that found that the policy doesn't violate the Constitution. The policy says officially recognized campus groups can't discriminate based on religion or sexual orientation.

A Christian fraternity and a sorority at San Diego State University sued in 2005, arguing that the policy violates their religious freedom. The groups are restricted to Christian members.

The case is Alpha Delta Chi-Delta Chapter v. Reed, 11-744.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/19/supreme-...
The Bush

Santa Fe, NM

#13 Mar 19, 2012
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh-uh...we'll see if the Supreme Court agrees.
appointees are corrupt and predictably pro-corporate, but of course there is no case before them on this aspect of the affordable care act.
Mary

Albuquerque, NM

#14 Mar 19, 2012
Mary says Obama has no conscience. If he did he'd quit today.
she

Santa Fe, NM

#15 Mar 19, 2012
Mary wrote:
If he did he'd quit today.
smoking, you mean. I think he did.
what

Santa Fe, NM

#16 Mar 19, 2012
Knightmare wrote:
http://www.bloomberglaw.com/pu blic/document/HosannaTabor_Eva ngelical_Lutheran_Church__Sch_ v_EEOC_No_10553_201
The First Amendment protects the freedom of religious groups to engage in certain key religious activities, including the conducting of worship services and other religious ceremonies and rituals, as well as the critical process of communicating the faith. Accordingly, religious groups must be free to choose the personnel who are essential to the performance of these functions.
does that have to do with running corporate entities?

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#17 Mar 19, 2012
fmer505-1951 wrote:
<quoted text>What these fools don't realize is that medical professionals aren't ALL going to be employed by Religiously run hospitals. So what are they going to do then? Not do their jobs because it is against their beliefs? Phooey!! If you are in the health care field your religious beliefs don't have any place in your field of work. You worship on your own time and you don't force your beliefs on anyone. These fools don't get it and are insistent on turning this country into a Theocracy.
Religious beliefs are applied to everything in life, and is a fundamental aspect of Christianity. A Christian is expected to work hard, to obey the moral code, to do the best in all things that they do. Otherwise, one is not Christian. It is not something that happens on Sunday, or during prayer.

Christians are not forcing their beliefs on anyone, THEY are being forced to go against their morals and conscious.

Yes, a theocracy would be best. Humanism has only resulted in pollution, genocide, and numerous human rights violations for the last 150 years. Sorry, but theocracy no longer scares us. It's not a bad word.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#18 Mar 19, 2012
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
Nazi Germany?
Geez - there is no parallel. It is extremeist nonsense stuff like that is maddening.
This is minimun, basic health care insurance for half the population. They have proposed a system where religious organizations can opt out for their religious activities and for secular, business activities, they can avoid any direct participation.
The debate on whether anyone has a right to the fruits of labor of the medical profession is still very much in doubt. There is no legitimate moral right to healthcare, and never has been.

What Americans have is a strong sense of entitlement, and a belief that others must support them. This is simply not so, not moral by any rational or logical standard, and no practical.

Until you can prove why anyone is entitled to any kind of medical professional at all, all such arguments fail.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#19 Mar 19, 2012
dragoon70056 wrote:
<quoted text>
Seems kind of unfair that religous organizations can opt out, Oblunder can waive corporations from participation, but the inividual citizen is stuck making insurance corps. even richer.
The only person making insurance corps richer is Obama and his allowing a healthcare monopoly.

“Fear is the Mind-Killer”

Since: Jun 08

Albuquerque, NM

#20 Mar 19, 2012
dpb wrote:
The Supreme Court has turned down an appeal from Christian groups that challenged a discrimination policy at California state universities.
The justices on Monday are leaving in place a federal appeals court ruling that found that the policy doesn't violate the Constitution. The policy says officially recognized campus groups can't discriminate based on religion or sexual orientation.
A Christian fraternity and a sorority at San Diego State University sued in 2005, arguing that the policy violates their religious freedom. The groups are restricted to Christian members.
The case is Alpha Delta Chi-Delta Chapter v. Reed, 11-744.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/19/supreme-...
So, what you're saying is that the Supreme Court has violated the US Constitution by claiming such actions do not violate the US Constitution?

Let's dispense with the nonsense. The Supreme Courts were undermined by partisan politics long ago, and therefore, lose their legitimate authority. They repeatedly violate democratic authority of the people to vote for certain things, making the Supreme Court clearly and enemy of the people in most cases. It is s joke, and unworthy of any respect.

Baring that, all people have a right to assembly, and to discriminate on whom they wish to associate with for any reason whatsoever. This is a human right. We discriminate all the time, and that in itself is a human right. Get over it.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 14
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Placitas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Good Old Days 2 (Apr '10) 2 hr Pestilence 106,048
Today I Saw (Nov '09) 2 hr Locusts 55,120
Obama Carved Out Possible Corridor for ISIS in ... 3 hr Real Concerns 2
West Mesa families hope psychic will help solve... (Aug '09) 5 hr LuzAranda 90
bodies on the mesa Mon LuzAranda 5
Republicans reach out (Feb '14) Mon IntheNO 69
Ruidoso's summer rains fall short Aug 30 Sad 5
•••
•••
•••

Placitas Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Placitas People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Placitas News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Placitas
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••