Saturday, February 11, 2012

"Freedom of Religion" Means It's the Religious Who Get To Decide, Not the Bureaucrats

The First Amendment to the Constitution says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It's the undisputed law of the land, a primary portion of the primary law on which everything else is based.

I guess our President and his advisors thought that they were the ones who get to decide whether their newly proclaimed laws, such as the one demanding that religious organizations pay for contraceptives, abortifacients and abortions for their employees, are actually lawful or not. [Update: Despite saying otherwise, the Obama administration went ahead and made this rule permanent, on Friday, 2/10/12, without any changes or accommodations. Whatever he or his cronies say otherwise is blatant untruth.]

Those who follow the oxymoronic practice sometimes called "situation ethics" believe the end justifies the means, so they evaluate different situations in order to take the most profitable action in their own favor.

I think they may be unable to comprehend the world view and decision-making process of faithful or law-abiding people, who follow a specific code of moral ethics that requires evaluating our behavior against a stable yardstick, such as the code of law or the tenets of our religion.

To give the benefit of the doubt, maybe some just need for us to explain in simple language exactly what the First Amendment's primary clause "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" means in practice.

To that end:

Someone needs to tell The White House that the 1st Amendment exists to protect religious people from those who want to define "mainstream".

Someone needs to tell President Obama and David Axelrod that the First Amendment exists to protect religious people from those who think opinion polls should have the force of law.

Someone needs to tell President Obama  that the First Amendment exists to protect religious people and organizations from the entire 99%.

Someone needs to tell The White House and its allies that the First Amendment exists to protect religious people of both sexes from elitists who think elitist people should get to make the rules for religious people.

Someone needs to tell President Obama that the Constitution IS THE LAW, and the First Amendment IS THE LAW, and they both exist to protect religious people from politics of any kind.

Someone needs to tell Democrats that the First Amendment exists so that different religious people and churches are the ones that get to define what matters "are about religion",  and so that political parties and politicians are PROHIBITED from defining which matters "are about religion".

Someone needs to tell President Obama and Kathleen Sebelius that the First Amendment exists to protect uncompromised religious freedom and practice, and no amount of deal-making or "balancing" or  deliberate misrepresentation and outright falsehoods by the President can require other religious people to abide by those deals or compromises.

The ugliest side of this is that the Federal Government has no power to enforce these laws other than unlimited confiscation of money. So, in this particular situation, Health and Human Services have gleefully added fines of $2,000 per employee per year that they can just confiscate from any religious organization that doesn't follow their orders. So it is an agenda to obliterate religious organizations: to put them out of business either by corrupting their ethics or bankrupting those that refuse to compromise.

We already know that Planned Parenthood will be the "preferred provider" to fill these newly mandated prescriptions. What do you want to bet that the colluding agencies have already pencilled in Planned Parenthood as the eventual recipient of these confiscated dollars as well, via grant gimmicks?

This is perhaps a watershed moment. A few years ago, most ordinary people believed our elected representatives would always stand up for our constitutional rights, including our right to practice our religion and follow God according to His leading. We've seen this continually eroded, as government agencies in airports are allowed to put their hands on small children who are too young to understand, as government agencies behave in practice as though unlawful pet liberal causes were codified and undebateable, as Washingon has refused to enforce the laws that do exist in everything from prosecuting criminals to the operations of government itself.  As recently as 6 months ago, the President's own supporters believed they were safe from having their liberties encroached upon. Now, they too have learned that there are no limits to a bully's demands. And this administration is a bully - picking on the kid that's a little overweight, or that goes to church each Sunday, or that is polite to the teacher and tries to follow the rules, or that has to work for their lunch money.

We have freedom to vote, elections are coming, and every politician who supported these actions needs to be sent home for good.


  1. Now that is one powerful post!


    I understand that, as of yesterday, 0 has formalized his threat into federal law.

    I have a feeling that we are witnessing the joining of a deep struggle. The resolve of people of conscience is not so pliable as the manipulators might expect, particularly when those people are Americans not quite as willing to be pushed around as it might look on the surface. Conscience, after all, is no easy master, and the discipline of those who follow their consciences is formidable in its own way. Just like a tree planted by the water . . .

  2. I saw your post about the sneaky finalization of the rule and added a link. In comments on various threads, I've seen an increasing number of people say that even though they themselves are not religious, they are disturbed by this because it limits everyone's freedom of conscience.

    Have a blessed Sunday!



Related Posts with Thumbnails