Tag Archives: mandate
An article at FRC comments on a piece by Linda Greenhouse at The New York Times in which Greenhouse laments the fact that “American women are losing the right to employer-provided birth control.” The article at FRC argues that birth control is not a right:
“At least she was honest enough to not use the hyperbole of saying, “American women are losing birth control…
After the Supreme Court dealt a devastating blow to the Obama Administration’s HHS mandate, the administration promised a “fix” to make it all legal. True to their promise a new HHS mandate “fix” was released last week. Unfortunately, the new “fix” does nothing to protect the religious conscience and convictions of business owners and religious organizations.
The following articles provide a detailed analysis of the new “fix” and why it’s really nothing new and doesn’t really fix anything. Stay informed about this very critical issue. At stake is the ability for business owners to live and do business according to their religious convictions without fear of government reprisal. This is important because religious freedom is a cornerstone of our country. If the government can force a business owner to violate his/her religious convictions it won’t be long before every person can and will be made to do the same.
ADF COMMENT ON HHS MANDATE ‘ACCOMMODATION’
I love reading articles like this from the left. This article not only misrepresents the facts by linking religious rights to taking four pills in question in the Hobby Lobby case, it disproves what it is trying to prove.
Here are some issues that should be apparent in the article by a little thought behind the words of the article.
1. They misrepresent teachings of Jewish history. It is clear that an agenda is in the works when this author says it is a religious requirement to support contraceptives. What the article cites is a disagreement among two ancient Jewish Scholars on the role of a form of birth control as it relates to two Jewish Principles. They discussed whether a sponge like material for the prevention of pregnancy is allowed and even use the phrase, “may use” to distinguish it from being a religious obligation, as this article seems to try to advance.
For instance, in my religious tradition I “may use beer.” This does not mean beer is required or part of my religion. Rather, it is something I am allowed to use.
This decision really blocks women from being able to make their own health care decisions? Really? Are there religions that really do oppose health care (strawman argument)? Where are all those business owners who oppose all health care? Why aren’t they suing the government?
Wasserman Schultz also expressed concerns for later implications of the law, pointing out that women use birth control to treat illnesses, such as endometriosis and serious menstrual cramping, and saying “the life function day to day for women is dramatically impacted by this decision.”
The decision was limited to four pills. For some reason Wasserman Schultz thinks every pill, pills that help endometriosis and menstrual cramping were banned. Building a strawman, she uses irresponsible language when she says, “the life function day to day for women is dramatically impacted by this decision.”
This is a collection of articles for numerous sources commenting on the landmark decision by the Supreme Court in the Hobby Lobby case against the Obama administration HHS mandate.
In what will be known as one of the biggest, most influential decisions the Supreme Court has made in the last decade, the court ruled that the government CANNOT force business owners to pay for drugs or devices that can cause an abortion. The HHS mandate, put in place by the Obama administration, demanded that all business owners provide contraception, birth control, and abortion drugs to their employers. Many business owners, seeking to live by their religious convictions against abortion, opposed the mandate. The Obama administration refused to give exemptions to these owners. Many have sued and won in lower courts, all such cases led to the Supreme Court case.
In the high court case both Hobby Lobby, owner by the Green family, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, owned by the Hahn family, argued that the mandate was unconstitutional and violated their first amendment rights to religious freedom. The case was closely watched as the implications would have devastating consequences on religious freedom in America.
But today, as we prepare to celebrate the 4th of July, a day of freedom, the court has ruled that religious freedom is still alive and the government cannot force people to violate their religious convictions.
Truly this is a victory for freedom and the unborn, and yet another crushing defeat for the Obama administration by the Supreme Court.
A press release from Alliance Defending Freedom carries comments by ADF senior counsel David Cortman and Conestoga president and CEO Anthony Hahn regarding the landmark victory:
A recent article reports that a federal court has issued an injunction against enforcement of the ObamaCare HHS Mandate against Dr. James Dobson and his “Family Talk” radio show. Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Kevin Theriot commented on the injunction:
“Faith-based organizations should be free to operate according to the faith they teach and live out every day. If the government can fine Christian ministries out of existence because they want to uphold their faith, there is no limit to what other freedoms it can take away. The court was right to block enforcement of this unconstitutional mandate against Family Talk.”
Dr. Dobson said of the injunction:
A recent article at LifeNews.com shows that Americans are consistently pro-life on the issue of abortion. The issue is an in-depth look at the use of specific words in polls and how it affects the outcome, but the results show a strong pro-life leaning in nearly every poll.
The two poll results shown below are representative of many polls taken over the last decade. The number vary slightly at times but polls consistently show that Americans favor life. This begs the question of why our federal government under the Obama administration has given more money to abortion groups like Planned Parenthood than ever before? And why repeal policies like the Mexico City policy put in place by former president George W. Bush to prohibit the U.S. from sending money for abortion to foreign countries? And why demand, through the HHS mandate and ObamaCare that tax money be spent to pay for abortions?
This also begs the question of why our lawmakers in West Virginia have not made abortion in welfare illegal, allow state tax money to be used for abortions, and still have not enacted any common sense health and safety restrictions on the abortion industry in our state. Obviously our lawmakers, both state and federal are not listening to the people that elected them.
The Obama administration continues to trump its HHS mandate which forces all people and employers to provide and help pay for abortion inducing drugs and services. They might be the only ones however. Based on the 2013 court cases, the administration is getting walloped and the HHS mandate is suffering setbacks and defeats one right after the other. A recent report by Alliance Defending Freedom breaks it all down:
“2013 proved to be a bad year for the Obama administration’s abortion pill mandate, which finished the year with 88 percent of court decisions going against it (53-7). Alliance Defending Freedom and its allied attorneys are currently winning their cases by a wide margin, with court orders going 15-1 against the mandate. Courts issued a flurry of orders against the mandate even in the waning days of the year, including orders in Alliance Defending Freedom cases filed on behalf of non-profit Christian colleges and universities in California, Indiana, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania. The score in favor of non-profit religious entities is 18-1; the score in favor of families doing business is 35-6.”
It seems Americans and courts are not nearly as excited about the HHS mandate as the Obama administration is. At some point common sense would dictate that the mandate be scrapped and replaced with something more acceptable to a majority of Americans. If not, the Obama administration will continue to lose in courts and look foolish to the American public.
In your eagerness to celebrate New Year’s last week you might have missed some incredible news that made headlines across the nation. The news is so astonishing that it has liberal pundits and talking heads baffled and conservatives rejoicing for the decision handed down by Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor.
An AP article explains: