Barack Obama may have just lost the election. He has foolishly gone to war in an election year with tens of millions of Catholics,Protestants,and Jews – Democrat,Republican,and independent alike. He has thrown down a radical feminist gauntlet and dared the Church to pick it up. They’ve picked it up. From running up trillions in debt and deficit,to the vast expansion of the size and scope of federal bureaucracy,Mr. Obama has done more in three years to supplant our 236 year-old Constitutional Republic with a Euro-style socialist autocracy – than a lesser Marxist could have accomplished in a lifetime. But controlling the purse strings is not nearly enough. A central element of full-blown secular-socialism is the suppression of religious liberty – principally,freedom of conscience. Karl Marx once said:“The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.” When Karl Marx speaks,Barack Obama listens. In what is perhaps the most egregious executive overreach in our lifetime,the president’s Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary,Kathleen Sebelius,has unconstitutionally decreed that both Catholic and Protestant organizations must violate fundamental tenets of the Christian faith by providing ObamaCare coverage that includes birth control,sterilization and various forms of abortion. This is as blatant a violation of the First Amendment’s guarantee to religious “free exercise” as we’ve ever seen. Despite two pathetic feints at “compromise,” Obama’s illegal requirement that faith-based groups pay for policies providing immoral “reproductive services” remains in full force. On Friday,the Obama administration offered its latest non-compromise “compromise.” LifeSiteNews.com reports:“The White House announced today that,instead of forcing religious employers to pay for birth control,it will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women,no matter where they work.” America:this arrogant,narcissistic,amoral man thinks you’re stupid. Who do you think pays for the insurance policies that provide “free” birth control,sterilizations,and abortifacients to employees? Why,the very religious organizations doctrinally prohibited from paying for these “services” in the first place,of course. This is nothing but a South Side Chicago shell game,dressed up as a concession. Obama’s unprecedented attack on the First Amendment continues full steam ahead. In Dreams from My Father, Mr. Obama writes:“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout,I chose my friends carefully.” It should come as little surprise that,among those carefully selected friends,he gives his “Marxist professors and the structural feminists” top billing. In fact,as we approach the 2012 general election,it has become alarmingly clear the degree to which various secular “isims” have shaped the development of Obama’s ungodly worldview. From the moment he falsely claimed,“Whatever we once were,we are no longer a Christian nation,” many have screamed from the rooftops that,despite his incongruous claims to be a Christ follower,Barack Obama,in reality,harbors tremendous animus toward all things Christian. It’s not surprising,then,that – even prior to his latest act of anti-religious authoritarianism – a Pew Research Center survey had determined that,under Obama’s leadership,“the number of [religious] voters who identify as a Democrat has declined,while the number saying they lean toward the GOP has risen.” Some highlights: ·White evangelical Protestant support for the GOP has grown from 65 percent in 2008 to 70 percent today; ·80 percent of Mormons now say they identify with or lean toward the Republican Party; ·White mainline Protestants,who were evenly divided between the parties in 2008,now favor the GOP by a 12-point margin; ·White non-Hispanic Catholics,who gave Democrats an eight-point advantage in 2008 now give Republicans a seven-point advantage at the end of 2011 (a remarkable 15-point swing); ·Even Jewish voters – traditionally one of the strongest Democratic constituencies – have moved noticeably in the Republican direction;Jewish voters favored the Democrats by a 52-point margin in 2008 but now prefer the Democratic Party by a significantly smaller 36-point margin. It stands to reason that,in the wake of his most recent attack on religious freedom,Democrat’s favor with the faithful will only further erode. Catholics especially are having none of it. Bill Donohue,president of the non-partisan Catholic League lashed out last week:“Never before;unprecedented in American history for the federal government to line up against the Roman Catholic Church.” Ms. Sebelius first feigned compromise in the aftermath of the original announcement,haughtily granting some religious groups one year “to adapt to this new rule.” “In effect,the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,” responded Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan,archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. In the spirit of Martin Luther King Jr.,many Catholic priests across the nation have vowed civil disobedience. On January 29,they read a form letter to parishioners pledging that Catholics “cannot – we will not – comply with this unjust law.” Nor should they. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has introduced a bill called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2012 that would restore liberty of conscience to religious groups. Evangelical leaders are allying en masse with their kindred papist travelers. Mathew Staver,Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel,said “ObamaCare is a direct attack on the moral and religious beliefs of our nation. One year will not change religious tenets that have been in place for thousands of years. This administration has pressed its radical pro-abortion agenda on the American people and around the world … ObamaCare is an assault on our freedom.” Dr. Richard Land,president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics &Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC),has said “we will not comply” with this law. He has pledged to face jail time instead:“We want the law changed,or else we’re going to write our letters from the Nashville jail,just like Dr. King wrote his from the Birmingham jail.” This is the stuff of civil war. This is a battle Barack Obama and Democrats cannot win. He has two choices:He can either stubbornly stand firm and continue to give the GOP a tremendous election year bat with which to beat him about the head and neck;or he can cave and further cultivate the snowballing narrative that he is weak and impetuous. Either way,the president has suffered a self-inflicted wound so deep that it may not heal before November,especially since (as evidenced by his latest illusory “accommodation”) he can’t seem to stop picking at the scab. Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action (LCA on Facebook). Related posts: - Obama Hails ‘New Iraq,’ But Ignores Persecution Of Christians And Other Religious Minorities (CNSNews.com) –President Barack Obama,with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri…
- Brace Yourself For The Anti-Mormon Slime Machine If Mitt Romney manages to win the GOP nomination,then…
I’ve gotten some very interesting emails regarding President Obama’s mandate commanding Roman Catholics (and many evangelical Protestants) to violate their consciences by providing mandatory contraception,sterilization,and abortion-inducing pharmaceuticals. The emailers noted that Obama’s action will force Catholics to challenge the president in court,particularly given that bishops are saying they will not comply with the law. It could mean another constitutional showdown over “Obama-care,” one that could likewise end up in the Supreme Court. Imagine: “The Catholic Bishops v. Obama.” What a fitting capstone to the Obama presidency. And imagine that a majority of professing Roman Catholics elected this man in November 2008. If this issue goes to the high court,I wouldn’t bet my money on Obama,even with the two new “pro-choice,” pro-Roe liberals he added to the bench:Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. Even the most “progressive” Supreme Court justice cannot avoid that old freedom-of-religion thing in the First Amendment. All of that is remarkable enough. But I find it especially ironic given two other fascinating current news item relating to the Constitution: Last week,President Obama did an interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer. Obama expressed frustration at his inability to be the “transformational political figure” Americans elected. The “change agent” lamented that this was the fault of the American Founders—who Obama refers to as “men of property and wealth”—and their Constitution. Obama told Lauer: What’s frustrated people is that I have not been able to force Congress to implement every aspect of what I said in 2008. Well,it turns out our Founders designed a system that makes it more difficult to bring about change that I would like sometimes. But what I have been able to do is move in the right direction. And what I’m going to keep on doing is plot away,very persistent. Ah,that old Constitution again. Obama is quite correct. His primary obstacle is the Founders’ system of separation of powers and checks and balances. His problem is a Congress and Supreme Court that is empowered to say,“No,Mr. President,that isn’t constitutional. You can’t do that in America.” Well,Obama’s mandate to the Catholic Church could be the next such challenge,again impeding his self-perceived rise to transcendent political greatness. A Democrat-controlled Congress approved Obama-care,but the Supreme Court now must scrutinize its provisions. That’s the court’s duty. That brings me to the second news item: Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg gave an interview to Egyptian television. Ginsburg will likely be the next justice to step down. Once Obama replaces her with a much younger pro-Roejudge,this nation will have Roe v. Wade for another 39 years. In the interview,Ginsburg advised Middle East democrats on drafting a constitution. She did not,however,recommend the U.S. Constitution. Ginsburg stated: I can’t speak about what the Egyptian experience should be,because I’m operating under a rather old constitution. The United States,in comparison to Egypt,is a very new nation;and yet we have the oldest written constitution still in force in the world… I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights,and had an independent judiciary… It really is,I think,a great piece of work that was done. Much more recently than the U.S. Constitution,Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It dates from 1982. You would almost certainly look at the European Convention on Human Rights. Yes,why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world? Actually,why not take advantage of what’s in the U.S. Constitution? The paradox in Ginsburg’s statement is her dismissal of the U.S. Constitution because it’s “rather old;” in fact,“the oldest written constitution still in force in the world.” Well,why is it so old and still in force? Because it was done right. It is based on timeless values and virtues and universal rights that work;that are true. It has been amended less than 30 times in 220-some years. It is the most stable,successful,remarkable constitution in history,bringing together a vast array of peoples and assimilating them into history’s most prosperous,awe-inspiring nation—a nation that spent the 20th century winning freedom for other nations,so those nations could produce democracies and constitutions. The U.S. Constitution is the perfect model,at once both beautifully broad and specific. And among the things it got right are separation of powers and checks in balances. Ruth Bader Ginsburg and President Obama may be learning that again very soon—compliments of Obama-care and its constitutional assault on the consciences of religious believers. Related posts: - Catholic Bishops Fight Back Against Obama’s Contraception Mandate The Conference of Catholic Bishops has finally awakened and like…
- Catholic Bishops:Obama’s Solution “Is Unacceptable” The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement late on Friday…
Yesterday Germany’s most important daily newspaper,The Bild,called the “experts” opinion on CO2 lies and pure fear mongering. Coming from Europe,this a thunderous body blow to the global warming hoax and makes our Supreme Court look foolish for ruling that CO2 causes greenhouse gases. Using that ruling,the federal EPA unleashed an endless stream of assine regulations that are crippling our economy. The Bild joined a publishing house that print a new book which is a scathing attack on the legitimacy of climate science claims about CO2. It was written by a heretofore revered father of Germany’s green community who felt compelled to speak out because he was shocked, first to find what he described as hundreds of errors in a report on renewable energy, and next that the errors were ignored by the “science’s” governing body. This is very bad news for the Left. The debate it has long feared and never wanted is now unavoidable. Make note of this date February 9,2012 as the date the hoax started to crumble. British government takes ownership of English schoolgirls Under the same kind of totalitarian health care coverage Obama wants to shackle us with,the British National Health System (NHS) has begun implanting contraceptive devices into school girls as young as 13without their parents’ consent or knowledge. The British State believes it owns these little girls and it will not let anything like “parental rights” or “religious objections” get in the way of its plans to control their own lives and bodies. The NHS can’t even say how many girls have been implanted,but it has no intention of stopping the procedures. The NHS assures English parents their little girls are all safe because they had to fill out a health questionnaire before the invasive procedure was carried out,not in a medical facility but in an office in the student’s school. Since teenagers are noted for their careful concern for details this will make everything okay,the NHS presumably argues. An explanation from a NHS representative that was supposed to be reassuring is chilling in its “1984”-like tone. She said,“This is over and above national guidance and meeting all legal requirements.” She might as well have said,“Sit down comrade this is all legal so you have nothing to complain about. We’re the government and we only want to help you.” Related posts: - Media Loves Obama’s Kids,Ignores Real Stories By Howard Kurtz,Washington Post Here’s what we don’t know:Who…
- Documents Show Media Plotting To Kill Stories About Rev. Jeremiah Wright It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen….
Via Mediaite,the key bit comes at 5:15 but don’t skip. Watch the whole thing,as this is easily the most entertaining speech you’ll see at CPAC. Naturally he’s coy about what he’s got,but it sounds like it has to do with O as a student radical. I wonder if big media,having heard this,will scramble to try to uncover the footage and put it out ASAP so that it’s old news by the time of the general election. Can’t wait to hear their explanations for why they couldn’t be bothered to do that last cycle. Note well what he says at 10:30 about Bernadine Dohrn’s take on the anti-war movement. It’s a comfort to know that some of its leaders are now willing to admit what a fraud it was. View video at Hot Air. Posted by Allahpundit. Related posts: - Uncovered:Obama’s Mystery College Years WASHINGTON,D.C. – A recently released book uncovers untold aspects…
- Disturbed By Beck,O’Reilly And Breitbart By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown,Western Journalism On the…
Announcing his support for Commissar Sebelius’s edicts on contraception,sterilization,and pharmacological abortion,that noted theologian the Most Reverend Al Sharpton explained:“If we are going to have a separation of church and state,we’re going to have a separation of church and state.” Thanks for clarifying that. The church model the young American state wished to separate from was that of the British monarch,who remains to this day supreme governor of the Church of England. This convenient arrangement dates from the 1534 Act of Supremacy. The title of the law gives you the general upshot,but,just in case you’re a bit slow on the uptake,the text proclaims “the King’s Majesty justly and rightfully is and ought to be the supreme head of the Church of England.” That’s to say,the sovereign is “the only supreme head on earth of the Church” and he shall enjoy “all honors,dignities,pre-eminences,jurisdictions,privileges,authorities,immunities,profits,and commodities to the said dignity,” not to mention His Majesty “shall have full power and authority from time to time to visit,repress,redress,record,order,correct,restrain,and amend all such errors,heresies,abuses,offenses,contempts,and enormities,whatsoever they be.” Welcome to Obamacare. The president of the United States has decided to go Henry VIII on the Church’s medieval ass. Whatever religious institutions might profess to believe in the matter of “women’s health,” their pre-eminences,jurisdictions,privileges,authorities,and immunities are now subordinate to a one-and-only supreme head on earth determined to repress,redress,restrain,and amend their heresies. One wouldn’t wish to overextend the analogy:For one thing,the Catholic Church in America has been pathetically accommodating of Beltway bigwigs’ ravenous appetite for marital annulments in a way that Pope Clement VII was disinclined to be vis-à-vis the English king and Catherine of Aragon. But where’d all the pandering get them? In essence President Obama has embarked on the same usurpation of church authority as Henry VIII:As his Friday morning faux-compromise confirms,the continued existence of a “faith-based institution” depends on submission to the doctrinal supremacy of the state. Read more at the National Review Related posts: - Obama’s Gay ‘religious’Advisor Attacks The Pope And The Catholic Church Using Condoms Democrats like to say “A fish rots from the head…
- The Fraud In The Straw Hat’s War On The Catholic Church by Kevin “Coach” Collins For discerning Roman Catholics,watching their…
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement late on Friday declaring that the small alteration President Barack Obama had announced earlier in the day to a regulation that would force all health-care plans in the United States to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives–including those that cause abortion–is ‘unacceptable”because,among other things,it does not protect the freedom-of-conscience rights of secular for-profit employers,or secular non-profit employers,or religious insurers,or self-insured religious employers,or individual Americans. The alteration President Obama described Friday says merely that insurance companies providing coverage to employees of religious institutions that object to sterilization,contraception or abortifacients will have to provide free coverage for these things to the employees rather than explicitly include them among the benefits covered by the premiums charged to the religious employer. The regulation will still require individual Americans and private-sector employers to buy,and insurers to provide,insurance coverage that pays for sterilizations,contraception and abortifacients–even if doing so violates their religious beliefs. Read more at CNSNews.com. By Terence P. Jeffrey. Related posts: - Catholic Bishops Call ObamaCare Mandate “Unprecedented Threat” To “Religious Freedom” In implementing the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act…
- Catholic Bishops Fight Back Against Obama’s Contraception Mandate The Conference of Catholic Bishops has finally awakened and like…
Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis spent most of last year on his second tour of Afghanistan;he was assigned to the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force. While carrying out his duties the Colonel talked to the troops about their situation in the region. He talked to everyone in any position as well as allies and Afghan security forces. He traveled over 9,000 miles and personally patrolled with ground troops in several provinces. Give credit to Co. Davis he saw the real situation up close and in person. His unclassified report to The Armed Forces Journal exposed that the situation on the ground is the total opposite what has been reported to the American Public. Revelations Col. Davis revealed that the situation in Afghanistan was not improving and that the security forces were nowhere near ready to fight against the Taliban. They lacked the will and courage to take the fight to the terrorists. The areas of the country that are not under the direct control of the Americans and theInternational Security Assistance Forces were the territory of the Insurgents and Davis felt they would remain so. The local Afghan government is inept and the Afghan military have no desire to confront the Taliban Insurgents and in some cases actually collude with the terrorists. Americans in country have little trust,confidence and respect for Afghanis because they lack the resolve to take on the Insurgents that will kill them and their families once the Americans leave. Conclusion The Col asks “How many more men must die in support of a mission that is not succeeding and behind an array of more than seven years of optimistic statements by U.S. senior leaders in Afghanistan? No one expects our leaders to always have a successful plan. But we do expect — and the men who do the living,fighting and dying deserve — to have our leaders tell us the truth about what’s going on”. The current leadership either has no idea of what is going on,or just plain lying about the situation in Afghanistan. Until Americans get the whole truth our troops those of our allies are fighting and dying to free a country that doesn’t have the will and courage to fight for itself. The Afganis would rather live as slaves of the Taliban than fight for their own freedom. Lt. Colonel Davis is keenly aware that going public with his findings may very well impact his military career. The only thing redacted form his unclassified report is criticism of civilian leadership of Afghanistan and Washington D.C. Only military leaders are to be blamed,it seems,for policy failures under statist regimes. Related posts: - Truth,Lies And Afghanistan I spent last year in Afghanistan,visiting and talking with…
- Obama Aides See Need For More Troops In Afghanistan Reuters Obama is ready to send more troops to Afghanistan…
Update at 8:30 PST:we just received the names of the four journalists that were fired:
Moshe Cohen,editor,fired on january 30,10 years with CNN.
Izi Landberg,Producer,about 25 years with CNN,fired on January 30.
Avi Kaner cameraman fired on january 30,10 years with CNN.
Michal Zippori desk producer,situation still unclear. The media scandal that you are about to read was revealed to us by a totally reliable source. It is likely to provoke a wave of shock and indignation within the North American media industry,and it certainly will not calm down the controversy over the pro-palestinian CNN treatment of the conflict. We learned today that the Israeli branch of CNN, located in Jerusalem,is downsizing to cope with reduced income from less advertising. What goes beyond good management is that CNN has fired four Israeli Jewish journalists (out of a crew of 8),and has retained only Arab journalists. Where,until now,CNN always sent a Jewish and an Arab journalist to cover information,now there will be only an Arab journalist. The local chief editor of the News Chanel is now Arabic. This is a conflict where information is central to public opinion,and it weighs a lot on diplomatic decisions. Furthermore,it is no secret that Arab journalists cannot freely publish what they want without risking for their own lives when traveling to Gaza,East Jerusalem,and Judea Samaria. Thus,CNN decision to fire all Jewish journalists from its Jerusalem office is of particular concern,because the general public is unaware that they will be receiving biased information from CNN. © Jean-Patrick Grumberg for www.Dreuz.info Related posts: - Obama Libels Israel,MSM Continues To Lie,Snooze U.S.-Israeli relations have hit a 35-year low over the contentious…
- Obama’s Call For Israel To Self-destruct President Obama demands that Israel withdraw to armistice lines that…
Interpol has been accused of abusing its powers after Saudi Arabia used the organisation’s red notice system to get a journalist arrested inMalaysia for insulting the Prophet Muhammad. Police in Kuala Lumpur said Hamza Kashgari,23,was detained at the airport “following a request made to us by Interpol”the international police cooperation agency,on behalf of the Saudi authorities. Kashgari,a newspaper columnist,fled Saudi Arabia after posting a tweet on the prophet’s birthday that sparked more than 30,000 responses and several death threats. The posting,which was later deleted,read:“I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don’t understand about you … I will not pray for you.” Read more at The Guardian. By Owen Bowcott. Related posts: - 5 Occupy Protesters Arrested At Paul Campaign HQ Police have arrested five Occupy protesters outside the Iowa campaign…
- Republican’s Tweet Revenge Compared with Barack Obama’s campaign romance with social networking technologies…
Though Georgia Administrative Judge Michael Malihi claimed to have issued a decision based upon “the law as well as the evidence,” we now know he made proper use of neither. For the Judge had no evidence in the Court record upon which to base his assertion of “fact” that Obama “was born in the United States.” And the Indiana Appeals Court decision to which Judge Malihi looked for his ONLY guidance made a thoroughly incorrect interpretation of existing case law. In short,Judge Malihi’s decision wouldn’t pass muster in a first year law school classroom. “The court can only rest its finding of fact on evidence that is part of the court record.” This is a rule of evidence of the superior court as stated by Attorney Mario Apuzzo. Yet only plaintiff’s evidence was contained in Malihi’s Court record and the Judge concluded that their claims were “not persuasive.” As Apuzzo puts it,“surely the court did not use those “insufficient” documents as evidence of Obama’s place of birth.” So how exactly was Judge Malihi permitted,in a proper legal manner,to state in his decision “the following facts are considered:1) Mr. Obama was born in the United States…”? But just as disturbing as basing “fact” on evidence he didn’t have is the Judge’s choice of an incorrectly reasoned and decided Indiana case as the basis of his decision. As in the case before Malihi,the 2009 Indiana case “Ankeny v Governor” involved a suit by plaintiffs who claimed Obama did not meet the Article ll,“natural born citizen” requirement of the United States Constitution. Although there is no definition of “natural born citizen” in the Constitution,there is a Supreme Court case in which the term “natural born citizen” is clearly defined. Writing for the unanimous majority in the 1875 SC case Minor v Happersett,Chief Justice Waite stated: At common-law,with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar,it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves,upon their birth,citizens also. These were natives,or natural-born citizens,as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Minor goes on to state: Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts,but never as to the first. So Minor made it clear that “natural born citizens” are born in the United States to parents who are US citizens. And those born in the US to parents who may not be citizens,may or may not be citizens themselves. Note there is NO question of “natural born” status in this second example,but merely citizenship. However,the Ankeny Court decided that Minor did not really define “whether a person who is born within the United States of alien parents is considered a natural born citizen,” claiming that the SC “left the issue open.” The Indiana Court then went on to conflate Article ll of the Constitution with the 14th Amendment which states:“All persons born or naturalized in the United States,and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,are citizens of the United States…” “The United States Supreme Court has read these two provisions in tandem…” states the Ankeny Court with a total lack of evidence for its claim. It then makes the INCREDIBLE leap that although the language contained in Article ll and the 14th Amendment is completely different and although the 14th Amendment doesn’t speak of “natural born” citizens at all, the Supreme Court has somehow decided that anyone born in the United States is a “natural born citizen.” It is this nonsensical bit of legal legerdemain upon which Judge Malihi relies in deciding Barack Obama is qualified to be on the Georgia ballot,writing “as discussed in Arkeny,[sic] he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen.” But these represent only a couple of the remarkable errors made by Judge Malihi in his Obama Decision. Coach is Right will present others over the next few days,along with the progress of appeals this decision is guaranteed to evoke. Related posts: - Georgia’s Obama Eligibility Decision:Legally Incorrect And Ethically Indefensible On February 3rd a much anticipated decision was issued by Georgia…
- Judge Malihi Rules Obama Eligible To Be On Georgia Ballot An administrative law judge in Georgia today ruled that Barack…
| |
Obama’s Anti-Religious Implosion
Barack Obama may have just lost the election. He has foolishly gone to war in an election year with tens of millions of Catholics,Protestants,and Jews – Democrat,Republican,and independent alike. He has thrown down a radical feminist gauntlet and dared the Church to pick it up.
They’ve picked it up.
From running up trillions in debt and deficit,to the vast expansion of the size and scope of federal bureaucracy,Mr. Obama has done more in three years to supplant our 236 year-old Constitutional Republic with a Euro-style socialist autocracy – than a lesser Marxist could have accomplished in a lifetime.
But controlling the purse strings is not nearly enough. A central element of full-blown secular-socialism is the suppression of religious liberty – principally,freedom of conscience.
Karl Marx once said:“The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.”
When Karl Marx speaks,Barack Obama listens.
In what is perhaps the most egregious executive overreach in our lifetime,the president’s Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary,Kathleen Sebelius,has unconstitutionally decreed that both Catholic and Protestant organizations must violate fundamental tenets of the Christian faith by providing ObamaCare coverage that includes birth control,sterilization and various forms of abortion. This is as blatant a violation of the First Amendment’s guarantee to religious “free exercise” as we’ve ever seen.
Despite two pathetic feints at “compromise,” Obama’s illegal requirement that faith-based groups pay for policies providing immoral “reproductive services” remains in full force.
On Friday,the Obama administration offered its latest non-compromise “compromise.” LifeSiteNews.com reports:“The White House announced today that,instead of forcing religious employers to pay for birth control,it will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women,no matter where they work.”
America:this arrogant,narcissistic,amoral man thinks you’re stupid. Who do you think pays for the insurance policies that provide “free” birth control,sterilizations,and abortifacients to employees? Why,the very religious organizations doctrinally prohibited from paying for these “services” in the first place,of course.
This is nothing but a South Side Chicago shell game,dressed up as a concession. Obama’s unprecedented attack on the First Amendment continues full steam ahead.
In Dreams from My Father, Mr. Obama writes:“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout,I chose my friends carefully.” It should come as little surprise that,among those carefully selected friends,he gives his “Marxist professors and the structural feminists” top billing. In fact,as we approach the 2012 general election,it has become alarmingly clear the degree to which various secular “isims” have shaped the development of Obama’s ungodly worldview.
From the moment he falsely claimed,“Whatever we once were,we are no longer a Christian nation,” many have screamed from the rooftops that,despite his incongruous claims to be a Christ follower,Barack Obama,in reality,harbors tremendous animus toward all things Christian.
It’s not surprising,then,that – even prior to his latest act of anti-religious authoritarianism – a Pew Research Center survey had determined that,under Obama’s leadership,“the number of [religious] voters who identify as a Democrat has declined,while the number saying they lean toward the GOP has risen.”
Some highlights:
·White evangelical Protestant support for the GOP has grown from 65 percent in 2008 to 70 percent today;
·80 percent of Mormons now say they identify with or lean toward the Republican Party;
·White mainline Protestants,who were evenly divided between the parties in 2008,now favor the GOP by a 12-point margin;
·White non-Hispanic Catholics,who gave Democrats an eight-point advantage in 2008 now give Republicans a seven-point advantage at the end of 2011 (a remarkable 15-point swing);
·Even Jewish voters – traditionally one of the strongest Democratic constituencies – have moved noticeably in the Republican direction;Jewish voters favored the Democrats by a 52-point margin in 2008 but now prefer the Democratic Party by a significantly smaller 36-point margin.
It stands to reason that,in the wake of his most recent attack on religious freedom,Democrat’s favor with the faithful will only further erode.
Catholics especially are having none of it. Bill Donohue,president of the non-partisan Catholic League lashed out last week:“Never before;unprecedented in American history for the federal government to line up against the Roman Catholic Church.”
Ms. Sebelius first feigned compromise in the aftermath of the original announcement,haughtily granting some religious groups one year “to adapt to this new rule.”
“In effect,the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,” responded Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan,archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
In the spirit of Martin Luther King Jr.,many Catholic priests across the nation have vowed civil disobedience. On January 29,they read a form letter to parishioners pledging that Catholics “cannot – we will not – comply with this unjust law.”
Nor should they.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has introduced a bill called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2012 that would restore liberty of conscience to religious groups. Evangelical leaders are allying en masse with their kindred papist travelers.
Mathew Staver,Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel,said “ObamaCare is a direct attack on the moral and religious beliefs of our nation. One year will not change religious tenets that have been in place for thousands of years. This administration has pressed its radical pro-abortion agenda on the American people and around the world … ObamaCare is an assault on our freedom.”
Dr. Richard Land,president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics &Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC),has said “we will not comply” with this law. He has pledged to face jail time instead:“We want the law changed,or else we’re going to write our letters from the Nashville jail,just like Dr. King wrote his from the Birmingham jail.”
This is the stuff of civil war. This is a battle Barack Obama and Democrats cannot win. He has two choices:He can either stubbornly stand firm and continue to give the GOP a tremendous election year bat with which to beat him about the head and neck;or he can cave and further cultivate the snowballing narrative that he is weak and impetuous.
Either way,the president has suffered a self-inflicted wound so deep that it may not heal before November,especially since (as evidenced by his latest illusory “accommodation”) he can’t seem to stop picking at the scab.
Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action (LCA on Facebook).
Related posts: