Posts Tagged ‘ supreme court

ALERT: Hobby Lobby Supreme Court Ruling NOT About Contraception

The New York Times and many others are contributing to the false notion that the recent Supreme Court decision, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc allows businesses to ban birthheadscratcher control. In the spirit of truth, the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby is about abortion-causing drugs and devices NOT contraception. To quote page two of the court’s official opinion, “The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions, and if they do not comply they will pay a very heavy price . . . If these consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see what would.” You can read the high court’s opinion in full here.

Hobby Lobby did not say that providing no cost contraception to employees was against their religious convictions. They said providing abortion-causing drugs and devices violate them. Of the 20 FDA approved contraceptives they have no problem with 16 of them because they have not been proven to end the life of a child. It is important to note that the court recognized along with Health and Human Services that the four ‘contraceptives’ in question in fact can and do end the life of an embryo. The court states on page 32, “They [the business owners] therefore object on religious grounds to providing health insurance that covers methods of birth control that, as HHS acknowledges may result in the destruction of an embryo.” Since the owners of Hobby Lobby have a deeply held religious conviction that all human life is valuable and begins at conception they only had a problem with those drugs (e.g. Plan B, Ella) and devices (e.g. IUDs) that end a newly ‘conceived’ life.

Again, this case is not about businesses blocking birth control it is about ham handed bureaucracy forcing companies to violate their deeply held convictions just so a government can implement a political abortion agenda. For expert interpretations see responses by Princeton Law professor Robert George and the Director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom at the Christian Legal Society, Kim Colby.

A Brief Pause Before Uncorking the Champagne
For all the hoopla out there on the pro-life side touting this decision as a great victory we should be cautious. It should be noted that this decision is monumental if not only for the fact that this is the first time in the history of the abortion problem that it has been directly connected to individual religious liberty. That is, the moral cost of access to health insurance is to pay for everybody’s abortion. To that point there are several sobering factors to consider in this decision before we celebrate the ‘victory.’

  1. The first point to consider before champagne is the 5-4 decision. This was an issue of freedom of religion my friends. The question as to whether or not a person, acting as an We the peopleindividual or as a corporation, can live out their religious beliefs in the public square was narrowly upheld. That is to say it was refuted by four Supreme Court Justices! Remind me again why this country was founded? So let’s say one of the five majority justices retires and is replaced by a justice who sides with the minority…at that moment when one’s religion becomes a public matter at odds with official government policy it comes with criminal penalties (er…taxes).
  2. A second point that we ought to consider to temper our enthusiasm is the sad fact that holding as true a fact confirmed by empirical science could be considered a religious belief if it does not support the secular government position. ‘Human life begins at conception’ is now considered a religious belief simply because it aligns with the Christian worldview, embryology and human genetics notwithstanding. It would be understandable for the court to site as religious the belief that all humans are made in the image of God and therefore ought to enjoy protection under the law at every stage of development from conception to nature death, hence abortion is bad But that was not the point of religious belief the court considered. It happens to be terribly inconvenient to the abortion agenda that science sides with the pro-lifers on this point. And the court, complicit with that agenda per Roe vs Wade, already ruled that a pre-born child is not a person deserving of protection under the law. So now they are stuck with the Solomon-like act of slicing the baby called science between two would be religions, theirs called secularism or Christianity. So does this mean that embryologists who recognize the new organism with human DNA created at fertilization are religious zealots?
  3. The third point is that the abortion industry has gotten not only the government (including Health and Human Services [HHS] and the Supreme Court), but the media, and 1237682_untitledeven many pro-life advocates to call certain types of abortion ‘contraception.’ The word ‘contraception’ is intended to define the use of methods that block conception which apparently in all other species but human takes place at fertilization. The abortion industry prefers to talk about when ‘pregnancy begins’ (they say it is at the time the embryo implants in the uterine wall) while the pro-life population prefers to talk about when the life of a separate and distinct human being starts (fertilization of the egg by the sperm). If contraception is supposed to mean the prevention of pregnancy and a pregnancy is not said to begin until the newly formed life is firmly implanted in the uterine lining (an arbitrary and convenience definition by the way) then drugs and devices that make it impossible for the embryo to implant are benignly called ‘contraceptives.’ If on the other hand life begins at fertilization, as embryology tells us, then that’s when pregnancy begins and those same drugs cannot be considered anything but abortifacients.
  4. A fourth cooling effect the decision should have on us is that it represents a ruling on a detail of an unethical, wrongheaded law (PPACA, aka Obamacare). This amounts to a sub-ruling serving only to further cement what ought to otherwise be repealed. Obamacare represents the takeover of the profession of medicine inserting itself in the place of the patient in the doctor/patient relationship. Now the government decides what ‘good health’ is for you, a member of a population that they manage, rather than you and your doctor. So, since the government has identified a population block called ‘women of child bearing age’ they have mandated that abortion-causing, carcinogenic drugs are good for all women. Individual health care no longer matters despite the rhetoric. It’s the population objective that counts as determined by non-elected rule-makers at the HHS. The same ones who wrote the contraceptive mandates at issue here. Simply Orwellian.

It Gets Worse: What Gosnell Has in Common with Cuomo, Obama, and the Supreme Court

Recently the Orwellian mask of the abortion industry has come off. In some ways it was their choice.

Planned Parenthood stopped using euphemistic ‘choice’ rhetoric knowing full well that the circumstances that drive women to get abortion represent the coercive polar opposite. Perhaps now they think they don’t need the language to accomplish their willfully gruesome agenda anymore. Additionally, spring revealed the fruit of the draconian abortion logic when in a Florida legislative hearing Planned Parenthood lobbyist all but said the killing of a baby born alive should be left up to the woman and her doctor. But in 2008 then Illinois Senator Barak Obama intimated the same thing as he rejected legislation providing full medical care to a baby should he or she be born alive during an abortion.

GosnellYet in some ways the removal of the abortion agenda’s mask was unintentional as Planned Parenthood has been caught time and again in cases of insurance fraud, unsafe conditions, and botched abortions. The Delaware Planned Parenthood currently under investigation is over seen by medical director Eric Schaff who researched the chemical abortion RU-486 for years at the University of Rochester in Cuomo’s New York State. Schaff was quietly asked to leave his position in Rochester for what one inside source at the hospital claimed were human subjects testing violations (We are loath to imagine what that could mean after seeing jars of baby feet in Philadelphia). But no investigation by health departments, politicians, medical peers, media . . . nothing. Silence. Oh, and then there’s Kermit Gosnell  whose house of horrors is located just 3.4 miles away from Schaff’s most recent Philadelphia office which the mainstream media was shamed into covering by outraged citizens taking over Twitter and Facebook on Friday April 12th. According to testimony, Gosnell recklessly harmed women sometimes killing them as well as routinely beheading live late term babies.

Why isn’t Barack Obama launching an investigation into the abortion business? Why didn’t Andrew Cuomo pass a message of emergency bill restricting the abuses of abortionists in NY as quickly as he whipped out gun restrictions after the Connecticut school shooting knowing Schaff was trained in practicing abortion in New York City and Rochester, NY, respectively? Or at the very least why hasn’t he publicly denounced his abortion expansion bill which literally paves the way for more fraud, abuse, and murder under his brazen newspeak banner, ‘Women’s Equality Act’? His anti-corruption crusade rings more hypocritical by the minute. Remind me again how removing the doctor from a woman’s medical care improves women’s healthcare, especially with doctors like Gosnell and Schaff routinely brutalizing them? You can read Cuomo’s abortion expansion bill here.

The chilling reason why Planned Parenthood evades, Obama ‘can’t comment,’ Cuomo keeps quiet,  Gosnell (God help us) ‘snipped,’ and the media was reluctant to cover the story is Personhoodbecause all five of them and their representative constituents are complicit with the U.S. Supreme Court in their belief that personhood can be qualified. The biological difference between fertilization and death at old age is simply a matter of time, not a matter of humanity. What the Supreme Court did in 1973 with Roe was arbitrarily move the line of when a human is deemed a person deserving protection of their God-given right to life. Is it possible that a group of nine culturally, and perhaps agenda-driven, Justices could be wrong? They’ve been wrong in the past. We need look no further than the Supreme Court’s denial of rights in 1823 to Native Americans, in 1857 to African Americans, and in 1927 to the ‘mentally unfit.’ The Supreme Court actually has a history of getting personhood wrong.

Perhaps the framers were not silent on the definition of personhood. Perhaps it is as obvious as the words on this page—God, our creator, has endowed each of us with life. He alone is the giver of life and if you have to ask the question of whether or not some ONE is a person you’ve missed that founding principle altogether: man did not create himself. And if the Justices are so morally out-to-lunch that they entertain such questions then the great American experiment stands on the razor’s edge rather than soaring the sunny heights of liberty. The very deed of deciding the personhood status of any category of human presumes that the decider has authority to dictate and deny the personhood of any category of human.  Once someone or small group of people do so they assume the mantle of the master of all humanity implicitly hollowing out the revolutionary context of America’s birth.

Many morally responsible citizens like me are outraged by the Supreme Court, the mainstream media, Gosnell, Obama, and Cuomo for their utter disregard of the personhood of pre-born boys and girls and the corollary: utter disrespect of all of humanity. In the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr., “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Gosnell is not just a run of the mill murderer. He represents the decidedly anti-American view of personhood held by Obama, Cuomo and the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision.  The American revolutionary principle that all are created equal whatever your stage or station in the human experience must be core to the notion of personhood, lest all classes of human are at risk of dehumanization by legislative or judicial fiat. The very thought that anyone has the power to determine who qualifies as a person and who doesn’t is anti-American and reflects a blind hubris reminiscent of the empirical despotism against which the American revolutionaries so fiercely fought. If personhood is defined by other persons then freedom is an illusion for all but the ruling elite and the pre-born are just the tip of that age-old iceberg, democide. Either all of us are persons equally or all but the definers of personhood are slaves.

“The word ‘person’ does not apply to the unborn.” U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harold Blackmun, majority opinion author, Roe v Wade.

To whom does the word ‘person’ apply?

Legislation Jeopardizes CompassCare’s Services

Let’s review. In 1970 New York became the first State in the Union to legalize abortion-on-demand without even considering whether or not the child is a person. In 1973 the Supreme Court stated that a child in the womb is not a person, completely dehumanizing pre-born children, despite thousands of years of human experience to the contrary. In so doing they ignored the weight of science demonstrating the personhood of the baby beginning at conception. What caused the U.S. Supreme Court, some of the most respected legal minds in the world, to blatantly ignore huge chunks of moral, biological, and medical truth, and then recklessly proceed to devastate a population with its ruling?

Curiously, during a 2009 interview with New York Times Magazine, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg discussed her understanding of the Roe v. Wade decision: “Frankly I Ruth Bader Ginsburghad thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” Stop right there . . . did Ginsburg say what I think she said? Shouldn’t she find it disconcerting that one group of people in America could use their power and resources to target certain population types for reduction and get away with it? That violates the very concepts of dignity and self-determination assumed in the whole ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’ business the Supreme Court claims to safe-guard. Where is her outrage?

Fast forward nine short months to March 2010. Obamacare was birthed, forcing all Americans, including religious non-profits, to purchase healthcare insurance which pays for abortion-causing drugs against their deeply held religious beliefs. Forcing all citizens to underwrite an abortion agenda via socialized medicine appears like another flagrant population control policy. This is especially highlighted when one considers the fact that for the first time in American history the Supreme courts says it’s O.K. for State policy to trump individual religious liberty. We must not forget that the Bill of Rights is about the notion that the rights of the individual are at least equal to if not greater than the rights of the State lest the population be owned rather than represented.

Now back to New York in 2013, rumored to have 2016 Presidential aspirations, Governor Andrew Cuomo committed to make abortion and contraception fundamental human rights through the Reproductive Health Act, contrary to the sentiment of NYS voters. This would make abortion untouchable by reasonable regulation like parental notification and consent, and waiting periods. The proposed law would even allow non-doctors to perform abortions. Additionally those who refuse to refer for abortion, like CompassCare, could face costly discrimination lawsuits for violating ‘a fundamental human right.’ Why? It can’t really be about women’s access to reproductive health care when 1/3 of all pregnancies in New York State already end in abortion. New York is the abortion capital of the U.S. with over 111,000 abortions annually.

God says in Isaiah 10:1-2, “Woe to those who enact evil statutes and those who constantly record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice and to rob the poor of my people of their rights, so that widows may be their spoil and that they may plunder the orphans.”

Who more than pre-born boys and girls are being actively deprived of their rights through evil statutes? Who is more widowed than young women abandoned by society whose only solution for unplanned pregnancy is destruction?

If there was ever a time to step it up, to demonstrate your passion for the personhood of mothers and their children, it is now. Walk with me this year at CompassCare’s annual Walk for Life on Saturday, May 4th as we show Rochester that true choice respects the dignity of all women and the personhood of all pre-born boys and girls. True freedom occurs not within a cold and lonely abortion clinic but in a civilization that empowers women with the ability to make the hardest choice of all and have the baby.

Register online here.

Supreme Court’s Health Care Decision Will Change the Way You Live

Many are asking how the Supreme Court decision announced yesterday June 28th, 2012 upholding the constitutionality of the health care reform act impacts Christians, churches, and pro-life organizations like pregnancy centers. A new religious fanaticism has been born and it is American State government. The following is a list demonstrating how the Affordable Care Act or “Obamacare” is not about healthcare reform but a change in the fundamental philosophy of American government.

-Obamacare compels all Americans to purchase health care

-Obamacare forces all health care plans to pay for sterilization, contraception, and abortion

-Obamacare permits only limited opt out parameters for religious institutions

-Obamacare defines what qualifies as a religious institution

-Obamacare presumes to determine applicable religious belief for individuals which makes the State the final religious and civil authority.

-Obamacare, now ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court, signals a fundamental shift in the philosophy of American Government from that of ‘government by the consent of the governed’ to ‘State over the individual.’

G.K. Chesterton said, “Government has become ungovernable; that is, it cannot leave off governing. Law has become lawless; that is it cannot see where laws should stop. The chief feature of our time is the meekness of the mob and the madness of government.”

However, this letter is not primarily about abortion or contraception or even Obamacare. This is about the future of modern western civilization. What we choose to do here in our time will determine whether a free democratic nation will revive or diminish into a democratic despotism.

Religion is the term used to define ultimate authority. Traditionally religion is the term we use to define those fundamental ideas that provide people with ultimate purpose. Those ideas force the human soul out of its habits of pleasure seeking to think of a higher purpose external to himself, aspiring to a Higher Being whose nature and laws apply to all mankind–equally. These notions of God and how then one should act in light of Him create a context for self-discipline, voluntary self-denial and even sacrifice for a greater good not owing to an all-powerful human being, or set of human beings called a legislature, not even owing to an all-powerful notion of “the majority.”

What has happened in America is that the traditional concept of spiritual religion has been tacitly rejected by government, education, and medicine and replaced with a material one, a religion of the State. This new religion has priests they call scientists and a prophet they call the ‘will of the people.’ The false notion of the separation of the sacred Church and secular State can only serve to create an official Church of State.  This process of creating a religion out of a scientific materialism is buoyed by modern democracy’s singular devotion to that final radical equality of every man’s morality. For when all men are their own moral authority, virtue dies and everyone simply does what is ‘right in his own eyes.’ An exponential increase in lawlessness then occurs to which government responds with more laws and ever tightening control; all to the hearty applause of an apathetic, comfort seeking people who in the end experience an orderly and peaceful brand of slavery.

Only a common and higher belief regarding the nature and purpose of mankind made in the very image of God can afford us a set of moral imperatives driving the virtuous behavior and actions of men and society. It is only that commonly held religious belief in God that creates those necessary and invisible protections afforded every person, for which all men are responsible to secure for each other; life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Centralized government is not only ill-equipped to secure those things but finds its survival requires their severe limitation.

What Obamacare represents is a centralized government attempting to secure for itself power and ownership over all peoples. Obamacare represents a usurpation of the role of God under the guise of a father-like benefactor for all the State’s children. Obamacare and the Health and Human Service (HHS) mandates that come along with it represent the last act of a sovereign people yielding to administrative despotism.

Stunningly, the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional signaling the willingness of the judiciary to approve of this fundamental shift in the philosophy of American government. Be warned. Even if Obamacare is overturned legislatively we have only a little more time. Lest you be tempted to think the issue is partisan let me assure you the Republicans have not a better plan only a slower one on the road to an American servile State controlled by either rich conservatives or  insane progressives.

What is needed is a return to the Christianity of our forefathers lest we mirror the tactics of Mao Tse Tung. What is required is a reawakening of the old religion of our great, great, grandparents lest we cease our struggle with Stalinism. What is absolutely essential is a revival of faith born at the foot of the cross of Jesus Christ the emancipator; a renewal of life informed by the Word of truth who alone can set us free from the sin which so easily entangles us. Set free to pursue our true destinies.

Without this reorientation to a vigorous theology our anthropology can be nothing higher than a pleasure seeking, pain reducing, animalistic utility. Without this return to true religion healers become killers, legislators become tyrants, educators become purveyors of sexual perversions, churches become cults of personality, women become men, men become predators, marriage is redefined, whole classes of people are dehumanized, and children become agents of parental self-actualization. Meanwhile the whole nation is kept in perpetual childhood by an omnipotent and omnipresent State, preventing the birth of the future, hindering, restraining, and stultifying all industry, all innovation. And family, where the core values of religious belief are nourished in order to secure a free and stable society, is sacrificed on the altar of the secular State.

So let us be clear, true religion securing true freedom requires the following basic beliefs:

1. All of humanity has fallen into the darkness of sin

2. Without Divine intervention we tend only toward greater inhumanity

3. Jesus Christ is that divine intervention, becoming sin on our behalf and then nailed it to the cross thereby satisfying the wrath of God’s judgment

4. Jesus rose from the dead having defeated sin and death, opening the door of eternal life to those of faith

5. Those who acknowledge their sin and turn from their wickedness, making Christ their King, can become the very righteousness of God and live truly free, freely protecting others from every sort of tyranny

Only one who has been released from the chains of sin is truly free. It is only the believer in Jesus Christ who experiences this freedom and therefore uniquely understands what freedom and free society is. This understanding comes first through faith in God and not government, while he who is faithless is fated to government’s chains. Believers alone are the ones who will always seek to secure the protection and dignity of all people from conception to natural death especially the most vulnerable of society. For it is the true Christian who uniquely understands moral bankruptcy, vulnerability, voicelessness, powerlessness, and the weakness to which many classes of humans are subjected under this gentle barbarism called the Affordable Care Act. For a true Christian recognized his lack of standing and rights as a sinner before a just and holy God. This God also is the One who sent His Son pouring out his riches and rights on our behalf thereby empowering us to do the same for others. Only the Christian and Christian society can make the weak strong and the poor rich by democratizing the royalty of Deity to the soul of any man who would accept it.

Let us recall Chesterton’s words, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.” So be courageous, Christian, destroying the young tyrannies, giving up our lives that we might find them, taking up our cross, dying to ourselves and defying this despotism through faith in the one true God. As Jesus says in Mark 8:35 “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it.”