The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
On Friday afternoon, the Obama administration released an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to announce it was proceeding as planned with its new federal mandate that abortion pills, sterilization procedures, and contraception must be provided without co-pays under virtually all health care plans.
The mandate will force almost all employer-provided health care plans, including those purchased by employers and employees who object on moral or religious grounds to paying for these services, to pay for abortifacients, contraception, and sterilizations by August 2012.
The mandate will force religious institutions--such as charities, universities, and hospitals--to provide these services by August 2013. As Cardinal Timothy Dolan said when the Obama administration announced the rule in January, "In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences."
Time in which to figure out how to violate our consciences--or how to remove President Obama from office.
ObamaCare delenda est.
- Comment (33)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Oct '10
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Perhaps some handwriting analysis is in order. Could be revealing and amusing if ever made available.
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 3:35amFeb '12
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Whiskey Sam
Leporello
Agreed. So what do you propose? · 2 minutes ago
For starters, refusing to comply. Let's see how the Left reacts when we don't roll over for once. · 0 minutes ago
And what would a refusal to comply involve if one is an individual citizen employed by a corporation or partnership that is not a religious institution? I agree with you, but I've been having trouble figuring out how to avoid compliance - apart from donning my three-cornered hat and arming myself for the fight to restore our liberties (which is more tempting than ever nowadays).
Apr '11
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
This strikes me as very good news. Under Romney, Nevada becomes a relatively safe state. The swing states are, thus, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, and Ohio. The united front with the Catholic church seems likely to be the campaign centerpiece in the last two states, where Catholics make up a large portion of the swing voters, and I can't imagine this playing well with Protestants in the first two.
So long as some compromise/ litigation strategy pushes compliance back until the non-existent second term, this seems likely to avoid any conscience problems, although it may incur some tax exemption problems.
Should be good for the upcoming SCOTUS litigation, too.
Jul '10
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Leporello
And what would a refusal to comply involve if one is an individual citizen employed by a corporation or partnership that is not a religious institution? I agree with you, but I've been having trouble figuring out how to avoid compliance - apart from donning my three-cornered hat and arming myself for the fight to restore our liberties (which is more tempting than ever nowadays). · 1 minute ago
That's the real problem. At some point we decided that every disagreement would go to the courts, and if we lost it was, "Oh, well. We'll just have to give up that right. We espouse belief in rights and liberty, but we can't be bothered to physically do something about it. That's so antiquated and extremist." Of course, if the Founders had thought that way, we wouldn't actually have a country today.
Continued...
Edited on March 20, 2012 at 4:28amJul '10
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
But if someone were to say something like the following today they would be dismissed out of hand as a dangerous extremist or a crank:
"The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson
May '10
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
This Friday, March 23, be at one of the nationwide rallies protesting the HHS mandate:
http://standupforreligiousfreedom.com/
Understand that the time between now and 11/6/12 is as critical to the future of our country as 1933 was to the future of Germany. If Obama is reelected, it will be too late for petitions, protests, civil disobedience. We must act now, the time for harrumphing, position papers, and strongly worded manifestos is over.
We are wittnessing our domestic version of Gleichshaltung, "bringing into line" the process by which the Nazi regime established totalitarian control [yes, I know as soon as Nazis are invoked, you lose the argument, but it is entirely apt at this juncture].
Aug '10
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Sorry Lepor ( if that is your real name !) I had an innocent wtf redacted the other day by the CoC and then saw the Congressman get away with it under the guise of Mick Taylor, so I had to do that .Never to offend.Obamacare offenda est
Apr '11
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Leporello
All Catholics not working in emergency services could strike. And Jews and other Christians could join them.
In fact, now that I think of it, not a bad idea. I wonder who might be able to organize such a thing.
If it were any other type of business/organization I'd agree, but I'm uneasy about putting innocent lives at risk by closing hospitals. Secondly, it would be a PR disaster. The news would be filled with stories of sick children and old ladies turned away from hospitals because "so-called Christians" were conducting their petty "War on Women." The same will be true if Catholic organizations and others decide to stop providing coverage.
This then gives Obama the perfect excuse to point out that: "it's now obvious that private entities care more about dogma or the bottom line than they do your heath. We tried the free market, and it failed. The only way to guarantee your health is through the benevolence of government. "
This was the plan all along.
Unfortunately, I don't know how we fight it, especially without a party leader who can passionately articulate the principles of liberty.
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Steven Zoraster: In front of the Texas state capital in Austin on Friday the 23. There will be people from both side of this issue.
I plan to be there on the ricochet side. · 4 hours ago
Post an eyewitness report--and take pictures!
Feb '12
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Heh. Got it. :)
Feb '12
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Whiskey Sam
Leporello
And what would a refusal to comply involve if one is an individual citizen employed by a corporation or partnership that is not a religious institution? I agree with you, but I've been having trouble figuring out how to avoid compliance - apart from donning my three-cornered hat and arming myself for the fight to restore our liberties (which is more tempting than ever nowadays). · 1 minute ago
That's the real problem. At some point we decided that every disagreement would go to the courts, and if we lost it was, "Oh, well. We'll just have to give up that right. We espouse belief in rights and liberty, but we can't be bothered to physically do something about it. That's so antiquated and extremist." Of course, if the Founders had thought that way, we wouldn't actually have a country today.
Continued...
Yes, well said. I have often wondered why there wasn't a move to secede over cases like Roe (and about 100 other horrendous decisions from the 60's and 70's). Perhaps it was because such resistance had already been given a bad name by segregationists.
Continued...
Feb '12
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Continuing...
In any case, I remain uncertain what to do today. Declaring independence and reaffirming the Constitution or a new version of it, with a determination to see the matter through, seems unlikely to succeed. Bad odds did not stop the Founders, but one trouble is that almost no prominent conservatives would support such an effort. Instead, they would, I predict, cluck their tongues and condemn the "radicals."
Is the best approach to try to persuade a group of states to declare independence and secede? Perhaps a group of Western states would be willing, though it would certainly not happen overnight. You would need a certain number of governors, senators, and assemblymen who care more about the country than their own re-election. Not impossible; not easy.
Or are other approaches better?
Feb '12
Re: The Soft Tyranny of ObamaCare Turns Hard
Cutlass
Leporello
All Catholics not working in emergency services could strike...
If it were any other type of business/organization I'd agree, but I'm uneasy about putting innocent lives at risk by closing hospitals. Secondly, it would be a PR disaster. The news would be filled with stories of sick children and old ladies turned away from hospitals because "so-called Christians" were conducting their petty "War on Women." The same will be true if Catholic organizations and others decide to stop providing coverage.
This then gives Obama the perfect excuse to point out that: "it's now obvious that private entities care more about dogma or the bottom line than they do your heath. We tried the free market, and it failed. The only way to guarantee your health is through the benevolence of government. "
This was the plan all along.
Unfortunately, I don't know how we fight it, especially without a party leader who can passionately articulate the principles of liberty. · 7 hours ago
By "emergency services" I meant police, firemen, and hospitals/clinics. My point was that all other Catholics - employees and owners of other businesses besides emergency services - could strike.