Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
President Obama and his administration have long played lip service to communities of faith. The president himself regularly quotes scripture in his speeches, and today he cited The Bible as a basis for his redistributionist tax policy.
Yet in their latest decision stemming from his namesake health care law, Obama and his allies have done nothing less than trample on the religious freedom of millions of American citizens.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic who favors unlimited access to abortion, has announced that the Obama administration will mandate that the overwhelming majority of faith-based institutions must pay for all FDA-approved forms of contraception in their health insurance plans. This requires every institution, regardless of religious qualms, to fund abortifacients, sterilization, and contraceptives with no out of pocket payments for employees or students on these plans.
Religious institutions had worked for months to convince the Obama administration to give them respite from this requirement. But instead of offering a broad exemption, Obama and Sebelius chose to require any institution which serves the non-faithful – in other words, nearly any organization other than an actual church – to provide these “preventive services”. This means the rule will apply to nearly every faith-centered non-profit, educational institution, and charity hospital in the country.
For Catholic hospitals and other providers supported primarily through philanthropy, which serve the poorest communities where there is often little financial incentive to set up shop, this is a crushing blow. They are being told that in order to minister to others, as their faith demands, they must set their deeply held theological beliefs aside at the whim of Washington elites.
The right to religious liberty is as essential to the founding of the nation we love as any other. It is enshrined not just in our founding documents, but was fundamental to the existence of the United States before it had its name, before Washington placed his hand on the Bible, before the Constitution or the Bill of Rights were even written.
Nearly four centuries ago, a small band of pilgrims landed on the shores of modern day New England in search of a land where they might worship in peace. Their principles of family and faith honored honest work, neighborhood, and thrift. These men and women formed the moral fiber of a new nation.
A hundred and fifty years after they arrived, their descendants stood shoulder to shoulder on Bunker Hill in defense of an as yet unwritten creed: that our rights are derived not from a faroff king, but proceed to each man from a Creator, and that these rights can never be taken away. In Britain, Thomas Macauley marveled at these sons of Puritans, who “humbly abased themselves in the dust before the Lord, but hesitated not to set their foot upon the neck of their king.” They did not rebel just against a tyrannical government, but the very idea of what government could demand of free men and women.
The clock is now ticking. The institutions affected have a year to prepare for the new law. Already some are openly preparing to defy it. Others see no option but to close their doors for good, rather than go against what they hold deeply as fundamental to their faith.
When asked about the matter a few months ago, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) scoffed at the concerns, saying flippantly that Catholic providers “have this conscience thing” that they really need to overcome.
The comment recalls the words of British author C.S. Lewis, who once wrote that “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive”, as “those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
The consciences of Obama, Pelosi, Sebelius and their allies are clearly undeterred by this move. But it's possible a line has been crossed here that is historically without national precedent. And some lines, once crossed, set in motion changes in the course of human events. In the end, free people either allow their nations to slip toward acceptance of the denial of human liberty, or gather in uprisings against tyranny around such dangerous ideas as "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
- Comment (24)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Mar '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
So how do we craft this so that the majority of Americans can see and be appalled by the tyranny? Can Mitt Romney even begin to touch this? For many it doesn't matter because it doesn't affect them directly, but as they say, "you are next".
Dec '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
That would require the majority of americans to have a conscience. Half of the country will turn their back on churchs that close down these services.
Aug '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Well, here's one Catholic teenager's response that some friends were passing around Facebook earlier this week.
The author identifies himself as an 18-year-old anyway. May the world have more 18-year-olds with this kind of clarity of thought.
Jan '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
So, where does the 1st amendment come in - the one that says congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of religion? Can subsequent federal laws abridge that right? And if that's so, what does "shall make no law" actually mean?
For example, can taking federal funds for treating Medicare/Medicaid citizens abrogate that right? If so, are all ten of the Bill of Rights limited rights, changing at the whim of a congress or SCOTUS?
Jun '10
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Just for future reference, when Jews and Muslims have to subsidize my bacon affordability insurance, I prefer the thick Canadian style bacon. I'll pay my $1 copay, and get 3-lbs of sweet salty heaven. Yum!
Nov '10
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
The solution to this problem is not to take federal/state funds for a religious charity. Once you take money from them, you will be required to dance to their tune which is precisely why Hillsdale and Grove City do not take one thin dime of government money.
A number of Christian charities which I support financially refuse government money and that is the 2nd of two primary reasons that I support them.
Mar '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Ben Domenech:
. In the end, free people either allow their nations to slip toward acceptance of the denial of human liberty, or gather in uprisings against tyranny around such dangerous ideas as "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." · · 40 minutes ago
Of course, there's nothing unconstitutional going on here as Congress has made no law. It's all Obama
Apr '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
This administration crosses one Constitutional Rubicon after another in its quest to "fundamentally transform" America.
The roll call (partial listing):
Fast and Furious (a covert op against the 2nd amendment?)
"Deem and pass"
Recess appointments made when Congress is not in recess
Three years without a budget.
Subsidies to "green" corporations administered by campaign bundlers
Now an assault on the free exercise clause of the 1st amendment.
I wouldn't be surprised if, God forbid, Obama serves a second term, we'll be forced to quarter soldiers in our homes during peacetime just so he can rub it in.
Apr '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
I'm not sure what is more frightening to me - the regulation itself, or that lack of public outcry. A good friend of mine - a very smart woman and a conservative - was not aware that this occurred. Once I told her, she didn't seem to share my outrage. I am very afraid for this nation.
Mar '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Robert Promm: The solution to this problem is not to take federal/state funds for a religious charity. Once you take money from them, you will be required to dance to their tune which is precisely why Hillsdale and Grove City do not take one thin dime of government money.
A number of Christian charities which I support financially refuse government money and that is the 2nd of two primary reasons that I support them. · 16 minutes ago
This truly is the biggest issue; dancing with the devil will never lead to a good outcome.
Edited on February 2, 2012 at 10:51pmJun '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
But Ben, don't you understand? He's doing all this in the name of religion because he's the only one who truly knows what it means to love your neighbor.
Jul '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
DrewInWisconsin
Well, here's one Catholic teenager's response that some friends were passing around Facebook earlier this week.
The author identifies himself as an 18-year-old anyway. May the world have more 18-year-olds with this kind of clarity of thought. · 1 hour ago
This letter looks a little too polished for an 18-year-old
Jul '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Robert Promm: The solution to this problem is not to take federal/state funds for a religious charity. Once you take money from them, you will be required to dance to their tune which is precisely why Hillsdale and Grove City do not take one thin dime of government money.
A number of Christian charities which I support financially refuse government money and that is the 2nd of two primary reasons that I support them. · 54 minutes ago
Robert, this a law that is being enforced on all employers, except those special ones that the Administration gives exceptions to. (their friends) It has nothing to do with the acceptance or refusal of government monies.
Aug '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Fake John Galt
DrewInWisconsin
Well, here's one Catholic teenager's response that some friends were passing around Facebook earlier this week.
The author identifies himself as an 18-year-old anyway. May the world have more 18-year-olds with this kind of clarity of thought. · 1 hour ago
This letter looks a little too polished for an 18-year-old · 20 minutes ago
I thought so, but dang, it sure is a good bit! Even if it was written by a 46 year old, it calls out tyranny for what it is.
May '10
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Fake John Galt
Robert Promm: The solution to this problem is not to take federal/state funds for a religious charity. Once you take money from them, you will be required to dance to their tune which is precisely why Hillsdale and Grove City do not take one thin dime of government money.
A number of Christian charities which I support financially refuse government money and that is the 2nd of two primary reasons that I support them. · 54 minutes ago
Robert, this a law that is being enforced on all employers, except those special ones that the Administration gives exceptions to. (their friends) It has nothing to do with the acceptance or refusal of government monies.
· 13 minutes ago
Exactly right. Further, not all Catholic organizations are charities. There are hospitals and schools, for instance.
Jul '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
This will not end here. Institutions that refuse to perform or pay for abortions are next as well as non licensing physicians who are opposed. Sounds far fetched but I think there are no boundaries with these people.
May '10
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
doesn't sound far fetched to me at all.
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Dan McLaughlin once wrote: "Barack Obama does speak the language of Christianity – but unlike most religious politicians, he always seems to use language that places himself in the role of the Lord."
Jun '11
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
Ben Domenech
Dan McLaughlin once wrote: "Barack Obama does speak the language of Christianity – but unlike most religious politicians, he always seems to use language that places himself in the role of the Lord." · 2 minutes ago
Ben, I think you've actually hit upon a serious psychological issue.
Wikipedia defines "God complex" as "an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of error or failure, even in the face of complex or intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks, or may regard personal opinions as unquestionably correct."
I can't think of a more accurate diagnosis of our president. How else to explain this?
Aug '10
Re: Tyranny and the Conscience Thing
If there are so many Catholic voters, then when will the GOP reach out with this statement writ large ?
Or will we see the liberal Jewish voters who vote for the man most likely to abandon Israel standing next to the liberal Catholics who will vote for the man most likely to kill their grandchildren (the democrat) as usual ?
As I look back through recent American history, about the only group that dislikes Jews, Catholics, and black babies as much as the present Administration appears to have been the KKK .
Edited on February 3, 2012 at 2:09am