Declaring War on Religion

[IggyAntiochus]

Michael Gerson on the Obama administration’s mandate that Roman Catholic institutions, as well as those of other churches and pro-life organizations, must provide employees health insurance that will give them free birth control, sterilization, and abortifacients:

The religious exemption granted by Obamacare is narrower than anywhere else in federal law — essentially covering the delivery of homilies and the distribution of sacraments. Serving the poor and healing the sick are regarded as secular pursuits — a determination that would have surprised Christianity’s founder.

Both radicalism and maliciousness are at work in Obama’s decision — an edict delivered with a sneer. It is the most transparently anti-Catholic maneuver by the federal government since the Blaine Amendment was proposed in 1875 — a measure designed to diminish public tolerance of Romanism, then regarded as foreign, authoritarian and illiberal. Modern liberalism has progressed to the point of adopting the attitudes and methods of 19th-century Republican nativists. . . .

The implications of Obama’s power grab go further than contraception and will provoke opposition beyond Catholicism. Christian colleges and universities of various denominations will resist providing insurance coverage for abortifacients. And the astounding ambition of this federal precedent will soon be apparent to every religious institution. Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears.

Obama’s decision also reflects a certain view of liberalism. Classical liberalism was concerned with the freedom to hold and practice beliefs at odds with a public consensus. Modern liberalism uses the power of the state to impose liberal values on institutions it regards as backward. It is the difference between pluralism and anti-*clericalism.

The administration’s ultimate motivation is uncertain. Has it adopted a radical secularism out of conviction, or is it cynically appealing to radical secularists? In either case, the war on religion is now formally declared.

washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-radical-power-grab-on-health-care/2012/01/30/gIQANB7XdQ_story.html

 

[Birdpreacher]

Sad part is 98% of Sexually Active Catholics are ok with this…

 

[Nine_Two]

Kulturkampf for a new generation.

 

[MorningSong51]

Sad part is 98% of Sexually Active Catholics are ok with this…

That might change considering the circumstance of this bill. Even though there maybe 98% Catholics that might be sexually active - outside of marriage, they must consider a certain amount of responsibility towards the other person and themselves in a religious way. We understand the biological part of the relationship but what about the spiritual - if in someway, they commit to the physical part they must make a commitment to the spiritual one. If out of the relationship a pregnancy should occur and the couple makes the decision or in some areas the mother decides (as a pro choice) then each runs the risk of leaving the church: Pro-Life Bishops vs. Pro-Abortion Politicians, 4 October 2004

The US bishops are planning a statement on the upcoming 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, i.e., the infamous case legalizing abortion in America. Since Black Monday, America’s bishops have been unwavering in expressing their opposition to abortion. But if some of them feel it’s perhaps time to go beyond words (yes, I know, some bishops have made sacrifices for life, efforts perhaps known but to themselves and God), at least two public canonical responses seem immediately worth considering.

1. Catholic politicians who support abortionism involve themselves in objective manifest grave sin (Evangelium vitae, 73). Such persons, to the extent that they persist in these misdeeds, make themselves ineligible for admission to Communion (c. 915). Diocesan bishops have the right and duty to see to the spiritual welfare of all those in their care (c. 383), of maintaining Catholic discipline on faith and morals (c. 392 § 1), and of preserving the Eucharist from unworthy reception (c. 392 § 2). The application of Canon 915 does not require a penal process, and therefore a bishop is free to shape his own approach to individual circumstances. I already wrote an extended canonical study of an actual case wherein a bishop applied Canon 915 against a pro-abortion politician, so I won’t repeat those matters here. The point to take from this is that the norm is on the books, ready to be used.

1. Canon law makes it a crime for Catholics to use “…public speeches, published writings, or other instruments of social communication to…gravely injure good morals…” (c. 1369). I think many of the activities of pro-abortion Catholic politicians, even in the act of casting their votes for death, to say nothing of the variety of public affairs that politicians typically engage in, meet exactly the requirements of this canon, which visits upon its violators a “just penalty”. While this canon is expressly a penal canon, demanding therefore the observance of penal procedural law (e.g., cc. 1341-1353), the flexible, indeterminate penalty makes Canon 1369 especially worth considering by bishops concerned to address the harm being caused by pro-abortion Catholics in politics. Moreover, contempt for what would likely be lesser penalties to start with can result in escalation of penalties against the recalcitrant (cc. 1393 & 1399). This canon too I have discussed in a recent interview. As with Canon 915, the law is already in effect. What’s required is the will to use it. +++
   canonlaw.info/blogarch02.htm

You really have to ask the question, “Who is really starting this war?” the government? or is the government acting out from the decision of others? You know, what’s is even more sad - those who really need health care and paying out of pocket along with those who have health insurance from their employer on premium payments - these payment (which are high enough for employee & individuals) will never use that option; they will not need it - over a certain age; and the money spent will go toward the insurance companies toward that plan - to help pay out with the pay outs for those individual who do use it. — I would think, and according to age, that this option wouldn’t be necessary - anyway. This health care bill was not well thought out…

 

[GaryTaylor]

Sad part is 98% of Sexually Active Catholics are ok with this…

Where did you arrive at this statistic? Catholics for Pro Choice?

 

[FabiusMaximus]

The Catholic Church gets what its “faithful” voted for.

Catholics need to stop supporting the Democratic Party lock, stock, and barrel.

If Obama wins in 2012, he’ll probably also come out fully in support of gay marriage, with his “evolution of position” on the concept finally coming to a conclusion.

 

[Frank_J]

Catholic Bishops have long supported nation health care for the longest time going all the way back in the 1980’s that I remember. Here is Pres. Reagan and it is worth listening too.

youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs
Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

The Democratic Party/ Soviet Party has long stood on lefts side for a very long long time. Everyone has known this. They should have stood up against Socialized Medicine and not been on the wrong side. Now we reap what we sow.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Catholic Bishops have long supported nation health care for the longest time going all the way back in the 1980’s that I remember. Here is Pres. Reagan and it is worth listening too.

youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs
Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

The Democratic Party/ Soviet Party has long stood on lefts side for a very long long time. Everyone has known this. They should have stood up against Socialized Medicine and not been on the wrong side. Now we reap what we sow.

Most American Catholics vote like sheep headed to the slaughterhouse and support the Democratic Party unquestioningly simply because it was historically the “Catholic” party. Which to me is absolute nonsense.

 

[bogeydogg]

The governments of men will always be hostile to the Church. They will not be hostile to false religions or even “Christian” denoms that will “play ball” but there is no reason to not expect this sort of thing.

The question is one of conscience and really, if you respect yourself and the one you love and are not yet married then the issue of contraception is a non-issue because you won’t be having sex anyway.

God Bless

 

[jlhargus]

The National Petition to Stop HHS Mandate. Sign the petition link;

www.stophhs.com

 

[Matthew_P_Muehl]

Most American Catholics vote like sheep headed to the slaughterhouse and support the Democratic Party unquestioningly simply because it was historically the “Catholic” party. Which to me is absolute nonsense.

It makes you wonder why chickens would vote for col. Sanders.
The trouble they helped brew yesterday they are drinking today.

Matthew

 

[JonNC]

Michael Gerson on the Obama administration’s mandate that Roman Catholic institutions, as well as those of other churches and pro-life organizations, must provide employees health insurance that will give them free birth control, sterilization, and abortifacients:

washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-radical-power-grab-on-health-care/2012/01/30/gIQANB7XdQ_story.html

While there remains doctrinal differences between us, we - all Christians - must stand together in the philosophical and Constitutional principal that government is restricted when it comes to the free exercise of religion. The attack on primarily the Catholic Church, but also others in this area of health care, and the attack on primarily the LCMS, but also others, on the issue of ministerial exception, must be fought by all of us. Fought by our prayers, our voices and our votes.

Those of us who are not Catholic can ill-afford to stand on the sideline while our siblings in Christ are attacked by this government. We must stand shoulder to shoulder with them. while doctrinal unity may be some distance off, we must stand united under this religious persecution.

Jon

 

[FabiusMaximus]

It makes you wonder why chickens would vote for col. Sanders.
The trouble they helped brew yesterday they are drinking today.

Matthew

The cult of the Kennedys.

It’s funny. They are hardly practicing Catholics, yet Catholics seem to continuously identify with them.

And of course, no Catholic bishop in the USA has been courageous enough to comment on that.

 

[Matthew_P_Muehl]

While there remains doctrinal differences between us, we - all Christians - must stand together in the philosophical and Constitutional principal that government is restricted when it comes to the free exercise of religion. The attack on primarily the Catholic Church, but also others in this area of health care, and the attack on primarily the LCMS, but also others, on the issue of ministerial exception, must be fought by all of us. Fought by our prayers, our voices and our votes.

Those of us who are not Catholic can ill-afford to stand on the sideline while our siblings in Christ are attacked by this government. We must stand shoulder to shoulder with them. while doctrinal unity may be some distance off, we must stand united under this religious persecution.

Jon

I agree JonNC. We must ALL stand together on this!
This is what happens when government gets to this size and has no regard for the constitution. Those that voted for whats in the white house wanted hope and change.
It looks like many didn’t get what they thought.
Well we are all now seeing it come to pass…
He MUST be voted out in November! 4 more years of this and country will destroyed!

Matthew

 

[Frank_J]

Christians need to stand up and not take this trash anymore from the U.S Goverment. Christians always turn the cheek. No long should it be that way. Nice guy always finnish last

 

[Frank_J]

When I chat I say what I believe I never back down where I stand. I tell the truth even it Catholic Answer tries to oh you can say that and removes my chat and they have. If they can find any mistakes in my statement I will retract it and I will recant my remarks.

This is my Gauntlet I have place in front of Catholic Answer.

This is unrelated to this Chatroom. I just wish to place my gauntlet as a challenge. Hey if was good for the knights to use that challenge I can too.

 

[hn160]

This is a letter from the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod:

LCMS President’s statement on HHS mandate
Share |
by GENE VEITH on FEBRUARY 8, 2012
in GOVERNMENT,LAW,LIFE ISSUES,RELIGIONS
Matthew Harrison, president of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, has issued a statement on the federal government’s mandate that religious organizations must provide free abortion pills and contraceptives to their employees in their insurance plans.* He clarifies what this will mean for Lutheran organizations and expresses his strong opposition:

A Statement on Recent HHS Decision and Religious Freedom

We are deeply distressed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) recent decision to require nearly all private health plans, including those offered by religious employers, to cover contraceptives. This will include controversial birth-control products such as “Ella” and the “morning after” pill, even though the Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warns that such drugs can cause the death of a baby developing in the womb. The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) objects to the use of drugs and procedures that are used to take the lives of unborn children, who are persons in the sight of God from the time of conception, and we are opposed to the HHS’ decision mandating the coverage of such contraceptives.

This HHS action relates to a provision in the “health care reform” legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) signed into law in 2010. The church’s benefits partner, Concordia Plan Services, which provides health care coverage to nearly 48,000 people, has been actively monitoring this legislation and, as a result, Concordia Health Plan (CHP)—the LCMS church workers’ health plan—has been maintained as a “grandfathered” plan. As such, employers and workers participating in CHP would not be subjected to the mandate. However, many religious organizations do not have grandfathered plans and cannot avail themselves of the extremely narrow religious-employer exemption, which only is applicable to religious employers that primarily serve and employ members of that faith.

For centuries, Lutherans have joyfully delivered Christ’s mercy to others and embraced His call to care for the needy within our communities and around the world. In a nation that has allowed more than 54 million legal abortions since 1973, we must consider the marginalization of unborn babies and object to this mandate.

In addition, I encourage the members of the LCMS to join with me in supporting efforts to preserve our essential right to exercise our religious beliefs. This action by HHS will have the effect of forcing many religious organizations to choose between following the letter of the law and operating within the framework of their religious tenets. We add our voice to the long list of those championing for the continued ability to act according to the dictates of their faith, and provide compassionate care and clear Christian witness to society’s most vulnerable, without being discriminated against by government.

The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, a church body of sinners redeemed by the blood of Jesus, has affected the lives of millions of people with care, aid, housing, health care, spiritual care and much more. We have been a force for good in this nation, promoting education (the nation’s largest Protestant school system), marriage and giving people the tools and assistance to be good citizens. We live and breathe Romans 13:3–7. The governing authorities are “God’s servant for good.” We pray constantly for our President and those in authority. We have sent our sons and daughters to fight for this country. We have provided military chaplains, elected officials, officers, including some who have held the highest military offices and other appointed positions in this country. Our people have and are serving as congressmen and women and senators.

Increasingly we are suffering overzealous government intrusions into what is the realm of traditional and biblical Christian conscience. We believe this is a violation of our First Amendment rights. We will stand, to the best of our ability, with all religious and other concerned citizens, against this erosion of our civil liberty. Come what may, we shall do everything we can, by God’s grace, to “obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

The Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison
President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

 

[MorningSong51]

This is a letter from the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod:

LCMS President’s statement on HHS mandate
Share |
by GENE VEITH on FEBRUARY 8, 2012
in GOVERNMENT,LAW,LIFE ISSUES,RELIGIONS
Matthew Harrison, president of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, has issued a statement on the federal government’s mandate that religious organizations must provide free abortion pills and contraceptives to their employees in their insurance plans.* He clarifies what this will mean for Lutheran organizations and expresses his strong opposition:

A Statement on Recent HHS Decision and Religious Freedom

We are deeply distressed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) recent decision to require nearly all private health plans, including those offered by religious employers, to cover contraceptives. This will include controversial birth-control products such as “Ella” and the “morning after” pill, even though the Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warns that such drugs can cause the death of a baby developing in the womb. The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) objects to the use of drugs and procedures that are used to take the lives of unborn children, who are persons in the sight of God from the time of conception, and we are opposed to the HHS’ decision mandating the coverage of such contraceptives.

This HHS action relates to a provision in the “health care reform” legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) signed into law in 2010. The church’s benefits partner, Concordia Plan Services, which provides health care coverage to nearly 48,000 people, has been actively monitoring this legislation and, as a result, Concordia Health Plan (CHP)—the LCMS church workers’ health plan—has been maintained as a “grandfathered” plan. As such, employers and workers participating in CHP would not be subjected to the mandate. However, many religious organizations do not have grandfathered plans and cannot avail themselves of the extremely narrow religious-employer exemption, which only is applicable to religious employers that primarily serve and employ members of that faith.

For centuries, Lutherans have joyfully delivered Christ’s mercy to others and embraced His call to care for the needy within our communities and around the world. In a nation that has allowed more than 54 million legal abortions since 1973, we must consider the marginalization of unborn babies and object to this mandate.

In addition, I encourage the members of the LCMS to join with me in supporting efforts to preserve our essential right to exercise our religious beliefs. This action by HHS will have the effect of forcing many religious organizations to choose between following the letter of the law and operating within the framework of their religious tenets. We add our voice to the long list of those championing for the continued ability to act according to the dictates of their faith, and provide compassionate care and clear Christian witness to society’s most vulnerable, without being discriminated against by government.

The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, a church body of sinners redeemed by the blood of Jesus, has affected the lives of millions of people with care, aid, housing, health care, spiritual care and much more. We have been a force for good in this nation, promoting education (the nation’s largest Protestant school system), marriage and giving people the tools and assistance to be good citizens. We live and breathe Romans 13:3–7. The governing authorities are “God’s servant for good.” We pray constantly for our President and those in authority. We have sent our sons and daughters to fight for this country. We have provided military chaplains, elected officials, officers, including some who have held the highest military offices and other appointed positions in this country. Our people have and are serving as congressmen and women and senators.

Increasingly we are suffering overzealous government intrusions into what is the realm of traditional and biblical Christian conscience. We believe this is a violation of our First Amendment rights. We will stand, to the best of our ability, with all religious and other concerned citizens, against this erosion of our civil liberty. Come what may, we shall do everything we can, by God’s grace, to “obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

The Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison
President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

Good post! :clapping:

Another very good commentary to read “Chaplains Corner: Even the Thought is an Affront to God” - even though that the topic is about another subject, the understanding still holds…to this topic as well.

 

[ltwin]

Evangelicals are responding as well. The National Association of Evangelicals has written an open letter to President Obama. Chuck Colson and Timothy George are urging Christians to pray and advocate for change.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, MorningSong51,

Let’s not confuse the issues.Sounds like you are blaming the victim - those with the desire to uphold morality have been tainted because of the way insurance coverage is provided.

Now, concerning your comment about the health care bill not being well thought out … I think a number of people support this position. Start off with Rep Nancy Pelosi: usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/03/09/pelosi-pass-health-reform-so-you-can-find-out-whats-in-it. There are probably different degrees of ‘totally outrageous behavior’ from an elected official - passing laws that are not understood has to be pretty high on the list.

God bless

You really have to ask the question, “Who is really starting this war?” the government? or is the government acting out from the decision of others? You know, what’s is even more sad - those who really need health care and paying out of pocket along with those who have health insurance from their employer on premium payments - these payment (which are high enough for employee & individuals) will never use that option; they will not need it - over a certain age; and the money spent will go toward the insurance companies toward that plan - to help pay out with the pay outs for those individual who do use it. — I would think, and according to age, that this option wouldn’t be necessary - anyway. This health care bill was not well thought out…