Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Phelps
Nah, seriously, I was just trying to get my point across that it's disingenous to expect that the government is going to give ANY organization money without some strings attached.
And, the term "religion" is so encompassing, that any splinter group could claim religious freedom, and practice any far out belief without any regulation. Even snake handling is illegal in most states, and although I really don't think it should be, I suppose there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. There are religious groups who believe that it is their God given right to have sex with minors, use children as indentured servants, etc. and someone has to protect those kids.
So I am FULLY in favor of Americans (and all people, for that matter) having the right to choose not to have an abortion, choose not to receive medical treatment, choose not to take birth control, etc. but I am not in favor of that belief system being forced on to others who have not made that choice willingly.
SEe, once again, we're not that far apart!
|
I agree with your paragraph in bold, however, the issue reaches a little deeper than a blanket plea for choice. It is not hard to get contraception and service, so mandating that a religious group carry those products in violation of their tenets of faith is unconstitutional. There is plenty of secular coverage, products and services available. Look elsewhere.
It falls on the same lines as Planned Parenthood trying to force a Catholic Food bank to accept their food contributions. Then they start a public brawl, on Facebook, erroneously playing on the growing, emotional sentiment saying, "This level of
extremism impeding individual access to essential healthcare and now food
is outrageous and
must be stopped."
Notice they use the word "extremism" and "impeding" as though there are no other food banks to be had and pushing that toward healthcare access as though there are no other healthcare providers.
That is totally extreme and speaks the same language as Nancy Pelosi and the Obama Administration. Pelosi went so far as to say that "self-insured religious institutions should pay for contraception". Self-insured would include the Amish, who at the outset, were set to be excluded from the healthcare debacle.
A religious organization that is not proselyting with it's funds shouldn't be forced to proselyte a liberal agenda. It works both ways.
Nancy Pelosi and the left wing pundits are pushing a "woman's rights" war on this country. I don't think we should overlook that in order to have their rights forced on all people, they violate our rights - unconstitutional.
And I do agree with you on your points regarding every fringe group.
When the Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law..." it doesn't mean that it will "make NO law". Some limits have to be placed on our freedoms - the Supreme Court affirms that to be true.
The government can regulate the time, place and manner, but it cannot regulate those things based solely on the basic content of our ideas, beliefs or expressions. In other words, we can march in support of our particular cause, but we must carry a permit to do so. The government issues a permit, but they cannot legislate how we believe in our cause, our right to believe in our cause or how we express that idea relating to our cause.
When two rights collide, there is going to be conflict. The government then has to balance the two. One example would with the public school system. The Supreme Court ruled that if a student's rights interfere with the school's mission in educating other students, the school officials can restrict students’ rights.
This "woman's right" issue is infringing on the religious conscience of many organizations. And we get back to our fight - it's unconstitutional.
The government funding is still a work in progress - it's not over by far. There are still problems being debated with The Charitable Choice clause.
Threaded Mode
