e429

Desiring to build others up & give grace to those who visit

Archive for the tag “government”

I’m Not Letting This Go

The more posts I come across regarding the Obama administration’s total disregard of the 1st Amendment, the more I’m going to keep passing them along…

Law forcing sales of abortion pill struck down. Hopefully, this will set a precedent when the Obama administration’s war on religion through contraceptives invariably goes before the courts.

“The Con” – a video presented by AUL – YouTube.  Whether you’re religious or not, this issue should be important to you.

Advertisements

UPDATED–Contraceptives & the War on Religion

Do not be fooled! The contraceptives controversy is not really a controversy over contraceptives, or women’s rights, or abortion; it is controversy surrounding freedom of religion & whether that freedom should exist in any meaningful way. (Sorry that so many of these links are to Gene Veith’s blog, but he does such a good job of covering these kinds of issues).

Declaring war on religion.–“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.”

How our government thinks of religion.–Here’s what the Obama administration apparently thinks: “Whenever a church or house of worship ceases to be simply inward-looking, when it in any way engages or serves the wider public, it becomes subject to much the same sort of government regulation as any secular entity.”–In other words, if your church decides to obey God’s commands & care for the widow, orphaned, & oppressed, you cease to be a church & rather become a secular institution.

Officially re-defining religion. –“It’s basically the same one [definition] used in the former Soviet Union, which provided for “religious freedom” in its constitution, construed as private interior beliefs, while at the same time forbidding evangelism, worship, education, religious child-raising, and any other external expression of religion in actual life.”

Calls for an American dictator.–I think this fits well with the contraceptives controversy: ” we must take care not to jettison our liberties in a panicked  desire for the government to ‘do something.'”

LCMS President’s statement on HHS mandate.-“Again, this is not just a Catholic issue.  All conservative Christian ministries and pro-life organizations are being put in the position of having to pay for abortion pills.”

Your religion mustn’t affect your life!.–SAY WHAT?!!!

Forcing a company to give away a product for free.–“Where does it say that the president can unilaterally order a private company to provide an allegedly free-standing service at no cost to certain select beneficiaries?”

Compromise on insurance birth control mandate?.–“Does this really solve the problem? Aren’t all of the expenses of an insurance company ultimately and necessarily passed on to the customers?”

The Church of Obama – Mark Steyn – National Review Online.–” In essence President Obama has embarked on the same usurpation of church authority as Henry VIII[…]” Which is exactly the kind of authority our founding fathers were trying to separate from with the inclusion of the Establishment Clause.

Do 98% of Catholic women use contraceptives?.–This is just despicable!

Media shirk debate on religious liberty » GetReligion.–If you listen to most of mainstream media’s accounts of this debate, you would think this is merely a conservative attempt to limit “women’s rights.”–Well, here’s a not-so-subtle hint for you: It’s not about women’s rights; it’s about RELIGIOUS LIBERTY aka FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

UPDATE:

AlbertMohler.com – What Compromise? This Policy Leaves Religious Liberty in Peril and Planned Parenthood Smiling.–“But, just to state the obvious, a policy goal and an ‘inalienable right’ are not to be ‘balanced.'”

 

Why Requiring Employers (Insurers) to Cover Contraceptives is Wrong

Nearly 3 weeks ago, I published a post in response to the President’s decision that religious-affiliated employers will be required to cover birth-control pills including abortifacents. I asked (in essence), “how should Christians respond when the government goes too far?” And specifically, I asked, “How do you oppose the President & his policy & still adhere to Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1, & 1 Peter 2:13-17?” Well, I got no response, and I’m really no closer to knowing exactly what the right response should be (or even if there is one right response), but here are some links on why this issue is so important (even if you’re not opposed to birth-control), what some Christian leaders are advocating in response, & a couple of other links on abortion & Planned Parenthood.

The FAQs: The Contraceptive-Abortifacient Mandate – The Gospel Coalition Blog. Here is why this controversy is so important: “If the mandate is allowed to stand it will set a precedent that the government can not only force citizens to violate their most deeply held beliefs but that we can be sanctioned for refusing to do so.”

“Please get the federal government out of our consciences”. From the testimony of the President of the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church before the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform

Christian Civil Disobedience against the U. S. Government? – Justin Taylor. Here is what Rick Warren, Chuck Colson, & Timothy George have to say.

On my mind and heart… « A Work in Progress. A passionate plea for Christians not to try to justify (even in part) the supposed good things that Planned Parenthood does.

More bullying from Planned Parenthood. Just one more reason I have no respect whatsoever for Planned Parenthood.

The Obama Administration Goes Too Far. How should we respond?

I am generally of the opinion that we should respect the President because of the office he holds & because God’s Word tells us to:

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7  Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed. Romans 13:1-7 (ESV)

See also Titus 3:1 & 1 Peter 2:13-17.

But how do we respond when the President goes too far?

It seems bad enough that the administration is forcing religious institutions to cover birth control pills even though it violates the beliefs of some religious groups. But what should we do when he tries to force religious institutions to cover abortifacients (which are required to be covered)?

I understand that God’s law trumps any human law, but what do you do if you are an employer like mine (I work for a Catholic hospital system)? Essentially the only way they can avoid providing coverage for these things is to offer no health insurance whatsoever to their employees. And what happens if they do that? Well, besides having a bunch of ticked off employees, the company would have to pay very steep fines which could potentially sink the organization resulting in lack of access to healthcare for scores of people.

So what do you say? What would be a biblical response to this rule? How do you oppose the President & his policy & still adhere to Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1, & 1 Peter 2:13-17?

 

And, by the way, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ comment regarding granting religious organizations an extra year to comply with the rule (“This . . . strikes a balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services”) would be laughable if this wasn’t so serious a situation.

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: