HHS Mandate: Worse Now!

Obama and Co. have re-jiggered the wording on the HHS mandate… and they have made it worse. “No, this is worse than before. Insurance companies will pass the costs on to employers and employees, whereas before, only employers would pay the costs.”

Costs aside, step back and look at what’s happening: the President claims to have the right to decide what your faith practices can and cannot be. If you do not comply, you will be penalized. Please, someone remind Obama of this:

Well worth watching: video from Card. Wuerl from the Morning Joe show this a.m., linked here. The hosts are asking him questions, and he asks them back, “”How about if we compromise away _parts_ of our freedom?” Exactly!

Also see Cardinal Wuerl, evangelical Chuck Colson, and Rabbi Meir Soloveichik in the Wall Street Journal from this morning.

They remind us that “under no circumstances should people of faith violate their consciences and discard their most cherished religious beliefs in order to comply with a gravely unjust law.”

In Virginia, Tim Kaine apparently thinks this changes something, and is now happy with it.

The Anchoress has a great post and is updating often:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2012/02/10/obama-to-announce-accomodation/ Her prediction:

Predictably, the media narrative is Obama reconciled this and the story is over. If the bishops object, they’ll blame them.

U.S. bishops http://www.usccb.org/news/2012/12-025.cfm

But the Conference continues to express concerns. “While there may be an openness to respond to some of our concerns, we reserve judgment on the details until we have them,” said Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, president of USCCB.

“The past three weeks have witnessed a remarkable unity of Americans from all religions or none at all worried about the erosion of religious freedom and governmental intrusion into issues of faith and morals,” he said.

“Today’s decision to revise how individuals obtain services that are morally objectionable to religious entities and people of faith is a first step in the right direction,” Cardinal-designate Dolan said. “We hope to work with the Administration to guarantee that Americans’ consciences and our religious freedom are not harmed by these regulations.”

Good reading at HotAir.

The government is forcing religious organizations to both pay for and facilitate activities that violate their religious doctrine. If anyone thinks that passes muster with the First Amendment, that’s even more magical thinking than this funding shell game.

  • kelley in virginia

    whether you are Catholic or Muslim; pro-life or pro-choice; black, white or purple: CATCH ON PEOPLE! the Obama administration is telling you how to live, what you can eat, what light bulbs you can buy.

    & the final indignity? you, the taxpayer is forced to pay.

  • Steve Vaughan

    Most Catholics agree that birth control should be covered, according to a survey released today.
    How far are you willing to take this?
    Jehovah’s witnesses don’t believe in blood transfusions.
    Should a hospital they run be allowed to refuse to perform them, thus jeopardizing the health and well being of its patients?
    This isn’t about forcing anyone to violate their conscience. It’s about allowing people to impose the dictates of their conscience on other people.
    No one is required to get an abortion or to buy and use contraceptives by this “mandate.”
    You are free to believe whatever you want to believe but, in America, you aren’t allowed to force everyone who works for you to believe that too.

  • Greg

    Obama is becoming a dictator and is trying to control every aspect of our lives. The entire Health Care Law should be found unconstitutional because if the over reaching government can force us to buy that there would be no end to what they could force us to buy. This administration hates the Constitution and if Obama is re-elected he will try to completely destroy it!!

  • Steve Vaughan

    Greg: Cut back on the caffiene. I agree that the consumer mandate in the health care bill sucks. It’s a sop to the insurance companies. It was originally a Republican idea. It would have been better to go with a single-payer plan. There’s no question about the constitutionality of that.

  • Steve, you certainly are free in this country to believe what you wish. But you’re also free to not to have to pay for someone to violate your beliefs. This “compromise” changes nothing. Religious institutions will be required to pay for insurance policies that provide these services for “free.” It’s no different than offering them directly.

  • ToR

    1. What is the difference between the Feds outlawing polygamy and forcing the Mormons to Mexico and this? It seems that the govt was violating their right to religion as well.

    2. Since we’ve now decided that a religious institution can do what it wants, does that mean that the govt needs to recognize gay marriages administered in churches, synagogs, mosques, etc?

    3. If a certain religious organization didn’t believe in anesthesia would they not have to provide anesthesia to people covered by their insurance policies.

    4. I would be very curious to know how many of you, whom are so against this, have ever slept with a woman who has NEVER used birth control. Have you always used condoms, even with your wife or long term girlfriend? This is a waste of our time, political pandering, and it’s going to cost Republicans votes. Women should have access to birth control through their health care plans.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.