Anti Obamacare activists given new life with U.S. Supreme Court order for new hearing on Obamacare religious school challenge

The U.S. Supreme Court has breathed new life into the anti Obamacare movement by ordering the 4th U.S. Circuit Appeals court to hear Liberty University’s challenge to the Affordable Care Act known as Obamacare. The university had brought an action against having to implement the law on the grounds of equal protection and religious freedom. President Obama insisted during the presidential campaign that religious freedom would not be inhibited or an issue for religious colleges and religious organizations would have to consider.

According to Fox News, the school is challenging being forced to provide insurance which pay for birth control against the institution’s constitutional rights. Liberty University and many opponents firmly believe that religious institutions are protected from having to adhere to this constitutional violation under the free exercise of religion clause in the First Amendment.

It appeared that many had seemingly resigned themselves to being victimized by the June U.S. Supreme Court decision as well as the recent reelection of Obama which appeared to defeat overturning the bill. But, legal sanity still prevails in the form of state leaders that are now openly opposing the merits of the law with renewed determination.

A number of republican governors are not waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to analyze the tea leaves in order to take concerted action against this draconian and oppressive federal interventionist law. The governors refuse to have their citizens burdened as Governor Kasich of Ohio warned, “States do not have any flexibility to build and manage exchanges in ways that respond to unique needs of their citizens or markets.”

Monday, November 26th, according to Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, over 16 states have already indicated that they will not be implementing Obamacare’s health insurance exchanges in their states. In fact, Ohio governor John Kasich was joined by Texas governor Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Sean Parnell of Alaska, and John Heineman of Nebraska, among others in opposition to state-run health exchanges.

In effect, these governors are providing the lead for Obamacare battleground opponents who can slow down and eventually reduce the implementation of the most odorous and oppressive aspects of the bill.

Democrats who have been doing the happy dance over the reelection of President Obama should slow down that roll to a “wait and see” crawl. More and more states and their citizens will rally against full implementation of the law based upon being deprived of their right to equal protection under the 14th Amendment. Others will seek protection of their religious freedom under the 1st Amendment.

If anyone believes that this issue of the illegality of Obamacare is over because of an election, then wait and see the fallout in 2013, when tens of thousands of employers continue to either cut employee hours or lay off employees rather than go bankrupt.

In fact Newsmax reported that more than a dozen top American firms have initiated plans to cut thousands of employees due to Obamacare implementation challenges. Some of those firms include, “Smith & Nephew with 770 layoffs; and Abbott Labs plans 700 layoffs. In addition, Covidien projects 595 layoffs; and Kinetic Concepts — 427 layoffs. Dana Holding Corp, which is a global auto parts manufacturing company plan layoffs as well.”

How unique is it that a Liberty University remains in the fight for America’s liberty to not be subjected to a law that deprives Americans and religious institutions of their constitutional liberties. As Patrick Henry stated after Britain’s King George kept implementing unjust immoral laws against America’s colonial liberties,

Patrick Henry:
“Virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone that renders us invincible. These are the tactics we should study. If we lose these, we are conquered, fallen indeed…so long as our manners and principles remain sound, there is no danger.”

Stand with Liberty University and stand for your family’s liberty as a gift you give for your children’s future and liberty.

( Click to let me know what you think )

Religious freedom in America is at stake with November 6th presidential election

Will you vote against Obama’s war on The Soul of America and its religious freedom on Tuesday, November 6th? In President Barack Obama’s first term he took advantage of the 340,000 social conservative who did not show up at the polls in 2008’s presidential election. Armed with this free pass given to him, Obama has riddled America’s landscape with executive orders and legislation that abandoned congressional law on gay marriage, abortion, religious choice and many other issues.

Now, four years later in battle ground states like Ohio, Florida, Nevada, and Virginia he wants to complete his anti-religious assault on religious freedoms which are America’s bedrock. So one has to ask, what it will take to motivate social and religious conservatives to vote to preserve and to save America’s freedoms.

Understand this, that the race for the presidency is as close as it could ever be in swing states all over the nation. Gallup just released its final pre-election survey of likely voters on Monday, November 05, 2012 and Mitt Romney is holding onto a bare one percent difference over Obama. Romney’s 49% to Obama’s 48% truly means that ever religious and social conservative voter holds the keys to religious freedom in his or her hands.

What’s at stake is more serious than one might imagine.

Do you believe that your child’s right to be protected from being assaulted with pro-abortion literature in school or gay rights seminars in elementary school against your protests will be listened to, your wrong. School systems have already begun to implement this in schools across the nation.

The Catholic universities and colleges across America are under assault daily from the Obamacare edicts that mandate they obey the Obama pro-contraception insurance mandates. They are being forced to disregard their constitutional right to their religious freedom, or risk the legal wrath of Obama’s federal government.

In fact in Ohio, in May of 2012, Catholic University, in Steubenville, Ohio, decided to fight back against the attempt by the Obama Administration to strip their institution of its religious freedom. Catholic University refused to implement the Obama administration mandates that require a school use their health care plan to provide sterilization, contraceptives or other pregnancy prevention drugs to students.

Michael Hernon, the VP of Advancement at the University, stressed to Fox News in May that Obama Care’s mandates amounted to “moral and economic injustice.” This is clearly a deliberate and intentional act of war on America’s religious freedom!

What more evidence do you need than the very dismissive conduct portrayed at the August Democratic National Convention, where God was booed and denied on the convention floor. Democrat convention organizers under supervision from White House political operatives removed God from the convention platform. When it was discovered, Obama quickly moved to cover up the exclusion with denials from convention handlers. Soon after, Obama’s convention handlers brought it to a vote and God was booed and voted down several times by convention attendees.

The rejection of God in the original Democrat Platform which is a statement of the position of the Democrat Party and its President going into the fall election should serve as a true call to arms by America’s religious community. The move to remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance, abandonment of religious prayer in public schools, at public meetings and at football and other games is just the beginning.

The religious freedom that children in America and their children will inherit can only be guaranteed and protected by preventing Obama and his congressional and local elected cadre from winning November 6th!

On Tuesday, will you be able to look into your children’s eyes or grandchildren’s eyes and affirm you did what you could to protect their right to religious freedom that you enjoyed in your youth. This is a war that America cannot afford to lose.

President Reagan saw the dangers that were on the horizon for America’s religious freedoms when he spoke January 31, 1981 to the National Religious Broadcasters. He warned:

“To those who would crush religious freedom, our message is plain: you may jail your believers. You may close their churches, confiscate their Bibles, and harass their rabbis and priests, but you will never destroy the love of God and freedom that burns in their hearts. They will triumph over you.”

On November 6th, let every vote in America’s religious community be a vote of triumph over the forces that support a second term for Obama. Show Obama that America’s religious community will not be threatened, nor allow its religious freedom to be crushed. America will continue to remain yesterday, today and tomorrow, one nation under God!

( Click  – Let me know what you think )

“Federal government continues to usurp power from individuals, families, and the church and replaces their responsibilities with government entitlements, handouts and regulations,” said Sam Rohrer, President of the Pennsylvania Pastors’ Network. “As we heard Governor Romney say, spending is a moral issue that we must handle effectively for the sake of our children and grandchildren. While the President wants to expand government to meet the needs of the American people — increasing costs and spending even more money — Romney wants to lower spending so that it is more in line with revenues, which he wants to increase through economic growth, while focusing on the private market, individual choice, and personal responsibility, which is more compatible with Biblical teachings.”

Also discussed on the call were the stark differences between the candidates on the role of government in public life.

“As Catholics, we agree with Governor Romney and affirm the dignity and worth of each person,” said Ted Meehan, Executive Director of the PA Catholics’ Network. “Such recognition leads to both democracy and free enterprise. These are the blessings which have brought greatness to America. America’s greatness comes from the virtue and vigor of its people, not from dependence upon its Government.”

Jo Ann Nardelli also gave a powerful account of how, as a long-time member of the Democratic Party who held several prominent offices in Democratic organizations, she recognizes that “the party had left her” and no longer represented her values or beliefs. As a result, she is now a registered Republican.

“I was conflicted over the far-left leanings of the party for the last few years, but when it came to the administration’s stance on same-sex marriage, I knew this party no longer reflected my beliefs and values,” said Nardelli.

Now, if the Native Americans want to kill the bald eagle as part of their religious ceremonies, they have the right to don’t they?. After all, in this country, there is after all a freedom of religion and religious practice. Or is there?

How is it that to the Obama administration, you’re protected by religious freedom if it’s part of your religious practice to kill once endangered birds that also happen to be a national symbol? However, if you’re a religious organization that doesn’t want to provide contraception such as the morning after pill to women because you believe it’s a form of abortion, you’re against women’s health and not entitled to the liberty to practice your religion as you see fit? Rather, you have the president of the United States tell you that you should listen to ‘the voices of reason’ and just do what the government wants because after all, it only has your best interests at heart.

And if the somewhat skewed endorsement towards religious freedom isn’t enough to make you question the current administration, what about the okaying of the killing of an animal that until very recently was on the endangered species list? Isn’t the well being of the environment and ‘sustainable energy policy’ one of the main concerns of the Obama administration? Isn’t that why millions of tax- payer dollars were wasted on green energy pipe dreams like Solyndra? And isn’t that one reason why domestic drilling of oil has come to a virtual halt, because it’s bad for the environment and rare species like the bald eagle?

But, at least the citizens of the United States can sleep easy in knowing President Obama is still relentlessly protecting their right to practice religious liberty- unless of course, you’re a Catholic organization and happen to believe in protecting the rights of the unborn by not using contraception. Then you’re just a bigot. And you hate women. And obviously, in that case, your rights aren’t protected.

On February 9, 2012, while trying to “accommodate” people who can read the US Constitution, particularly the first amendment, Obama said, “But if a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company – not the hospital, not the charity – will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles. The result will be that religious organizations won’t have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly.” His objective was to take complaining religious organizations out of the equation, while ensuring employee access to important health benefits.

WOW! His statement really sounds good. But …

Does Obama really believe that insurance companies will not pass on the increased cost of contraception to hospitals and charities? Does he really believe that premiums can be separated into medical necessities and contraceptions, sterilizations, and abortifacients? Some employers would like to be able to purchase insurance from insurers that do not offer contraceptive coverage so that none of their money supports such coverage. Further, some nonprofit religious insurers have said they would object to a requirement that forced them to provide contraceptive coverage

And now the self-insurance issue rears its ugly head. Obama thought that he had found a way to ease objections to a requirement that ALL employers offer coverage for birth control to women free of charge. Obama tried to “accommodate” by saying his edict would make the insurers cover the costs, rather than the organizations themselves. But the issue just won’t go away. And now Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has spoken about insurance coverage. At her weekly press briefing, she said, “This is an issue about women’s health, and I believe that women’s health should be covered in all of the insurance plans that are there.”

Large employers, like the Catholic church, often choose to self-insure. Many large employers contract with an insurance company to administer the plan. In 2011, 82% of insured workers at companies of more than 200 employees had self-insured plans.

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on February 17, 2012, that the revised rule on insurance coverage of birth control will apply to self-insured entities, as well as policies issued by insurance companies. So all of this uproar over insurers covering contraception may be moot.

But that’s just my opinion.

On February 9, 2012, while trying to “accommodate” people who can read the US Constitution, particularly the first amendment, Obama said, “But if a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company – not the hospital, not the charity – will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles. The result will be that religious organizations won’t have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly.” His objective was to take complaining religious organizations out of the equation, while ensuring employee access to important health benefits.

WOW! His statement really sounds good. But …

Does Obama really believe that insurance companies will not pass on the increased cost of contraception to hospitals and charities? Does he really believe that premiums can be separated into medical necessities and contraceptions, sterilizations, and abortifacients? Some employers would like to be able to purchase insurance from insurers that do not offer contraceptive coverage so that none of their money supports such coverage. Further, some nonprofit religious insurers have said they would object to a requirement that forced them to provide contraceptive coverage

And now the self-insurance issue rears its ugly head. Obama thought that he had found a way to ease objections to a requirement that ALL employers offer coverage for birth control to women free of charge. Obama tried to “accommodate” by saying his edict would make the insurers cover the costs, rather than the organizations themselves. But the issue just won’t go away. And now Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has spoken about insurance coverage. At her weekly press briefing, she said, “This is an issue about women’s health, and I believe that women’s health should be covered in all of the insurance plans that are there.”

Large employers, like the Catholic church, often choose to self-insure. Many large employers contract with an insurance company to administer the plan. In 2011, 82% of insured workers at companies of more than 200 employees had self-insured plans.

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on February 17, 2012, that the revised rule on insurance coverage of birth control will apply to self-insured entities, as well as policies issued by insurance companies. So all of this uproar over insurers covering contraception may be moot.

But that’s just my opinion.

Anyone familiar with the union thug tactics of SEIU and the oh-so-unbiased reporting of ‘news’ organizations like George Soros funded Media Matters employed in the 2008 election, is probably skeptical of the credibility of the Truth Teams. And rightly so.

Example- the Truth Team’s “Debunking of the so-called “War on Religion”

AttackWatch primarily refutes Mitt Romney’s statement that Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate for religious organizations is forcing religions to violate their conscious.

The Truth Team’s refutement of this rests on six points that Obama’s Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter presents.

Her first point- contraception is important to women’s health. Her evidence? Scientists and medical experts agree with her! These scientists aren’t named in the Truth Teams explanation. But if you click on the text, you’re taken to the website of the Guttmacher Institute, whose website states that its goal is to advance reproductive health and rights. Their mission also states “The Institute’s overarching goal is to ensure the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health for all people worldwide.”

Cutter states that “The fundamental belief behind this decision is that women should have access to this care, without having to worry about cost.”

Here, the Obama administration’s assumption is that this is a women’s rights issue, which is not true. Where in the Constitution is there a clause mandating the government provide low cost contraception to women? From the start, the Obama administration obscures the issue- the principle at stake is women’s rights not religious freedom. Just a thought- it’s a lot easier to make people sound evil if they’re arguing against women’s rights.

Next, Cutter writes that churches are exempt from the rule, which is about the only true statement on the website. She also states that religious organizations (charities and hospitals) will be exempt for another year. Again true, although delaying government mandates against religion isn’t exactly a point on the side of the Obama administration.

Third, Cutter writes that individual religious beliefs will be protected. No woman will be forced to take contraceptives and no doctor will be forced to proscribe them. According to Cutter, this means that no one’s religious conscience is violated. Unless you’re the head of a Catholic hospital and you’re forced to pay the insurance policy for an employee receiving contraceptives as part of your medical care. Or do church officials not count as individuals with a right to conscience?

Fourth, Cutter has the audacity to claim that 75% of women are actually behind the Obamacare mandate stating that churches should be forced to provide contraception.
Their facts to back this up? They claim 71% of Americans and 77% of Catholic women support it (the mandate). They also state that 98% of Catholic women use contraceptives.

Now, there’s no data on AttackWatch, however there is a link embedded in the text which brings you to the source of the information- Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the country.

Here is Planned Parenthood’s breakdown of their survey:

• 71 percent of all voters, including men and women, say prescription birth control should be included as preventive health care services, covered without any out-of-pocket costs.
• Seven in 10 Republican women (72 percent) said that birth control should be included as preventive health care, covered without any out-of-pocket costs.

• 77 percent of Catholic women voters said that birth control should be covered as preventive health care without any out-of-pocket costs. 


Notice the question not asked- whether women, especially Catholic women, even though they use birth control, believe their Church should be forced to provide contraceptives. So the 75% of women who supposedly think the Church should be forced to violate its conscience live only in the progressive minds of the Obama administration. Also, if 98% of women already use birth control, is there really an availability problem. And if Planned Parenthood, the darling of the left, is doing such a good job providing reproductive services to women, why does the Obama administration need to force the Church to cover contraception?

Fifth, Cutter states that the mandate will reduce employer health care payouts by 15 to 17 percent. This might sound great until you realize that this is projected savings is a result of health care services for babies that will not be born. Not only that, but these savings are purely hypothetical. The savings comes from money that is projected to be spent on the medical services a baby requires. If a baby is never born, and those services are never billed, then no money was spent, hence there is no real savings.

Cutter’s sixth point and conclusion is- President Obama loves the religious community! Apparently, the health care mandate, which forces religious employers to violate their belief that abortion is wrong, is a shining example of his commitment to religious liberty. Which actually sums up the president’s views on religion pretty well- he thinks they’re wonderful as long as they do what he wants.

So there you have it, as AttackWatch says. Indeed- there you have it. Here you have a crystal clear example of Obama’s contempt for the Constitution, and his clear contempt for the thinking brains of the American people. His endorsement of such blatant lies shows his character clearly.

So please, as AttackWatch concludes- “Now we need your help to spread the word about the administration’s stance.” Stand for truth and religious freedom and spread the words about AttackWatch’s lies.

For more information see:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/survey-nearly-three-four-voters-america-support-fully-covering-prescription-birth-control-33863.htm

http://www.attackwatch.com/debunking-the-so-called-war-on-religion/

Anyone familiar with the union thug tactics of SEIU and the oh-so-unbiased reporting of ‘news’ organizations like George Soros funded Media Matters employed in the 2008 election, is probably skeptical of the credibility of the Truth Teams. And rightly so.

Example- the Truth Team’s “Debunking of the so-called “War on Religion”

AttackWatch primarily refutes Mitt Romney’s statement that Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate for religious organizations is forcing religions to violate their conscious.

The Truth Team’s refutement of this rests on six points that Obama’s Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter presents.

Her first point- contraception is important to women’s health. Her evidence? Scientists and medical experts agree with her! These scientists aren’t named in the Truth Teams explanation. But if you click on the text, you’re taken to the website of the Guttmacher Institute, whose website states that its goal is to advance reproductive health and rights. Their mission also states “The Institute’s overarching goal is to ensure the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health for all people worldwide.”

Cutter states that “The fundamental belief behind this decision is that women should have access to this care, without having to worry about cost.”

Here, the Obama administration’s assumption is that this is a women’s rights issue, which is not true. Where in the Constitution is there a clause mandating the government provide low cost contraception to women? From the start, the Obama administration obscures the issue- the principle at stake is women’s rights not religious freedom. Just a thought- it’s a lot easier to make people sound evil if they’re arguing against women’s rights.

Next, Cutter writes that churches are exempt from the rule, which is about the only true statement on the website. She also states that religious organizations (charities and hospitals) will be exempt for another year. Again true, although delaying government mandates against religion isn’t exactly a point on the side of the Obama administration.

Third, Cutter writes that individual religious beliefs will be protected. No woman will be forced to take contraceptives and no doctor will be forced to proscribe them. According to Cutter, this means that no one’s religious conscience is violated. Unless you’re the head of a Catholic hospital and you’re forced to pay the insurance policy for an employee receiving contraceptives as part of your medical care. Or do church officials not count as individuals with a right to conscience?

Fourth, Cutter has the audacity to claim that 75% of women are actually behind the Obamacare mandate stating that churches should be forced to provide contraception.
Their facts to back this up? They claim 71% of Americans and 77% of Catholic women support it (the mandate). They also state that 98% of Catholic women use contraceptives.

Now, there’s no data on AttackWatch, however there is a link embedded in the text which brings you to the source of the information- Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the country.

Here is Planned Parenthood’s breakdown of their survey:

• 71 percent of all voters, including men and women, say prescription birth control should be included as preventive health care services, covered without any out-of-pocket costs.
• Seven in 10 Republican women (72 percent) said that birth control should be included as preventive health care, covered without any out-of-pocket costs.

• 77 percent of Catholic women voters said that birth control should be covered as preventive health care without any out-of-pocket costs. 


Notice the question not asked- whether women, especially Catholic women, even though they use birth control, believe their Church should be forced to provide contraceptives. So the 75% of women who supposedly think the Church should be forced to violate its conscience live only in the progressive minds of the Obama administration. Also, if 98% of women already use birth control, is there really an availability problem. And if Planned Parenthood, the darling of the left, is doing such a good job providing reproductive services to women, why does the Obama administration need to force the Church to cover contraception?

Fifth, Cutter states that the mandate will reduce employer health care payouts by 15 to 17 percent. This might sound great until you realize that this is projected savings is a result of health care services for babies that will not be born. Not only that, but these savings are purely hypothetical. The savings comes from money that is projected to be spent on the medical services a baby requires. If a baby is never born, and those services are never billed, then no money was spent, hence there is no real savings.

Cutter’s sixth point and conclusion is- President Obama loves the religious community! Apparently, the health care mandate, which forces religious employers to violate their belief that abortion is wrong, is a shining example of his commitment to religious liberty. Which actually sums up the president’s views on religion pretty well- he thinks they’re wonderful as long as they do what he wants.

So there you have it, as AttackWatch says. Indeed- there you have it. Here you have a crystal clear example of Obama’s contempt for the Constitution, and his clear contempt for the thinking brains of the American people. His endorsement of such blatant lies shows his character clearly.

So please, as AttackWatch concludes- “Now we need your help to spread the word about the administration’s stance.” Stand for truth and religious freedom and spread the words about AttackWatch’s lies.

For more information see:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/survey-nearly-three-four-voters-america-support-fully-covering-prescription-birth-control-33863.htm

http://www.attackwatch.com/debunking-the-so-called-war-on-religion/