Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist and Jewish Leaders Swear Disobedience to HHS Contraception Mandate

A House hearing has exposed some surprising responses from religious leaders who testified that hey would go to jail and even shut down medical facilities in defiance of the Obamacare contraception mandate.

This is really getting hot and heavy.

(CNSNews.com) - Would you go to jail--or even close down your hospitals and schools--rather than violate your religious faith, a Republican lawmaker asked religious leaders at a House hearing on Thursday. The answer, given under oath, was unanimous: They will disobey.

"We're not going to violate our consciences," William E. Lori, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Bridgeport, Conn., told Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) in response to Gowdy's question about the Obama administration's contraception mandate.

The Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, president of the Lutheran Church's Missouri Synod, said, "Yes, I would, clearly" rather go to jail.

Article and video:
They will disobey Obama !


It looks like a conservative movement is alive and well in the USA

Aside from the possible unconstitutional language in Obamacare, this effort may be fueling an anti-liberal movement as well


Can the Liberal movement withstand this onslaught ??

Originally posted by xuenchen

Can the Liberal movement withstand this onslaught ??

The Liberal Movement will wither away once they both parties run out of other peoples money.

Why should they follow a law that disagrees with their faith? the answer is they shouldn't, and I'm not some bible thumper, I'm a Pagan, rooting for the Christians on this one. Its against the constitution and against freedom of religion. But that hasn't stopped this govt in the past...

I'm really impressed. This is the kind of faithfulness and backbone that Ron Paul has shown in other issues. Go religious guys! There is hope for the country yet! I wish there was some way I could protest this as well.

Originally posted by xuenchen
A House hearing has exposed some surprising responses from religious leaders who testified that hey would go to jail and even shut down medical facilities in defiance of the Obamacare contraception mandate.

This is really getting hot and heavy.

(CNSNews.com) - Would you go to jail--or even close down your hospitals and schools--rather than violate your religious faith, a Republican lawmaker asked religious leaders at a House hearing on Thursday. The answer, given under oath, was unanimous: They will disobey.

"We're not going to violate our consciences," William E. Lori, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Bridgeport, Conn., told Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) in response to Gowdy's question about the Obama administration's contraception mandate.

The Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, president of the Lutheran Church's Missouri Synod, said, "Yes, I would, clearly" rather go to jail.

Article and video:
They will disobey Obama !


It looks like a conservative movement is alive and well in the USA

Aside from the possible unconstitutional language in Obamacare, this effort may be fueling an anti-liberal movement as well


Can the Liberal movement withstand this onslaught ??

You're damn straight i will go to jail before i disobey my King and my God. I obey the laws of man until they come into conflict with the laws of the Messiah, on the day they come into conflict with what is in accordance with him we make our stand. We bow down to only one King and he is not Obama, but he is Yahshua haMeshiach otherwise known as Jesus the Christ.

If a hospital is closed down due to refusal to comply then the blood of those who die will go on Obama's hands. he is not our Master.

The real question of authority here is what is ethical and moral on the behalf of the patient .


Jehovah witnesses don't believe in blood transfusions...would it be ethical to grant These churches an exemption from covering this procedure on religious grounds? Of course not. Is it the patients choice to refuse the procedure ; absolutely.

Now let's take a patient with auto-immune disease with high risk of pre-clampsia that could result in a life threatening pregnancy : is it ethical to deny coverage for contraceptive ..no

I believe that it is highly unethical and immoral to practice medicine that is not in the best interest of patients , due to unproven claims outside the realm of evidence based practice.

The church does not have the ultimate authority to make outlandish claims and apply them to medical practices when it results in patient harm.

I believe in the separation of church and state , I do, but when the church takes decisions out of the hands of individuals an appoints itself the moral authority on what is good for the majority even though it is harmful ...I don't believe anyone can rationally defend that.

reply to post by paleorchid13


Some good points that will undoubtedly be debated.

I think the main point of all the uproar is whether or not the mandates are unconstitutional.

We can all believe in whatever we want, but the government is not supposed to tell anybody what's better or worse, and then demand a universal rate increase to have everybody pay for the idealism intended.

I think that is the issue.

I've always found the hippocratic oath to be rather interesting, and it's extension or solidification in the declaration of geneva which apparently originally included this:

en.wikipedia.org...
I will maintain the utmost respect for human life, from the time of its conception, even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity;

"from the time of it's conception" but this however has been removed from the "updated" version. I suppose as population control is important and the medical industry is perhaps the best through which to enact it this should be no surprise. These men and women are bearers of secrets, their brothers and sisters are not humanity but rather their colleagues who also guard secrets. How can any of them be trusted?

I am grateful that there still exists those who value life and though I am not of the opinion that contraception/abortion should be outlawed, as it is for the guardians of that soul to decide its fate and whether they are fit for the task, I feel they must be fully informed and most definitely should never be forced into either situation.

EDIT: A link to the hippocratic oath: en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by paleorchid13


I'm always glad to discover "the real question," that makes discussion a lot easier. But it seems to me that you only have a partial grasp of the question. Let me explain why I think that way.

Both of your examples deal with providing medical care to a patient. That's important, yes. But the Obama rules are ordering those hospitals to cover their employees' contraceptive care costs. There's no discussion about medical treatment in these rules. The patients are not discussed in the rules.

The hospital's medical decisions are not addressed in these regulations. That might make a very good thread, checking to see if Catholic hospitals provide different procedures, but I don't think that's what we're talking about here.

reply to post by charles1952


Sorry , you're correct ..I did look at that wrong. *blush*