Obama Administration: We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith

page: 1
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+10 more 
posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Obama Administration: We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith


cnsnews.com

In a legal argument formally presented in federal court in the case of Hobby Lobby v. Kathleen Sebelius, the Obama administration is claiming that the First Amendment—which expressly denies the government the authority to prohibit the “free exercise” of religion—nonetheless allows it to force Christians to directly violate their religious beliefs even on a matter that involves the life and death of innocent human beings.

Because federal judges—including Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor—have refused to grant an injunction protecting the owners of Hobby Lobby from being force
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
visiontoamerica.com
www.gather.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
edit on 31-12-2012 by pavelivanov22 because: (no reason given)



+27 more 
posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Well here comes Obama he is going to start taking away our rights little by little. Wait until Obamacare..

Sad to see Christians being denied there freedom of religion too..

Sad to see this in USA brought up by christian principles and was blessed by God, now that they take him away from everything, this country is going downhill and fast. defiantly living in the end times.





cnsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
jeez is obama just wanting to get everyone pissed off at him now they he cant be president again or what... wtf is going on with him lately.. change is right.. for the worse.


+11 more 
posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Good news! If you are a Muslim, Amish, American Indian, you are exempt!



EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.


—In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following information:

In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual’s status as a
member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian,
or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe.”

Senate Bill, H.R. 3590, pages 273-274

There are several reasons why an individual could claim exemption, being a member of a religion that does not believe in insurance is one of them. Islam is one of those religions. Muslims believe that health insurance is “haraam”, or forbidden; because they liken the ambiguity and probability of insurance to gambling. This belief excludes them from any of the requirements, mandates, or penalties set forth in the bill. Other excluded groups include Amish, American Indians, and Christian Scientists.

libertyandpride.com...

If not? Suck it up, buttercup!



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by pavelivanov22
 


Not saying I don't disagree with anything you posted, but we have been going downhill for a very long time. Honestly we're close to hitting the bottom of the hill (more like cliff?).

The topic itself is pretty whacked. My opinion on it is everyone is entitled to their own faith and choose to believe (or not believe) in whatever they wish. Cased closed, but I guess things can never be simple and accepting, and amendment rights getting plucked away one by one until there are none...

Star and flag.

-SAP-
edit on 31-12-2012 by SloAnPainful because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Sickening... Makes me think of the poster who spoke of ATS and how they do not allow freedom of speech. In their defense the ATS staff says the T&C's overrule the 1st amendement, because it is a "privately owned" website.

So get this..
"The first argument the administration makes against the owners of Hobby Lobby is that Americans lose their First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion when they form a corporation and engage in commerce. A person’s Christianity, the administration argues, cannot be carried out through activities he engages in through an incorporated business."

"In keeping with Delery’s argument, the Washington Post, as a corporation, can use its First Amendment-protected freedom of speech to write editorials in support of the Obama administration imposing its contraception mandate on businesses like Hobby Lobby. But the members of the family that created and owns Hobby Lobby, because they formed Hobby Lobby as a corporation, have no First Amendment freedom of religion that protects them from being forced by the government to act against their religious beliefs in providing abortion-inducing drugs."

All these rules, these words about "privacy" are nothing but a play on words. Freedom of speech is the foundation and should be honored as such, regardless. Privacy should be strictly defined, and have relation to physical property, not VIRTUAL property.

For the record, virtual privacy DOES NOT EXIST.
edit on 30-12-2012 by chadderson because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Well, Muslims, Amish and the Native Americans may be exempt but Sotomayor sure didn't see it the same way for Hobby Lobby or the chain of Christian Book Stores seeking a temporary injunction from ...you guessed it..

ANOTHER present arriving on Wednesday! I mean, we just have a full plate in a few days as News Hounds. It should be non stop wall to wall events for weeks.


In her brief, Sotomayor said the Supreme Court has never weighed in on similar freedom-of-religious claims brought by for-profit corporations objecting to mandatory provisions of employment benefits laws.

"Moreover, the applicants rightly recognize that Lower courts have diverged on whether to grant temporary relief to similarly situated plaintiffs raising similar claims," she wrote. "And no court has issued a final decision granting permanent relief with respect to such claims."

The "Obamacare" law requires business and organizations, except for religious entities such as churches, to provide access to contraception coverage. The plaintiffs claim they do not object to providing insurance coverage for every contraceptive, but do object to the so-called "morning-after pill," which they consider an abortifacient.
Source - Court News Services

Happy New Year!



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by pavelivanov22
 


Christians...Some good ones out there but THEY follow the word of Christ, not the politics of the Pope or the Bishops of the Church

After the priests were accused and found guilty of pedophilia, then we come to find thousands of children abused by the church and by Christian men of God, on top of it we discover the CHURCH has been covering up pedophilia all these years -

I find it hard to take anything the church decrees seriously.
Anyone else would be in jail for turning a blind eye - this guy is Pope now.

I wonder instead if we have not been horribly deluded in trusting the church at all?

Nothing is against their "faith" btw, although it might be against their religion.

Faith is something else entirely.
edit on 31-12-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Well, legally its true, to the letter of the law anyway!
Sounds to me, like another republican attack!

Theres your issue:


The Greens, who are Evangelical Christians, do not suspend their religious beliefs while running their businesses. Instead,they strive to run them fully in accordance with their Christian beliefs. They are unanimous in stating that they have always “sought to run Hobby Lobby in harmony with God’s laws and in a manner which brings glory to God.”


because:


The first argument the administration makes against the owners of Hobby Lobby is that Americans lose their First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion when they form a corporation and engage in commerce. A person’s Christianity, the administration argues, cannot be carried out through activities he engages in through an incorporated business.


sadly, the law exists and you cant 'strive' to be different.
edit on 31-12-2012 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)


+13 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
It's funny because if Christians were really honest with themselves, maybe they would actually question their faith, because in all actual reality, most religions really don't have a problem with loss of innocent life.

C'mon, someone had to say it
edit on 31-12-2012 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)


+7 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   


being a member of a religion that does not believe in insurance


So the truth comes out- it's not that Obama is favoring non-christians, they are just giving exemptions to religions that think health insurance is against their faith. As usual, conservatives are highly exaggerating to create outrage.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


There are churches out there who say they are christian and believe in God, but do not follow according to his word, if they did things like that would not happen.


+39 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavelivanov22
Sad to see this in USA brought up by christian principles and was blessed by God,
Please Sir, Show me a Link to where the US was Blessed by God.

The US is Probably the Most Barbaric Country since Mongolia's Genghis Khan.


+6 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
So he is only targeting Christians?

Oh wait, hasn't it been said that he is Muslim? Ok, makes sense now that this is the exact agenda of the 'Other' religion.

Peace



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Those in authority can force others to do things against their religious beliefs. However, one day they will have to answer to a higher power. If what they are doing brings down the wrath of God on them, I hope they are far away from me. Obviously doing such things against people trying to follow their religious beliefs is anti-christian in my opinion. If allowed to persist, it would also mean that the US constitution no longer is valid and our government is a joke because it pretends to uphold the constitution but does not. Maybe that's where we are at. At least half the population doesn't even seem to care.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by orionthehunter
 


Thats the way it looks like.
America got who they voted for.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavelivanov22
reply to post by orionthehunter
 


Thats the way it looks like.
America got who they voted for.


Off topic: I didn't vote for him.

Just sayin'.

-SAP-
edit on 31-12-2012 by SloAnPainful because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by SloAnPainful

Originally posted by pavelivanov22
reply to post by orionthehunter
 


Thats the way it looks like.
America got who they voted for.


I didn't vote for him.

Just sayin'.

-SAP-


The majority did, but i doubt anyones vote even counts when it is all rigged.


+7 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Sure doesn't take long for the "I Hate America" and "I Hate Religion" folks to come running with bells on. I think it was a matter of mere moments.

I don't see where this topic has anything whatsoever to do with the fundamental issues of the Church, Christianity or the finer points of theology. It's a point blank question of whether the United States Federal Government can or cannot order citizens to act in a way that directly contradicts their faith? That faith, in this case is Christian. So they come at the Christians first. We'll see what happens next when those Amish or Jews or Buhddists have a core and deep religious belief that contradicts A FUTURE decree from on-high.

I can't help but think if this is allowed to stand and a good part of that Freedom of Religion concept is taken....it WILL be more issues and it WILL be other Faiths down the road.

First they came for the Jews...and I said nothing for I wasn't Jewish! Then they came for the Gypsies and I said nothing because I wasn't Roma! ......When they come for each of us? We'll have happily dealt away the rights and freedoms of everyone else first ...so no one will remain to say a thing for those of us left.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavelivanov22
Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.godlikeproductions.com...


Uuuum, GLP isn't ATS.
You might want to correct that before the edit period maxes out.





top topics
 
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join