Midknight Review -- new and revised: Obama's attempt to force the end of the "conscience provision" was issued a blow in Federal District Court. What does this mean?

From the NY Post, we have this positive report for those who actually care and desire to preserve their religious liberties:

In a blow to President Obama’s signature legislative mandate, a Brooklyn federal judge on Monday sided with several Catholic organizations in New York, saying they do not have to comply with an Affordable Care Act requirement to provide employees with contraceptive coverage. . . . . . In the first permanent ruling on the hot-button issue, US District Court Judge Brian Cogan said the religious groups should not be forced to comply with the birth control component of Obamacare. . . . . Cogan ruled the plaintiffs “demonstrated that the mandate, despite accommodation, compels them to perform acts that are contrary to their religion. And there can be no doubt that the coercive pressure here is substantial. They consider this to be an endorsement of such coverage; to them, the self-certification compels affirmation of a repugnant belief . . . . “It is not for this Court to say otherwise.” He also suggested that employees could be provided with contraception through alternate government programs without the involvement of their religious employer . . . . . read the full article here.

Editor’s notes: There are 94 Federal District Courts, 13 Federal Appellate courts and the Supreme Court. This decision is far from a final decision on the issue in question. In time, this and several other District Court decisions, no doubt, will wind up in one or more Federal Appellate courts and then on to a petition for a hearing at the High Court Clearlytlevel.

I think it significant that “religious freedom” is protected in this decision, not disregarded as per the design of the Obama Administration. But more than this, the court made the case that its decision did not prevent employees who so desire, from applying for and receiving free contraception services available in other Federal programs.

Which brings me to this question: Why is this Administration forcing employers to violate their religious consciences over the issue of birth control, if free services are available, elsewhere and to all, within the Federal insurance system? Could it be that Obama is simply trying to break the back of the religious collective - specifically the Christian collective - within this country?

Just asking.

The Stated Nonsense from the Left now includes these Progressive goals:

July 2, 2008, Obama had this to say: "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

MICHELLE OBAMA: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

“ . . . . . . they have become a generation of activists possessed with that most American of ideas – that people who love their country can change it.” -- Obama the Radical

On September 30, Van Jones told MSNBC "I think everybody should hold onto your seats. October is going to be the turning point when it comes to the progressive fight back."

Midknight Review -- new and revised

Obama's attempt to force the end of the "conscience provision" was issued a blow in Federal District Court. What does this mean?

No comments:

Post a Comment

copyright policy of the original Midknight Review