For starters, this is not just a “Catholic” issue. It’s an “Everybody” issue. But before I get to that, let’s say, just for the sake of argument, that it is a Catholic Church issue.
In stating that the Church ‘cannot impose their religious views’ on employees, Rep. Nadler has reversed reality.
The Church (and it’s many sponsored affiliates and institutions) does not force anybody to come to work for them. People come to Catholic institutions seeking employment. Catholic institutions do not hire people based on their religious preferences (if any), and they do not require them to be Catholic.
Let’s say you are interviewing someone for a job, and that person states that they will only take the job if you allow them to date your spouse. What would you think? You, hopefully, would end the interview immediately and go on to the next person in line.
Why? Because, you believe, for a prospective employe to make such a demand is immoral, and for them to expect you to capitulate to an immoral demand is unreasonable.
What if the government sites ‘scientific’ studies that show that sexual activity between employes and their employers’ spouses is healthy and, that being the case, you have to allow that person to date your spouse or face fines? Who is imposing their views on whom? Who is using coercion? Who is making threats?
You or the government?
You may say “That’s ridiculous! That will never happen!”
Hopefully not, but the point is that the government is attempting to coerce you into doing something that you consider immoral.
And immoral is immoral. Whether it’s forcing someone to provide – directly or indirectly – access to abortifacients, sterilizations, contraceptives, abortions; or forcing them to allow your employe have an adulterous relationship with your spouse.
Aside from all that, because they were free to seek employment with a Catholic institution, they are also free to leave and seek employment elsewhere. There is no coercion on the part of the institution to keep them from leaving. Nobody is stopping them.
Rep Lowey says that 99% of Catholic women use contraception. Probably not, but let’s give her the benefit of the doubt – in fact, let’s bump it up for her. Let’s say it’s 102%. Let’s say that more Catholic women than exist use artificial contraception.
What’s her point? You cannot judge a Church by the people who do not adhere to it’s teachings. AND you cannot force a church to change or disregard it’s teachings because a large number of it’s ‘professed’ followers don’t practice what they profess to follow.
The Catholic Church is not a democracy. It’s teachings are not based on popular culture, politics, personal feelings or somebody’s whim. It’s teachings are based on the ‘be-ing’ (Who He is) of Jesus Christ, and they haven’t changed in over 2000 years of practice.
Even if you don’t believe that, the Church believes that, and that’s not going to change. And anyone who thinks differently does not understand the Catholic Church.
There are some things that Reps Nadler and Lowey don’t seem to know.
- The Church is full of sinners – sinners are the only reason for the Church to exist. Jesus didn’t just drop in to say “hi”. He came to reconcile sinners to God. And he left the Church behind to carry on that mission. If that wasn’t true, we wouldn’t have churches at all.
- Lots of those sinners repent and are reconciled. They have changed whatever it was they needed to change and are attempting to follow the teaching of the Church. Even if they fail on occasion they pick themselves back up and continue on with their struggle. In the cases of abortion, sterilization, contraception, etc., many (perhaps millions) have had a change of heart and have abandoned these practices.
- The Catholic Church does not change doctrine.
- The Catholic Church does not change doctrine.
- The Catholic Church does not change doctrine.
I could go on and on, but that would be getting beyond the scope of this article.
Here is the real issue here:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The very first words in the First Amendment were put there to prevent the state (government) from creating a state religion, influencing the doctrines of religions or interfering in any way the “free exercise thereof”. Early Americans had had enough of that in the old country. That’s why they came here.
By attempting to force institutions or INDIVIDUALS to act against their moral beliefs, the government is injecting it’s demands into the practice of one’s faith – effectively creating a state religion.
And if they can do it to one religion, they can do it to any or all religions.
And if they can do it with contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilizations, what’s to prevent them from throwing in abortions, euthanasia, eugenics (we’ve had that before, you know) and a host of other things that you might (or might not) consider undesirable.
And if they can do it to churches and other religious institutions, what is to stop them from doing it to individual company owners (or even large companies/institutions that self insure) who’s beliefs prevent them from supporting – directly or indirectly – things that go against their consciences?
And if they can do it to the “religion” part of the First Amendment, what’s to stop them from doing it to the rest of the First Amendment? What’s to stop them from restricting speech (that’s already begun – Political Correctness or Hate Speech, anyone?) or a free press or the right of assembly or the right to complain to a public official?
Answer: NOTHING.
It doesn’t matter what your political leanings are, if you believe in your right to free speech at any level, what’s happening with the HHS mandate should scare the hell out of you.
Maybe even literally.
