Well what the **** is it Holder? I know, just a bunch of cells...that becomes what each and everyone of us are, a human being! The cruelty and degradation of humanity is startling!
The U.S. Justice Department is telling the Supreme Court that killing a human embryo by preventing the embryo from implanting in his or her mother’s uterus is not an “abortion” and, thus, drugs that kill embryos this way are not “abortion-inducing” drugs. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. The crux of the administration’s argument in this case is that when Christians form a corporation they give up the right to freely exercise their religion—n.b. live according to their Christian beliefs—in the way they run their business.....
DOJ to Supreme Court: Killing Human Embryo in Womb is Not Abortion | CNS News
Hobby Lobby shouldn't be making decisions about women's healthcare.
Neither, by the way, should the government.
And RELIGION, with respect to the law, should only be a factor when protecting the freedom to worship.
That's it.
Dear Sallow:
the same way people don't all agree what "the right to bear arms" refers to,
obviously people don't agree on what "religious free exercise" refers to either.
For the GOVT to DICTATE the degrees or applications of religious exercise and freedom,
isn't THAT govt regulating religion? if govt is in charge of dictating how to interpret laws?
this should NOT be given by top down, like a Pope preaching from the bench to the people what to believe and what is life or what is not.
Govt officials are NOT supposed to act as a divine ruler.
In cases of religious beliefs, clearly people need to reach an agreement on a local level,
in order to KEEP THESE ISSUES OUT OF GOVT JURISDICTION.
If the people AGREE on a policy, THEN we can make laws or rulings reflecting that agreement among people BEFORE we call that govt authority or public laws and contracts.
The Govt cannot be in the business of dictating religious decision FOR the people,
that's backwards.
The problem is people are NOT resolving our religious conflicts in private where these matters belong. So people keep pushing these conflicts into the legal and political realm, where they become govt issues. This is the #1 sign that govt is overreaching jursidiction.
If we are debating religious issues over abortion, when does life begin, who has the right to object, etc. govt should NOT be involved in that level of our lives where these issues come up at all.
Sallow, if you really want govt to only have a say in allowing "freedom of religious worship" that's fine -- then ALL THESE ISSUES that touch on religious beliefs (gay marriage, death penalty, abortion etc.) should also NOT BE IN GOVT HANDS.
and then Govt will not have to interfere or intervene in such matters.
Again, this confirms how our Govt was never designed to address personal religious issues.
If activists on the left insist on using Govt to represent and manage these agenda,
that is why I am pushing to separate systems by Party, to avoid this imposition back and forth. If people can't agree, then keep it within one's own Party, and invest taxes directly in those programs. Separate the prochoice and prolife where they don't pay for each other's policies, just like separating Hindus from Muslims or Protestants from Catholics.
Quit taking the agenda of either Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives, and trying to lobby for political points or majority to "impose" this policy on everyone else including those who disagree. why can't we treat and respect political beliefs equally as religious beliefs, and quit imposing back and forth. We wouldn't force pork on Muslims, or meat on Vegans; why do we force birth control policies on people who don't believe in that "for whatever reason, scientific or religious or what." We even let Atheists sue to remove a cross from a building deemed to offend ONE person. Why can't we respect prolife views?
Why aren't those equally protected as any other beliefs we don't ask to prove or justify?
