Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The HHS Mandate and Judicial Theocracy
The Public Discourse ^ | 1/3/13 | Melissa Moschella

Posted on 01/05/2013 1:23:12 PM PST by rhema

If we are to preserve our First Amendment rights, judges must refrain from telling plaintiffs challenging the HHS mandate that they’ve got their theology wrong.

Are judges more competent to determine what a particular religion requires or forbids than that religion’s own leaders or adherents? Most would think not. Yet that’s what two of the recent rulings related to the Health and Human Services contraception, sterilization, and abortion-drug mandate seem to claim.

Recently, in Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, federal district judge Joe Heaton of the western district of Oklahoma ruled against the Greens, the devout Christian owners of Hobby Lobby arts and crafts stores. The Greens strive to operate their company in accordance with Christian principles, paying generous wages, closing earlier than most other stores so that employees can spend time with their families, and not opening on Sundays.

Like many Christians, the Greens object to the HHS mandate’s requirement to offer coverage for certain “emergency contraceptives,” such as Ella and Plan B, which they believe cause early abortions. These drugs can sometimes work by preventing or interfering with the embryo’s implantation, thus triggering a miscarriage.

The Greens claim that they cannot comply with the mandate because their religion forbids them to facilitate access to abortion. The mandate went into effect January 1, and since the Supreme Court denied the Greens' subsequent request for emergency injunctive relief, remaining faithful to their religious beliefs may cost them up to 1.3 million dollars per day in fines. It is worth noting that Judge Sotomayor's denial of Hobby Lobby's appeal is no indication of how the Supreme Court will ultimately rule on the HHS mandate cases, because the standard for granting emergency relief is more stringent than the standard for granting a religious exemption under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

(Excerpt) Read more at thepublicdiscourse.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: hhs; hobbylobby; obama; obamacare

1 posted on 01/05/2013 1:23:17 PM PST by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rhema

Judges are gov’t employees, politicians, and former lawyers. They are part of the political class. The game is rigged.


2 posted on 01/05/2013 2:04:21 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhema

If anyone doubts that judges have also “rigged the game” please see OrlyTaitzEsq.com (Jan. 3, 2013) where the US Attorney and Judge England agreed that the Constitution does not require the President have a valid birth certificate, a valid social security number, and a selective service card which is not a forgery. Orly replied that it does not require the President to have a pulse or brain activity either.


3 posted on 01/05/2013 5:27:56 PM PST by charlie72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson