Posted on 06/24/2014 7:48:56 PM PDT by marshmallow
Washington D.C., Jun 24, 2014 / 04:57 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- While affirming the dignity of every human person, Catholic and family advocates are voicing concern over reports of an anti-discrimination executive order that could undermine religious freedom.
A group of U.S. Catholic bishops issued a statement noting “great concern” over “the reported intention of the President of the United States to issue an executive order forbidding what the Administration considers ‘discrimination’ based on ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity.’”
“Because we do not know how the executive order will define these critically important terms, or if it will provide sufficient (or any) religious freedom protection, we cannot provide substantive comment on the order,” the bishops clarified in their June 20 statement.
The document was signed by Archbishops Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco, chairman for the bishops’ Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage; Thomas Wenski of Miami, chairman of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development; William E. Lori of Baltimore, chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty; and John Nienstedt of Minneapolis, chairman of the Committee on Doctrine.
The archbishops responded to reports that an executive order is being drafted to ban discrimination by federal contractors against people who identify as gay or transgender.
The news came after the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, stalled in the House of Representatives.
If signed into action, the executive order could require organizations with federal contracts to treat same-sex partnerships as marriages, unless wide religious freedom exemptions are granted.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
Religious liberty only exists for muzzies.
Tell the Punk in chief to shut his stupid idiotic mouth. Ignore his edicts. Disregard his proclamations. It is time to rise up against the dictator.
Executive Orders can only be applied to the organizing of the executive branch, they are not laws.
+1 But there’s always the secret executive orders, the ones that get passed between the president and his best friend, the attorney general.
He can pass all the executive orders he wants, I’ll adhere to them when he starts adhering to the Constitution.
Sure, it may not impact mom-and-pop 5¢ and 10¢ stores and may not impact non-franchised restaurants, but otherwise…
FAR Clauses in contracts impact not only prime contractors, but subcontractors…and, depending upon the clause and the business involved, can impact companies that sell to those contractors / subcontractors (as vendors, not subcontractors). (You can see examples of this at L-3 Communications and Lockheed Martin)
You might ask, "so what? My company doesn't do business with the government, nor are we subcontractors to some big defense contractor." Are you sure?
Think about something like military commissaries. You may not think of companies like General Mills, Tyson's Chicken, Coca-Cola, or Eden Foods as government contractors, but if they supply products to the local post commissary, they have to sign contracts with the government that have the same type of clauses as some huge defense contractor like Lockheed or Northrop. You can include your local vegetable distributor, your local dairy, and your local bakery to the list, as well. And those who supply those businesses. (Think about local farmers, equipment suppliers, and so on)
The only question is how aggressively it will be enforced.
Think I'm over-exaggerating? Read FAR 44.402 and the associated contract clause, FAR 52.244-6, for yourselves.
The thing that frustrates me about this article, by the way, is that the only reason these bishops are speaking up is that a lot of Catholic social services have government contracts and will be impacted by this EO. Had Øbama carved out an exception for them, they would have been utterly mum about the matter regardless how many lay Catholics would have been impacted.
The thing that frustrates me about this article, by the way, is that the only reason these bishops are speaking up is that a lot of Catholic social services have government contracts and will be impacted by this EO. Had Øbama carved out an exception for them, they would have been utterly mum about the matter regardless how many lay Catholics would have been impacted.and there it is...
I’d say he can shove his executive orders, but that would only arouse his homosexuality.
On June 20, Austin Ruse, president of C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), wrote an insightful article in Crisis Magazine.
George W. Bush had a doctrine. His dad didn’t but Ronald Reagan had one. So did Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon. Also Lyndon Johnson, and John Kennedy. Gerald Ford did not last long enough to have one. Eisenhower had one. So did Truman.
No doubt Barack Obama wants one. Some say he has one but they are quick to say they are not sure what it is. There is now a six-year debate about what it might be.
I say he has one and it is clear. His number one foreign policy priority is the promotion of lesbians, gays, bi-sexuals, and transgenders around the world. It is the thing he is most consistent about and the thing he consistently backs with the might and muscle of the United States no matter what.
He issued a presidential memorandum in 2011 making LGBT rights a major foreign policy priority. He directed every part of the Federal government that does business beyond our borders to make this a priority issue including, inexplicably, the Department of Agriculture. Perhaps there are, after all, transgender farms in Sweden like there are in California.
He directed all Federal agencies to “to expand efforts to combat discrimination, homophobia, and intolerance on the basis of LGBT status or conduct.” Homophobia and intolerance are not defined but you can expect they will be defined broadly enough to get you and me.
Don’t think the Obama Doctrine is not serious or that he treats LGBT issues like he treats America’s traditional leadership role in the world, that is, with regret and disdain. No, for this he punishes. In March he withdrew greatly needed financial assistance to Uganda because Uganda passed what many see as draconian laws restricting LGBT activity, both public and private. I happen to agree that the Uganda laws are draconian but the withdrawal of development aid from such a poor country over this issue simply does not make sense except in the context of the Obama Doctrine.
Uganda is one of the poorest countries in the world. Thirty-seven percent of its population lives on less than $1.25 per day. Life expectancy at birth is 54 years. It has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the world.
Barack Obama withdrew financial support from this poor country as a sop to his rich gay friends at the Human Rights Campaign. He even withdrew money from a program to combat HIV/Aids.
Last Friday twenty-five Democratic Senators, led by Ed Markey of Massachusetts, proposed legislation that would place into law that LGBT is a foreign policy priority for the United States. Their bill goes much further than Obama’s memorandum. This bill even mandates the training of foreign soldiers in the promotion of LGBT rights. It creates a new Special Envoy, appointed by the President, who may roam the world as he sees fit to ensure that this favored group’s favored desires get the full backing of the most powerful nation on earth.
Let’s keep in mind that right now the world is on fire. The Iranians work ever closer to nuclear capability. Russia expands into Crimea and Ukraine. Somali terrorists raid Kenyan villages killing dozens. Egypt teeters on chaos. Libya is in chaos. Syria has a hot civil war going. Thailand had a military coup. Terrorists kidnap Israeli teenagers. Baghdad is about to fall to a new group no one heard of a few news cycles ago.
And what does Obama do? Besides dithering on the big things, he hoists the gay rainbow flag over embassies all over the world. We are relieved the gay flag flies not over but under the US flag, but give them time. The US holds gay pride events, including dances, in our embassies, even in countries we need as allies in our fight against Muslim extremism but who are guaranteed to find such events deeply abhorrent. We appoint otherwise unqualified men as ambassadors but who qualify because of their same-sex attraction.
The Obama Doctrine - Read More
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.