Skip to main content
Report this ad

See also:

Religious Liberty vs. Women's Health?

Since the onset of Obama’s rhetorical “War on Women” factions of society which included the legal system have argued that any and all regulations on women’s reproductive issues constitute a war against the women of this nation. As with any “war” there are hostilities and the pro-abortion advocates have defended their theoretical right to be provided with medical insurance coverage for contraceptive drugs and abortifacients.
The issue at the center of this recent struggle is whether businesses owned by Christians should be forced under the HHS mandate to provide their female employees with insurance coverage for contraceptive drugs and abortifacients when it is in direct violation of their religious beliefs. Companies such as Hobby Lobby owned by the Green family and Conestoga Wood Specialties owned by a Mennonite family challenged the HHS mandate stating that this compulsory requirement violates religious liberty.
On June 30, 2014 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that such mandatory obligations forcing Christian companies to violate their religious beliefs infringed on their rights protected 1st Amendment whereby “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and many laws are implicitly established to ensure as much as possible that one’s person’s rights end where another person’s rights begin. Despite harsh dissension from four Supreme Court justices (Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Breyer) women continue to have a right to use contraception and may obtain it by other means, and religious-based companies continue to maintain the right under the 1st Amendment to a free exercise of religion. To mandate that religious based companies must provide contraceptive and abortifacient drugs is to suppress the rights of religion in favor of inflated rights of women.
Women Speak for Themselves, a group of women founded by Helen Alvaré JD, Professor of Law at George Mason University and Kim Daniels JD, Former Counsel at Thomas More Law Center is committed to the idea that “No one speaks for all women on these [health] issues. Those who purport to do so are simply attempting to deflect attention from the serious religious liberty issues currently at stake.”
It is vital to remember that suppressing religious liberty is a slippery slope. Nations that have taken this route have encountered serious opposition. Remember the words of the Pharisee named Gamaliel from the fifth book of Acts when he warned the Pharisees against persecuting the apostles for preaching about Christ: “for if this plan or action is of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God” (Acts 5:38-39). Opposing religious freedom goes against the very foundations upon which this country was built. The magnitude of this Supreme Court ruling upholds religious freedom without denying the freedom of women’s choice. Pro-abortion supporters do not speak for ALL women – some women choose to follow their religious beliefs.

Report this ad