The War Against Christianity: Operation “Women’s Health”

As has been the S.O.P. of the Obama Dictatorship…errr…Presidency, Director of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, under the orders of her boss, President Barack Hussein Obama, (mm mmm mmmm), issued as Friday Night Document Dump, announcing their plans to go forward with making Religious Medical Organizations offer contraceptives and abortiafacients, even if it violates the tenants of their faith.

That’s not all.  Now, the administration of a man who attended a Black Liberation Theology Church, sitting under the teachings of a former Black Muslim  for 20 years, is going to decide what is or is not a “Religion Organization”.

Here is part of the advance PDF of the report:

On February 10, 2012, the Departments also announced their intention to provide an accommodation with respect to non-exempt, non-profit religious organizations with religious objections to contraceptive coverage. The final regulation concerning student health insurance plans, published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, states that this intention extends to student health insurance plans arranged by non-profit religious institutions of higher education with such objections. This accommodation would apply to some or all organizations that qualify for the temporary enforcement safe harbor, and possibly to additional organizations. Thus, a question for purposes of the intended regulations is: What entities should be eligible for the new accommodation (that is, what is a “religious organization”)?

One approach would be to adopt the definition of religious organization used in another statute or regulation. For example, the definition used in one or more State laws to afford a religious exemption from a contraceptive coverage requirement could be adopted. Alternatively, the intended regulations could base their definition on another Federal law, such as section 414(e) the Code and section 3(33) of ERISA, which set forth definitions for purposes of “church plans.”

A definition based on these provisions may include organizations such as hospitals, universities, and charities that are exempt from taxation under section 501 of the Code and that are controlled by or associated with a church or a convention or association of churches. In developing a definition of religious organization, we are cognizant of the important role of ministries of churches and, as such, seek to accommodate their religious objections to contraceptive coverage.

The Departments seek comment on which religious organizations should be eligible for the accommodation and whether, as some religious stakeholders have suggested, for-profit religious employers with such objections should be considered as well.

The Departments underscore, as we did with respect to the definition of religious employer in the final regulations, that whatever definition of religious organization is adopted will not be applied with respect to any other provision of the PHS Act, ERISA, or the Code, nor is it intended to set a precedent for any other purpose. And, while the participants and beneficiaries covered under the health plans offered by a “religious employer” compared to those covered under the health plans offered by a “religious organization” will have differential access to contraceptive coverage, nothing in the final regulations or the forthcoming regulations is intended to differentiate among the religious merits, commitment, mission, or public or private standing of the organizations themselves. 

Regardless of the definition of religious organization that is proposed, the Departments are considering proposing the same or a similar process for self-certification that will be used for the temporary enforcement safe harbor referenced in the final regulations.

Under that process, an individual authorized by the organization certifies that the organization satisfies the eligibility criteria, and the self-certification is made available for examination. The Departments expect that, for purposes of the proposed accommodation, religious organizations would make a similar self-certification, and similarly make the self-certification available for examination. The self-certification would be used to put the independent entity responsible for providing contraceptive coverage on notice that the religious organization has invoked the accommodation. The future rulemaking would require that the independent entity be responsible for providing the contraceptive coverage in this case.

By the way, what sort of “downtrodden” lifestyle was the “Poster Child” for “Women’s Health” doing she appeared before Congress wanting us to pay for her $3,000 worth of contraception expenses per year?

She and her boyfriend Fluke and her boyfriend, Adam “Cutie Pants” Mutterperl recently traveled to Spain and Italy together.

The 30 year old women’s rights activist and her rich socialist boyfriend were photographed while drunk in the streets over there.

Adam is a proud boyfriend. He tweeted the following recently:

Rush Limbaugh just called my girlfriend a “slut” and a “prostitute” on his show! She’s finally made the big time!

Adam’s rich Daddy, Bill, is a huge Democratic Donor and Operative.

So, just like the cause she’s advocating, Fluke’s real agenda is hidden from the American public.

What in the world gives the Obama Administration the right to decide what is a “religious organization”?  Especially, after the President, himself, attended a “church” for 20 years that views Jesus Christ as a revolutionary along the lines of the murderer, Che Guevara.  

This is not about “Women’s Health”.  This is about facilitating the cradle-to-grave control of our lives by “The State”…and the callous stopping of helpless beating hearts.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

3 Responses to “The War Against Christianity: Operation “Women’s Health””

  1. darwin Says:

    I don’t see why you’re so shocked. After all, 0zero now determines when the Senate is and is not in recess.

  2. Badger40 Says:

    This:
    Amendment 1
    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.

    And this:
    Amendment 10
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    So the question is, WHY do the American people put up with this?
    We need the states to come forward with resolutions, like KY & VA did in response to the ALien & Sedition Acts.
    States need to GET A CLUE on this.
    This, I feel, is the ONLY way to stop the Federal Tyranny we are experiencing.

  3. Gohawgs Says:

    The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 this past January in a “religion” case. It will be interesting to see Ginsburg, Kagen, and Sotomayor contort themselves when this freedom of religion case comes before the Court. I guess this contraceptive mandate will be a mute issue after the Supremes rule obamacare to be UNconstitutional…

    “…The present case, in contrast,concerns government interference with an internal church decision that affects the faith and mission of the church itself. Pp. 13–15.”…

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-553.pdf

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,617 other followers

%d bloggers like this: