“Maybe the Founders were wrong to guarantee free exercise of religion in the First Amendment but that is what they did and I don’t think we have to choose here.”

Here’s a transcript of the conversation between Henneberger and Matthews aired last night (2/8/12) from NewsBusters:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: There you have the ideological argument from the left, I suppose, the progressives in this country. You heard it well-spoken there, I believe, Melinda, they see it as an argument over whether you’re allowed to have birth control or getting covered as part of the insurance or not. The Catholic Church and those who are looking at the interests of the, well, the First Amendment if you will, as they see it look at it differently. Explain this distinction and how you look at the interests involved, the conflicts, the rights involved here.

MELINDA HENNEBERGER (Washington Post): I just think the two sides can’t hear each other, not that there is anything unusual about that. But I know in my own conversations with friends, I’m saying, "First Amendment, First Amendment, First Amendment." And what I hear back is, "Wow. I had no idea you, you didn’t believe in birth control." You know, this really is  seen widely among Catholics and people of other faiths as an attack on religious liberty. Maybe the Founders were wrong to guarantee free exercise of religion in the First Amendment, but that is what they did and I don’t think we have to choose here. The key is that I think there are ways we can go about this where, without infringing on any concern about a woman’s health, we can still guarantee religious liberty without which, I mean, there is no way this is going to stand in the court but it’s also a huge political liability.

MATTHEWS: Okay. You say there is no way it’s going to stand in the court. Let’s assume there is no legislation that gets signed by the President. Let’s assume it stands between this who’s going to blink thing. Let’s ask, will the Catholic Church, let’s ask, blink? Can you imagine them saying we give up. We’re going to provide full insurance coverage with no co-pay for everything now defined by the FDA as birth control. They’re going to do it. They’re going to go for this?

HENNEBERGER: That actually can never happen so they would have to literally go- I mean, what Sister Carol Keehan is saying who runs the Catholic Health association, do I really have to choose between the call that I think came from Jesus to serve the have nots in this world and the government telling me that I have to do something that goes against my faith? I mean, this really- that will never happen so what they’re doing is guaranteeing people, you know, these Catholic outfits and others can’t serve the populations that they were called to serve. But, it does not have to come to that.

Response: Remember WaPo editor Melinda Henneberger was defending the Catholic Church in the conversation and supporting the rights of the church to continue their allied ministries and looking for someway that religious freedom could be preserved while maintaining a woman’s right to choose and receive expanded healthcare.

The conversation is revealing on a number of different levels. Both Henneberger and Matthews are progressives and the issue is really about how they might be able to get around the Constitution which allows religious freedom and yet provide for a progressive agenda which supports a woman’s ‘right to choose’ and wants to provide for contraceptives, abortive next-day pills, and ultimately abortion through mandated health care insurance on the dime of employers, even religious ones.

Matthews sees the progressive ‘right to choose’ agenda as trumping religious rights. Henneberger points out here that the 1st amendment of Constitution will actually end up supporting the church in this matter therefore they must find a way around it.

The slip of the tongue here by the WaPo editor ( Maybe the Founders were wrong to guarantee free exercise of religion in the First Amendment) actually reveals an on-going  battle in progressive think tanks over what the 1st Amendment actually means and how to get around it in order to support a hierarchy of rights for homosexuals and women.

The current progressive thinking is that the ‘freedom of religion’ in this country needs to be re-interpreted and limited to a ‘freedom of worship’ instead. A ‘freedom of worship’ only affects what is happening within a religious worship center itself and does not include the public square. This seems to be the Obama Administration approach. If Barack Obama gets a 2nd term then the issue will be front and center as he chooses 100’s of federal judges which also reflect that view.

Here are links to a couple of articles I have written on the issue:

-Is the First Amendment In Danger of Being Overridden For the ‘Greater Good’? 

-What’s the Difference: ‘Freedom of Religion’ vs. ‘Freedom of Worship’

*Top

                                                     (Image via Wikipedia)

This is a story that continues to escalate and shows no sign of going away anytime soon. Here’s a link to my first article on the confrontation between the Obama administration and the Catholic Church over a new requirement to provide for contraceptives and after-morning abortive pills in their health-care coverage of workers in the church’s allied ministries.

The Bishops sent out letters 2 weeks ago to be read in the churches all across America protesting the new requirement and laying down a gauntlet and drawing a line in the sand stating that the church has no intention of ever complying with the order.

At that point, President Obama who personally signed off on the HHS ( Department of Health and Human Services) order had to be wondering how he got himself into this mess during an election year. The administration did back off somewhat by giving the Catholics and others a year to comply with the order hoping to put off any confrontation till after the election. However, the issue continues to expand on many different levels.

One battle front was the military. Letters were sent out to be read by Catholic chaplains in the Army but the administration through the chain of command initially ordered the chaplains to stand down and not read the letter to Catholic soldiers. Some Catholic chaplains disobeyed the order and read the letter from their Bishops anyway. Then a new letter was crafted and approved that left off the part that seemed to encourage civil disobedience against the commander-in-chief.

This whole issue is now taking on a life of its own and becoming larger than just the original issue. Some protestant leaders are now joining the battle with concern over the Obama administrations penchant towards issuing executive orders that could well end up challenging everyone’s religious freedoms in the future.

Here’s a link to an article by Dr. Albert Mohler (President of  The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) who sees it as a larger issue -an attack on religious freedom itself:

The President, the Pill, and Religious Liberty in Peril

Here’s a couple of quotes from Mohler’s article:

“In actuality, the Obama Administration trampled religious liberty under the feet of the leviathan state, forcing religious employers to do what conscience will not allow. Religious organizations such as schools, colleges, and hospitals will be required to pay for services that they believe to be immoral and disobedient to God.”

…

“Every president faces decisions that test his character and principles. President Obama has failed this test, and the results will be tragic. He has trampled religious liberty underfoot and has announced his intention to force religious institutions to violate their consciences or go out of business.”

Response: This issue is way bigger than I initially thought. I believe that Dr. Mohler and others are correct in framing it in the context of the larger issue of religious freedom and liberty in America. If Catholics do not have the right to follow their own conscience in matters related to their allied ministries than religious liberty has been diminished on our watch.             *Top

Related Posts?:

1. -Catholic Bishops: “Will Not Comply” with Obama Administration Contraceptives Order
2. -USCIRF Shutdown: Obama Administration No Longer Cares About Religious Freedom?

                     (Image by elycefeliz via Flickr)

Last Sunday, Catholic churches all across America read a letter to congregants supporting the church’s stance against the Obama administration order that employers must include contraception and abortion-inducing drugs in their health-care coverage. Churches are exempt from the order but not allied ministries including hospitals, schools, and colleges regardless of faith-based opposition.

The Obama administration has given the Catholic ministries and other church-affiliated hospitals and organizations one year to comply. The Catholic bishops are saying that they ‘will not comply’ with the federal requirement devised by the current administration setting up a legal battle in the near future.

Response: This is a significant battle for religious freedom. Many churches have allied ministries that they support and they should not be required to violate the faith-based belief system that is the foundation for these allied organizations in the first place.

The Catholic Church stands firmly opposed to all medications and procedures that would terminate the life of an unborn child. Some of the contraceptives themselves are abortive in nature in that they can potentially eliminate already fertilized eggs contrary to Catholic beliefs.

The Catholic Bishops are taking a stand here that could help to clarify whether the First Amendment and ‘religious freedom’ in this country is going to be extended to associated religious ministries or limited only to official churches and worship centers. For many religions, schools are an official part of their ongoing ministry. Where is the line to be drawn

Recently the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of a church firing a school teacher  but that person was also a licensed minister. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the years to come since many times Catholic Schools in particular are so closely identified with the church and the administration over the local church and school many times involves the same personnel.            *Top

Related Posts?:

1. -Catholic Bishops: Religious Liberty is Eroding in America
2. -NY Catholic Bishop Speaks Out Against Gay Marriage

                (Image via Wikipedia)

The dictator is gone and the ‘free’ elections in Egypt are over and have produced an Islamist majority in Parliament. Even though their were many incidences where the Coptic Christians were kept from voting, former president Jimmy Carter judged the elections to be “acceptable”

Now Coptic Christians who make up approximately 10% of the population are concerned about their future.

Life under Mubarak was not all that rosy for the Copts but at least they were protected most of the time from radical violence. Lately the authorities have stood by while churches were attacked and Christian businesses and homes were burned.

Now with a coming new government dominated by Islamists who control 70% of the Parliament (the Muslim Brotherhood controls 46% of the seats along with the more radical Salafi Nour Party who control 24%), Coptic Christians are worried that their community will no longer be protected from radical violence. Also, if Sharia law becomes a larger part of the legal system in the country, then the Copts will not receive equal justice under the law and possibly be subject to paying a tax to remain Christian in their own ancient homeland.

One Coptic author, Amin Makram Ebeid, has summarized four different Coptic responses to the situation:

1. A minority, though sizeable, is planning to emigrate.

2. The largest group is looking for spiritual, perhaps even mystical solutions.

3. A smaller party is dedicated to stay and fight for their rights, especially in securing a non-Islamist constitution, which according to the national referendum in March is the provenance of parliament.

4. Finally, there is a group that is looking to cooperate with Islamists, provided Copts do not lose their identity in the process.

Response: Meanwhile, leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood before the election promised to look after the interests of the Coptic Christians after they took over the reins of government. However, the Brotherhood and the Salafi Noor party also promised that they would establish sharia to be the law of the land so it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Christians should remember to pray for our Christian brothers and sisters in Egypt that it will be resolved in their favor and they will be able to remain and thrive in their ancient homeland.            *Top

Related Posts?:

1. -Egypt: Muslim Radicals Burn Coptic Church
2. -Egypt: Muslim Mobs Continue Attacks on Coptic Christians

        (Bloomberg via Wikipedia)

32 out of 51 members of the New York City council protested, along with over 300 people including pastors from all over the city, the upcoming expulsion of over 60 churches  from meeting in NYC public schools.

Since the U.S. Supreme court refused to hear the case in December, notices of eviction have been sent out to the churches with a February 12 deadline.

Here’s links to our previous posts on this issue: 

-NY City Councilman and Others Arrested for Prayer Protest 

-Supreme Court Allows Church Ban from NYC Schools to Stand 

-U.S Court of Appeals: Churches Can be Barred from Using Schools

The churches and Council members have been trying to get the school district administrators to allow the churches to stay at least until the end of the current school year in order to find alternate meeting places but school chancellor Dennis Wolcott has refused.

Most of those involved in this situation believe that it is Mayor Michael Bloomberg that is really standing in the way of any positive resolution of this situation. You might remember that is was also Mayor Bloomberg who would not allow prayers or clergy at the 10th anniversary ceremonies in September 2011 of 9/11/01 attacks.            *Top

Related Posts?:

1. -NYC Council Votes to Add Two Muslim Holidays to the School Calendar
2. -U.S Court of Appeals: Churches Can be Barred from Using Schools

                                                (Image via Wikipedia)

A New York City Council member and 6 other church leaders were arrested on Thursday for holding a prayer vigil in front of a government building protesting the new city policy prohibiting churches from meeting in public buildings.

City Councilman Fernando Cabrera along with other pastors and church leaders were arrested and led away in handcuffs from New York City’s Department of Law building after only a few minutes of prayer and protest. According to Cabrera:

“There was one prayer. There was one song. Immediately after that, we were arrested. The Wall Street occupiers were there for 40 days, and there were some very bad things happening there. But that was tolerated.”

The protest stems from the Bronx Household of Faith case and the new NY City policy to kick over 60 small poor churches out of using public buildings for worship. Some were renting school buildings and others were meeting in Housing Authority community centers within public housing projects.

Response: It really is incredible that this ‘religious’ protest was only tolerated for barely a few minutes in the cause of religious liberty while the so-called Wall Street Occupiers were tolerated for weeks and violated one law after another.

The New York City administration continues to outwardly show a penchant for discrimination against Christians and churches in the city. In this case, poor churches serving in poor areas that cannot afford their own buildings nor the excessive commercial rents.  Meanwhile they bend over backwards to accommodate Islam and make space available for Muslim prayers.

The Orthodox Christian church destroyed on 9/11 had difficulty in getting their plans for rebuilding ok’d by the city while Muslim plans for a new nearby mosque not only received  the city’s blessing but help in financing even in the face of clear opposition to the project in the city and all across the nation.

Then there was the 10th anniversary of 9/11 where clergy and prayers were not allowed. I guess that certain religions are still tolerated and even encouraged in the city but Christianity is not one of them. There does seem to be some kind of double standard going on there indeed.            *Top

Related Posts?:

1. -US Court of Appeal: Crosses in City Logos Ok
2. -NYC Housing Authority Changes Mind and Offers Leases to Churches

                                               (Image via Wikipedia)

For once, here’s a case where the ACLU is actually supporting the freedom of religion rather than trying to restrict it in the public square:

“NYCLU to City and Brookfield: Accommodate Christmas Prayer Vigil in Zuccotti Park”

NEW YORK — The New York Civil Liberties Union today wrote to New York City officials and Brookfield Properties asking them to accommodate a Christmas prayer vigil at Zuccotti Park.

Occupy Faith, which is composed of members of an Occupy Wall Street Christian interest group, is planning to hold a 24-prayer vigil in Zuccotti Park to begin at midnight on Christmas Eve and continue to midnight Christmas Day.

“The city has enabled religious events in parks in the past, including a 1995 mass in Central Park led by Pope John Paul II ,” NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman said. “It is entirely appropriate for the city to allow these folks to pray together in the park. It should do so without restricting any items the group believes are necessary to express its faith.”

<<Read the rest>>             *Top

Related Posts?:

1. -NY City Councilman and Others Arrested for Prayer Protest
2. -NJ: Battle Over ‘Keep Christ in Christmas’ Sign