Resisting Obama’s Assault on Religious Liberty and Diversity

Some are characterizing the escalating concern of the American people about the attack of Barack Obama on religious liberty and diversity as the awakening of a sleeping giant.  Obama’s contempt for the Judeo-Christian foundations of the United States of America has long been evident.  Obama ridiculed those who cling to their Bibles and guns when the going gets tough.  Obama assured the Muslims that the United States is not a Christian nation.

Lutherans, Baptists, and other organized religious groups are joining with Roman Catholics to oppose Obama’s assault on Catholics and others who oppose the mandatory financial support of birth control and abortion.  On 16 February Roman Catholic Bishop William E. Lori testified before the “House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in opposition to the Obama administration's new regulation that will force all health-care plans in the United States to cover sterilizations and all Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive, including those that induce abortions.”  Bishop Lori, the Chair of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, delivered the following parable to illustrate the tyranny of the Obama mandate to pay for contraception and


Written Testimony of The Most Reverend William E. Lori

Roman Catholic Bishop of Bridgeport, Conn.

For my testimony today, I would like to tell a story. Let’s call it, “The Parable of the Kosher Deli.”

Once upon a time, a new law is proposed, so that any business that serves food must serve pork. There is a narrow exception for kosher catering halls attached to synagogues, since they serve mostly members of that synagogue, but kosher delicatessens are still subject to the mandate.

The Orthodox Jewish community—whose members run kosher delis and many other restaurants and grocers besides—expresses its outrage at the new government mandate. And they are joined by others who have no problem eating pork—not just the many Jews who eat pork, but people of all faiths—because these others recognize the threat to the principle of religious liberty. They recognize as well the practical impact of the damage to that principle. They know that, if the mandate stands, they might be the next ones forced—under threat of severe government sanction—to violate their most deeply held beliefs, especially their unpopular beliefs.

Meanwhile, those who support the mandate respond, “But pork is good for you. It is, after all, the other white meat.” Other supporters add, “So many Jews eat pork, and those who don’t should just get with the times.”

Still others say, “Those Orthodox are just trying to impose their beliefs on everyone else.”

But in our hypothetical, those arguments fail in the public debate, because people widely recognize the following.

First, although people may reasonably debate whether pork is good for you, that’s not the question posed by the nationwide pork mandate. Instead, the mandate generates the question whether people who believe—even if they believe in error—that pork is not good for you, should be forced by government to serve pork within their very own institutions. In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is no.

Second, the fact that some (or even most) Jews eat pork is simply irrelevant. The fact remains that some Jews do not—and they do not out of their most deeply held religious convictions.

Does the fact that large majorities in society—even large majorities within the protesting religious community—reject a particular religious belief make it permissible for the government to weigh in on one side of that dispute? Does it allow government to punish that minority belief with its coercive power? In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is no.

Third, the charge that the Orthodox Jews are imposing their beliefs on others has it exactly backwards. Again, the question generated by a government mandate is whether the government will impose its belief that eating pork is good on objecting Orthodox Jews.

Meanwhile, there is no imposition at all on the freedom of those who want to eat pork. That is, they are subject to no government interference at all in their choice to eat pork, and pork is ubiquitous and cheap, available at the overwhelming majority of restaurants and grocers.

Indeed, some pork producers and retailers, and even the government itself, are so eager to promote the eating of pork, that they sometimes give pork away for free.

In this context, the question is this: can a customer come to a kosher deli, demand to be served a ham sandwich, and if refused, bring down severe government sanction on the deli. In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is no.

So in our hypothetical story, because the hypothetical nation is indeed committed to religious liberty and diversity, these arguments carry the day.

In response, those proposing the new law claim to hear and understand the concerns of kosher deli owners, and offer them a new “accommodation.” You are free to call yourself a kosher deli; you are free not to place ham sandwiches on your menu; you are free not to be the person to prepare the sandwich and hand it over the counter to the customer. But we will force your meat supplier to set up a kiosk on your premises, and to offer, prepare, and serve ham sandwiches to all of your customers, free of charge to them. And when you get your monthly bill from your meat supplier, it will include the cost of any of the “free” ham sandwiches that your customers may accept. And you will, of course, be required to pay that bill.

Some who supported the deli owners initially began to celebrate the fact that ham sandwiches didn’t need to be on the menu, and didn’t need to be prepared or served by the deli itself. But on closer examination, they noticed three troubling things. First, all kosher delis will still be forced to pay for the ham sandwiches.

Second, many of the kosher delis’ meat suppliers, themselves, are forbidden in conscience from offering, preparing, or serving pork to anyone. Third, there are many kosher delis that are their own meat supplier, so the mandate to offer, prepare, and serve the ham sandwich still falls on them.

This story has a happy ending. The government recognized that it is absurd for someone to come into a kosher deli and demand a ham sandwich; that it is beyond absurd for that private demand to be backed with the coercive power of the state; that it is downright surreal to apply this coercive power when the customer can get the same sandwich cheaply, or even free, just a few doors down.

The question before the United States government—right now—is whether the story of our own Church institutions that serve the public, and that are threatened by the HHS mandate, will end happily too. Will our nation continue to be one committed to religious liberty and diversity? We urge, in the strongest possible terms, that the answer must be yes. We urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to answer the same way.

Thank you for your attention.

Francis Cardinal George of the Archdiocese of Chicago delivered a compelling Lenten message.  The following are but the final four paragraphs.  I suggest reading the Cardinal’s entire column.

The provision of health care should not demand “giving up” religious liberty. Liberty of religion is more than freedom of worship. Freedom of worship was guaranteed in the Constitution of the former Soviet Union. You could go to church, if you could find one. The church, however, could do nothing except conduct religious rites in places of worship-no schools, religious publications, health care institutions, organized charity, ministry for justice and the works of mercy that flow naturally from a living faith. All of these were co-opted by the government. We fought a long cold war to defeat that vision of society.

The strangest accusation in this manipulated public discussion has the bishops not respecting the separation between church and state. The bishops would love to have the separation between church and state we thought we enjoyed just a few months ago, when we were free to run Catholic institutions in conformity with the demands of the Catholic faith, when the government couldn’t tell us which of our ministries are Catholic and which not, when the law protected rather than crushed conscience. The state is making itself into a church. The bishops didn’t begin this dismaying conflict nor choose its timing. We would love to have it ended as quickly as possible. It’s up to the government to stop the attack.

If you haven’t already purchased the Archdiocesan Directory for 2012, I would suggest you get one as a souvenir. On page L-3, there is a complete list of Catholic hospitals and health care institutions in Cook and Lake counties. Each entry represents much sacrifice on the part of medical personnel, administrators and religious sponsors. Each name signifies the love of Christ to people of all classes and races and religions. Two Lents from now, unless something changes, that page will be blank.

The observance of Lent reminds us that, in the end, we all stand before Christ and give an accounting of our lives. From that perspective, I ask lay Catholics and others of good will to step back and understand what is happening to our country as the church is despoiled of her institutions and as freedom of conscience and of religion become a memory from a happier past. The suffering being imposed on the church and on society now is not a voluntary penance. We should both work and pray to be delivered from it.

Barack Obama is arrogant and looks down upon We the People.  Obama considers both his opponents and his supporters to be stupid and easily manipulated.  Obama successfully manipulates his Democratic supporters by frightening them with tall tales about what Republicans will take away from them and what Democrats will give them after they win the next election.

When religious principles oppose Obama’s agenda, including providing unrestricted abortions for his supporters, Obama takes a strong stand against the religious principles.  What additional actions might we expect Obama will direct toward those in the Catholic Church and other religious people who oppose him?

  • Comment
Comments (46) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Since when are American submissive?

"Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us?"

William O. Douglas (1898-1980), U. S. Supreme Court Justice


@May Sources...

May: "Obama’s contempt for the Judeo-Christian foundations of the United States of America has long been evident. Obama ridiculed those who cling to their Bibles and guns when the going gets tough. Obama assured the Muslims that the United States is not a Christian nation."

May: "Lutherans, Baptists, and other organized religious groups are joining with Roman Catholics to oppose Obama’s assault on Catholics and others who oppose the mandatory financial support of birth control and abortion. "

And your sources for this are? Let's see a Catholic Bishop and a Catholic Cardinal.

Well, the Republicans are doing a great job of disenfranchising women with this stupidity.

Let's see now: "Obama gains among women amid improving economy, new talk about their access to birth control...for Obama, there is no more crucial constituency than women. They make up a majority of voters in presidential elections, and a bit more of them identify with his party. He would not be president today without topping Republican John McCain in that group in 2008. And Republicans would need to win a sizable share — more than about 40 percent — of female voters to beat him."

Obviously May, you and the cons haven't learned: "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

I see that when you chickened out on the Obama gasoline thing bit, you came back to this. Probably after you learned that Santorum lost in Michigan and Arizona. I really had high hopes that Santorum would win in Michigan, because his nomination for the Republican Presidential candidate will ensure an Obama win. Well, there is still hope, and more primaries to go....LOL. I will vote for him if Texas gets to have a primary......


The Douglas quote.....

William O. Douglas: ""Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us?"

May trips into la-la land on this one, and I am clueless how it fits his blog.

Let's see now, when was the last time I bowed submissively? Oh, yes, I was going to Amarillo for some reason in my leased Volkswagen. Actually, I took over another persons lease on that car. It came from the Dallas area, and the Dallas Volkswagen dealer hadn't put a front license plate on the car. I had the car for over a year, and I was stopped by a Highway Patrolman because of the missing front license plate. I bowed submissively to the patrolman and only got a warning ticket.

I suppose my actions explain why I would never be considered for a position on the Supreme Court.

Now had I been Governor Rick Perry caught speeding 75mph in a 55mph speed zone, I could have gotten out of my vehicle, and chewed out the trooper because: "I am the Governor of Texas, and I am late for a meeting."

Is that what Douglas was speaking to?


Obama must be really regretting

It seems Obama must be really regretting attacking the separation of church and state and stomping on religious diversity.

Joe Biden warned Obama not to do this.


Dr. May My apologizes

Dr. May, I apologize for my brief remarks yesterday. I received a very important telephone call just as I started to write you. I confess that I hadn't even read the subject of your blog.

My business takes me everywhere, and I find myself with less and less time to look at the good conservative blog sites on the Internet. I found yours months and months ago, and was impressed with your comments. Frankly, I don't recall what the subject matter was. I just remember that what you were writing about was very correct.

Of course, as I mentioned previously, the driving passion in my life is to clear my uncle, Heinrich Himmler, of some of the charges that were made against him in the past. Unfortunately, business takes priority in our lives.

When I first came across your blog, I had my staff do some research on you and your family. They discovered that your family, like mine came from Germany. Ist das richtig? We have a kinship.

Even though I am an American citizen, I don't know what to think about the current political situation in this country. Of course, I would prefer to support a conservative candidate, but none seem to have the courage to speak with authority. Unless there are some major changes in the conservative leadership, I don't believe this is the year for that leadership to take control. Bessere Zukunft, ja?


In their ongoing attempt to brand the Obama administration’s

birth control rule as infringing on religious freedom, House Republicans invited a Muslim witness to a hearing who pointed out that such a precedent could permit the government to make laws that violate Islamic code.

Asma Uddin, editor-in-chief of the Muslim-American website under questioning from House Judiciary Chairman, and Congressman from Texas, Lamar Smith explained how the regulation’s precedent could infringe upon the rights of Muslims. “If the government mandated everything that had positive health benefits, it could possibly mandate that everyone drink red wine for heart health even though it violates the religious beliefs of Muslims,” Uddin said.

Smith soon ended his questioning of Uddin.

Uddin wasn’t singling out the potential plight of Muslims that could arise from this regulation. But siding with a witness who argues that government should not create laws that oppress the Islamic faith is still deeply ironic for Lamar Smith, who has continually attacked the Obama presidency warning about the specter of “Sharia law,” suggesting that Muslims want to exert greater control over U.S. laws.

In this instance, whether they like it or not, GOP success in rolling back the birth control mandate would go hand-in-hand with making the health care law more Sharia-compliant.

Maybe Smith should follow the lead of Darrell Issa and not allow women to testify......Rush Limbaugh could have told him that.......



May: "It seems Obama must be really regretting attacking the separation of church and state and stomping on religious diversity.

Joe Biden warned Obama not to do this."

I would love to see where you came up with this BS--cites, quotes, etc, etc, etc.

I think I can translate what you are trying to say. Santorum, who thinks that church and state should be joined, lost Michigan and Arizona tonight.

But, hey, I am a big Santorum fan, and I will vote for him in the Texas primary. If Santorum is the Republican choice, Obama will win by a landslide in 2012.


Catholic Nuns File Brief Supporting Affordable Care Act

As further proof that conservative efforts to paint President Obama as the enemy of religion are ludicrous, nearly two dozen leading Catholic nuns filed a brief in the Supreme Court last week supporting the Affordable Care Act. The Catholic sisters who joined the brief include the leaders of many prominent religious orders providing health care and other services to the needy.

These nuns have unique standing to explain why their support for the Affordable Care Act is based on their faith, since so many of them have devoted their lives to providing care to those most in need.

Their views are not unique within the church’s hierarchy. Pope Benedict XVI called health care an “inalienable right,” and added that it is the “moral responsibility of nations to guarantee access to health care for all of their citizens.”


That does more debate....May's maven...Limbaugh speaks

Limbaugh: Obama And Democrats Would "Get What They Want With Churches Shutting Down"

In other words of wisdom May's maven states: On Florida Ban On Baggy Pants: Maybe This Means "Hillary Can't Come Here" ...........Limbaugh labels Hillary, "Sex-retary Of State"

In a repeat of yesterday’s post:

Rush Limbaugh On Danica Patrick: "What Do You Expect From A Woman Driver?"

After Playing Clip Of Hillary Clinton, Limbaugh Says, "And People Ask Why The Divorce Rate In America Is So High"


“Mark my word,

if and when these preachers get control of the Republican party and they’re sure trying to do so, it’s going to be a terrible d+mn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe there are acting in the name of God, so they can’t and won’t compromise. I know, I’ve tried to deal with them…”

Barry Goldwater


Has it come to pass??? In his view it certainly has!!!!

“One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a Libertanianish right. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world.”

Rick Santorum


At least five Republican candidates feel, or felt, that God

called them to run for president. That includes: Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, Cain and Gingrich. In an interesting twist, they happen to be the five candidates who caused the most controversy during the campaign, and arguably done the most damage to the Republican brand. If you believe that this is the field that God chose for the Republican primary, then it is hard not to conclude that He must be seriously pulling for the Democratic Party.


Men of energy of character must have enemies"

"Men of energy of character must have enemies; because there are two sides to every question, and taking one with decision, and acting on it with effect, those who take the other will of course be hostile in proportion as they feel that effect."

Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, 1817



It would be helpful to you if you would learn to use the Internet to provide answers to your own questions.

This would help you to feel more secure in your statements.


Joe Biden and Bill Daley warned Obama,

Joe Biden and Bill Daley warned Obama not to mandate contraceptive coverage. White House Feminists apparently overruled these two Catholic men.

Bloomberg reported on February 8,

“Obama Weighed Religious Politics in Contraceptives Decision”

“President Barack Obama ended months of internal White House debate by siding with a group of mostly female advisers who urged him not to limit a health-care law mandate to provide contraceptives, even at the risk of alienating Catholic voters in November, people familiar with the discussions said.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic and a two-term governor of Kansas, was joined by several female Obama advisers in urging against a broad exemption for religious organizations. To do so would leave too many women without coverage and sap the enthusiasm for Obama among women’s rights advocates, they said, according to the people, who spoke about the deliberations on condition of anonymity.

Vice President Joe Biden and then-White House chief of staff Bill Daley, also Catholics, warned that the mandate would be seen as a government intrusion on religious institutions. Even moderate Catholic voters in battleground states might be alienated, they warned, according to the people familiar with the discussions.”

Continue reading this Bloomberg article,

The Blaze reported,

“Two of President Obama’s top advisers — both Catholics — warned him of the potential fallout from his controversial mandate requiring religious organizations to cover the cost of contraceptives in their employee’s health insurance plans.”

The Blaze further reported,

“The Obama administration clearly underestimated the response it would receive from Catholics and non-Catholics, alike, after implementing a universal mandate on health plans that requires coverage of contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.”

Politico also reported,

Two top advisers to President Barack Obama — both Catholics — warned him of the potential for controversy over his decision to require religious organizations to cover contraceptives in their health insurance plans.

"Vice President Joe Biden and former White House chief of staff Bill Daley both told the president that the decision would be cast as a government intrusion on religious freedom and that it could alienate Catholic voters in swing states, Bloomberg reported Wednesday. The decision has whipped up a frenzy of criticism for the president that he’s been battling since the move went public.

Biden, the first Catholic to serve as vice president, isn’t known for being reticent. But he hasn’t yet spoken publicly about the Jan. 20 decision. His office declined to comment."

Continue reading this Politico article,



May is a perfect example of someone whose parents should have used birth control! Such a shame, really, but at least he's good for a laugh once in a while.


When religion goes into

When religion goes into business, religion needs to be held to the same standards as everyone else. Religion as business, ie hospitals, might do well to brand themselves as private clubs or associations similar to Costco or Sam's Club where the members accept the terms of doing business, which could be offered through health insurance companies. This way, religious business groups only serve those who follow their rules, and no one is obligated to join if they don't want to. It looks like it would be a win-win for everybody. These private or association hospitals might have to forego federal dollars, but it seems the only way for a religious institution to run a business and avoid parts of federal and/or state laws that conflict with a religion.

4 more years of Christian bliss with Obama



There are times when I start to think this entire blog is an elaborate piece of performance art.



Only if "elaborate" means shoddily crafted and poorly executed.


Check out May's homeboy!

A congressional candidate running as a Republican in the upcoming Illinois primary says the “Holocaust never happened.”

Arthur Jones, 64, a Lyons, IL, insurance salesman who organizes family-friendly neo-Nazi events around Adolf Hitler’s birthday, hopes to be the Republican candidate chosen to run against Democratic Congressman Dan Lipinski in Illinois’ 3rd Congressional District.

“As far as I’m concerned, the Holocaust is nothing more than an international extortion racket by the Jews,” Jones said. “It’s the blackest lie in history. Millions of dollars are being made by Jews telling this tale of woe and misfortune in books, movies, plays and TV.

"The more survivors, the more lies that are told."

A member of the Nationalist Socialist Party in his younger days, Jones took part in the Nazis’ march on Chicago’s Marquette Park in 1978. While he doesn’t deny nor repudiate his “past affiliations,” he says he votes Republican “90 percent of the time.”

Hopefully, this Nazi will stay in Illinois after he loses his bid for office. He may figure, as May did, that Texas would be more amenable to his brand of ignorance and bigotry than Illinois. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson, there's no need for him to peddle 'crazy' down here; we're already fully stocked with Damn Yankee right-wing nimrods.

But who knows? If Lubbock gets really lucky, perhaps May will decide to move back to the Ancestral Farm. This would reduce Lubbock's 'stupid' quotient drastically (and consequently raise the city's average IQ) in one easy step.


@May Internet research...

May, I visited your lengthy Biden blabber claim on the Internet sites you listed,

How you arrived at: "It seems Obama must be really regretting attacking the separation of church and state and stomping on religious diversity" is a tall one.

How do you know that Obama must be really regretting this? Are you channeling Obama again, or just following the orders from the other con blogs that are still trying to make a big deal over this issue.

And BTW it was Joe Biden and Bill Daley. You left that out in your initial statement.

You should be more clear in your writing style, and be more careful to not leave information out accidentally. We know you are skilled at leaving out information you don't like......


@Patriot Bob

Elaborate may not be the right word, but as performance art,IMO,it is really well crafted. One would have to put in a great deal of effort to keep a performance going for this long and have it be so consistently hilariously and tragically wrong on every issue and concept presented, not to mention keeping up the self-assuredness that can only come with total rejection of all but a few sources of information. Even those have to go through the "May filter", where they are cleansed of any "elite" of factual influence. Sadly, though, I do know that Dr May really does believe what he writes is the truth. It must be a terrible thing to be so frightened of the entire world.


Is President Obama waging a war on religion?

Amid all the uproar, it's easy to overlook something very important: the administration's many battles for religious liberty.

His commitment is evident in defending churches against municipal governments that would prefer to do without them....It filed a brief in support of a Hasidic Jewish congregation's lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles, which had forbidden it to hold services in a private home. A federal court ordered the city to back off.

The administration has also intervened in cases where prisoners are denied religious literature. After a South Carolina sheriff prohibited inmates from getting devotional materials and other publications in the mail, the Justice Department sued. In the end, the county agreed to let inmates receive Bibles, Torahs, Korans and related material.

....In doing all this, the administration isn't always doing the politically expedient thing....The congregations victimized by zoning regulations are too small to matter. Prison inmates generally can't vote. There is no detectable political gain in anything Obama is doing here.

No detectable political gain? I suppose. But look: we're dealing with people who think the reason Obama has left gun laws alone is because he wants to "lull gun owners to sleep and play us for fools in 2012." So he's probably doing the same thing here.

Reelect the guy on November 6th, and on November 7th he'll begin his war on the Catholic church and the NRA. There's really no arguing with this, is there?



"Reelect the guy on November 6th, and on November 7th he'll begin his war on the Catholic church and the NRA. There's really no arguing with this, is there?"

Only if one is rational and capable of extrapolating future actions from historical behavior.


belief vs. fact

"...Dr May really does believe what he writes is the truth."

My granddaughter used to 'believe' that there was a boogeyman who lived in the closet of our guest room.

May believes there's a boogeyman living in the White House.

My granddaughter was talked out of her delusional belief by the simple expedient of opening the closet door.

That's the difference between May and a five-year-old girl-- she is capable of changing her opinion when presented with facts.


Major change today in N. Korea

They agreed to suspend nuclear weapons tests and uranium enrichment and allow international inspectors to monitor activities.

If Hillary negotiated this she will probably get the Nobel Peace Prize and May and Rush will be p*ssed!



The good Dr. May makes a point and supports it and your response is to attack him personally. Be proud of your ruthless intolerance.



Two posts, that when combined, add up to asinine.


@rettch So what?

rettch, so what if N. Korea is making changes. Clearly the Obama Administration had nothing to do with it.

Maybe, it was Mitt, Newt, or Rick working behind the scenes? Unlikely....

Or it could be that Obama is secretly "bowing" to N. Korea, and this is just phoney information generated by the liberal news media. Maybe Obama is secretly going to slip some of them into the country as a terrorist cells.

N. Korea is an Evil empire, because George W. Bush said so!



Give steve a hug. Totalitarians get lonely too.

Back to Top