« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Barack Obama’s “Freedom of Worship”

The timing may be off with this post, but there is an observation I’ve been meaning to point out with regard to Barack Obama’s HHS Mandate on religious institutions.

Barack Obama in defending the mandate has suggested that it has no impact on “Freedom of Worship”. So, exactly where does “Freedom of Worship” appear in the Constitution? It doesn’t. The First Amendment provides for “Freedom of Religion”. No one to my knowledge has called him out on this significant distinction.

Freedom of Religion of course provides for living one’s life in concert with the principles of your faith. It unambiguously asserts the rights of Americans not to be coerced beyond the limits of their faith and conscience.

What about Freedom of Worship? This “nuance” effectively seeks to diminish the boundaries of faith in our individual lives by compelling actions in violation of firmly held moral convictions. Simply put, when Barack Obama and his closest allies speak of “free worship”, they mean to segregate the services of devotion from its application in our daily lives. Obama’s position essentially is that our faith has no value in society beyond the front door of the respective houses of worship and fidelity to the precepts of our faith is invalid if determined to be in conflict with our “enlightened” federal government.

In Barack Obama’s America we must leave our prayers in the pew. In Barack Obama’s America we must leave our faith at the front door. In Barack Obama’s America our faith must submit to the new moral authority, or as Mark Steyn calls it: “The Church of Big Government”.

Barack Obama has been let off the hook when he speaks of “Free Worship”. Some might suggest this is just an example of political nuance to take the edge off the issue. This is an absurd defense. Look at the President’s resume’. Are we supposed to believe that a man who graduated from Harvard Law School, the most prestigious law school in the country is unaware of the distinction between worship and religion? Are we to extend him the benefit of the doubt that as the editor of the “Harvard Law Review” that he is ignorant of the constitutional distinction? Are we to ignore his years as a Law Professor and conclude that he doesn’t understand the clarity of the First Amendment?

Barack Obama has taken a position that undermines the first right in the United States, freedom of religion. Not worship, but RELIGION. Barack Obama’s education belies his rhetoric. His record and motives are clear. WE can devote our lives to God, just as long as we keep our faith in the closet.

COMMENTS

  • checkmate2012

    I guess because I’m so disgusted with his daily assault on Americans in so many ways, I try not to listen to him. But now his HHS ruling is the pinnacle of sabotaging our Constitution, and I didn’t catch the nuance since I already knew what he was destroying. You are so right about the difference and it’s a great catch that I haven’t seen written or talked about.

    This is more of the left-speak as I call it that numbs down the average person if they aren’t careful to see the real meaning of their words. The left has been tricky over many decades to paint a quality, position or moral issue as something not to be feared in their use of language by re-defining it using “nice” words. Example: we have tax revenues instead of raising taxes. Give me a break! The list goes on.

    Very smart post & btw, notice how the MSM won’t even report on one of the biggest lawsuits in our history, Catholics vs. U.S. Gov?
    I hope it wakes up America as any religion is in jeopardy under this admin.

  • http://kevin-wardsworld.blogspot.com/ kevinaw2

    I did take notice. BTW, I should note that the 1st Amendment does not literally say “Freedom of Religion”, but the language is clear.

  • checkmate2012

    is a religious institution..which indeed is against the 1st:

    “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.”

    Not that you needed to read it! Just clarifies your case :)

  • kipling

    nt