Throughout history it has been not the mainstream Christian denominations, but the JehovahsWitnesses, Mormons, Santeria, Amish, Seventh Day Adventists, and worshippers of the Union of the Plant who have argued and won before the Supreme Court. Specifically in the context of prisoner religious liberty claims, Wiccans and Satanists have been the vanguards of religious liberty in the Supreme Court and the direct beneficiaries of its protections.
At the Supreme Court oral arguments in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties cases in March, Justice Anthony Kennedy tested the limits of the governments argument by asking if, under the governments theory, people could be forced to pay for others elective surgical abortions through their insurance plan.
By now, most everyone knows that MSNBC thinks that one of our big problems is this outdated notion that your children are your own. As this MSNBC video explains: “We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”
There is a 43-year-old woman, born in Texas, who should be dead right now. In fact, she should have never been born. Forty years ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Texas law that prevented Jane Roe from ending the life of her unborn daughter was unconstitutional. But by the time the Supreme Court issued its decision in 1973, she had already been born and adopted by a family—likely not knowing that all that ink spilled in Roe v. Wade was about her.
What might have been? If Robert Bork had been confirmed, perhaps this column would have appeared in this space.
President Obama apparently has chosen to stake his re-election on abortion, and particularly on Planned Parenthood.
In Tuesday’s presidential debate and the latest issue of Glamour magazine, President Obama stumbled into accusing on of his campaign's largest benefactors- Planned Parenthood- of serially violating a federal women's health law designed to protect breast cancer patients by claiming that the abortion giant provides mammograms even though it has no license to do so.
A court has recently stopped Illinois from enforcing a rule that denied freedom of conscience to pharmacists. This is a cause for celebration and an excellent legal win. But as the left reacts hysterically to the supposed lack of access to Plan B that will result, one pharmacist’s story perfectly demonstrates the fundamental flaw at the core of any effort to deny freedom of conscience: compelled violations of conscience won’t expand access, they’ll reduce it.
Remember just a decade or so ago when the mantra of the abortion industry was that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare?” It was even in the Democrat Party platform for a while.
A deliberate effort is underway to rebrand Planned Parenthood as an integral provider of healthcare services, without which untold millions of women would lack basic medical care, or so the story goes. Thus, whenever any effort is made to cut off funding for the nation’s largest abortion provider and stalwart financier of leftist politicians, we’re told there is a “war on women.”
That is the breadth and scope of the religious liberty you believe ought to be respected? Do you believe religious liberty stops where Planned Parenthood’s financial needs begin? Should Americans be forced to pay for that which violates their conscience and the tenets of their faith?
For the past five years, every dawn has brought additional evidence of the fact that Planned Parenthood and its allies in the abortion industry cannot be trusted to tell the truth about the one thing they should know well – abortion.
Planned Parenthood’s denials to the contrary, many women suffer extreme guilt and mental anguish as a result of having an abortion. Killing one’s child is simply not as easy the abortionists would have you believe.
While the Supreme Court prepares for the showdown over the constitutionality of ObamaCare next week, another important battle over the controversial law is playing out in a state court in Rhode Island.
When Amy Hamilton’s pre-born son died, as a result of what she believed were “negligent acts” by doctors in Dekalb County, Alabama, she sought justice by filing a wrongful death suit. (Alabama law provides recovery for a mother whose preborn child is killed because of another’s negligence.) But Amy faced an obstacle, Roe v. Wade.