Obama Rule Respects Religious Diversity and Employees' Dignity

Religiously owned or affiliated organizations ought to play by the same rules as other employers

Reader Comments
Back to argument

You would think two individuals who represent a law school would avoid using hyperbole and speculation to support their personal opinions! What they are actually saying is they believe saving some individuals $30 to $50 per month justifies taking away the religions freedoms of every Catholic who adheres to the tenents of their religion!

J. Padraig of CO 7:14PM July 09, 2012

I find it interesting that these two "legal scholars" miss the point of governmental intrusion into religion. If they can't recognize that simple fact, they are not scholars of the basis of all law in the United States. The constitution and the historical writing that describes it's intent are irrefutable in the absolute separation of religion from government. And this does not mean government is free of religious influence but rather the religion is free of intrusion by the United States government.

It appears that the Columbia law school is in need of better instructors that know and understand the Constitution. Of course our President, the Harvard instructor on Constitution Law, is the first president that has unabashedly violated this primary tenet. The only explanation is that they do not believe it. Which in his case is a violation of his oath of office.

J. Dunlap of GA 11:19PM February 14, 2012

You say:Religiously owned or affiliated organizations that employ people of all faiths and backgrounds ought to play by the same rules as every other employer, including being subject to health, safety, and labor regulations.

You only say this because the government has already jammed down the throats of the employers who they can hire based on race, ethnicity, religion etc. I'm sorry but once you're hired the employer makes the rules, if you don't like it hit the road.

If as you say the employers must all play by the same rules, can we agree that welfare can be eliminated, because if you breed 'em you feed 'em.

June of DE 9:46PM February 12, 2012

My own religious conviction is that God punishes us with disease and rewards us with good health, and that it is a sin to ever try to intervene in his will medically.

I'm therefore stripping practically everything out of my employees' policies. If I can't, I won't be able to sleep nights, because I would have a guilty conscience imagining to what unnatural ends they might choose to apply their insurance, and of course I can't be stopped from stripping out those policies, because my Republican friends are backing me on this, since it is a matter of my own religious freedom.

Plus, I save a lot on the health premiums I pay to cover my work force, since their pay package basically only includes chiropractic care and homeopathy, which don't offend my religious scruples because I deem them entirely ineffective.

frank buns of AR 5:25AM February 10, 2012

N 1968, POPE PAUL VI WARNED, IN HUMANAE VITAE, THAT BIRTH CONTROL PILLS WOULD LEAD TO MUCH INCREASED RATES OF INFIDELITY, PROMISCUITY, DISEASE, DIVORCE AND, ULTIMATELY, TO LEGALIZED ABORTION.

It appears he was quite a visionary, as well as a brilliant scholar. But I don't think he foresaw the Catholic Church being forced to pay for the moral debacle that followed.

Oh, and Bill of MD - Just FYI. You and all the rest of Western Civilization owe your existence to the Catholic Church. For a millennium (uh...that's 10 centuries Bill) the Church battled militant Islam - the blood of hundreds of thousands of Catholic Knights and men at arms was spilled from North Africa to Vienna, and from Constantinople to the English Channel.

Finally, in the 16th Century, the Muslims were mauled and decimated at Rhodes (Nothing has ever been lost so well as Rhodes.), defeated at Lepanto and Malta and driven back from the Gates of Vienna. Western Civilization, saved from the terror of Sharia and the scimitar - a world where women are enslaved and infidels (non-believers) are murdered where they stand.

You know Bill, if you, Professor Franke and Ms. Sepper, could see beyond your own pseudo intellectual smugness and facile, subjective thinking.... Well then I reckon you'd understand the price the Catholic Church - Christendom - paid so people like you would have the freedom to spit on it.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 10:15PM February 09, 2012

The Catholic Church has such a sordid history that I'm never surprised at their actions.

If a church decides that the bible justifies slavery, they can insist that it's their constitutional right to own slaves because it's part of their religious dogma.

Relgion seems to exist for little more than a justification for various froms of bigotry and hatred.

Catholics have no right to brag about their religion. Our cardinal here in Maryland said he regrets his apology for the church having pedophiles among it's priests. It's the church first, everything else second.

Bill of MD 8:01PM February 09, 2012

Contraception is evil. It desecrates the marital bond, offends against chastity, and is a menace to public morals. It is reprehensible to engage in contraceptive acts or to cooperate in them in any way. This is a matter of natural law; it has nothing to do with religion. Public bodies should not be promoting or enabling this sin. Neither Holy Mother Church, nor any other group, religious or secular, nor any individual should be forced by government to divulge funds for such wicked purposes.

The amazing chutzpah of those who say, “Whether I contracept is none of your business” while holding a gun to our heads and demanding we pay for their contraceptives is truly breathtaking, particularly since they are not only robbing us, but forcing us to violate our consciences while they do it. Contraceptives are cheap as dirt and common as water. Let those who want them get them themselves and not gratuitously force those who think them immoral to pay for them. Painting this as “the Church imposing its morals” on them is like accusing the pistol-whipped victim of armed robbery of lack of charity. This is an act of war against Catholic conscience and religious liberty and a naked act of malice from the Obama Administration. There must be no compromise. It must be utterly defeated.

Gregory Wenker of OH 5:53PM February 09, 2012