GOVERNMENT SEEKS 'AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE WHAT IS SIN'



Legal team warns of ramifications of wrong decision at Supreme Court



In its Supreme Court battle over Obamacare’s abortion-pill mandate, the government wants to “determine what is in fact a sin,” contends a religious-rights legal group.

The high court has agreed to hear the case of the Denver-based Little Sisters of the Poor nuns, who refused to comply with the requirement that the insurance policies for their employees cover abortion pills.

The nuns have refused to sign over the responsibility to their insurance company, arguing it also would be a violation of their faith to facilitate someone else committing a sin.

Now a friend-of-the-court brief submitted by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of dozens of clients charges the government is seeking to become the arbiter of religious beliefs.

The group’s chief counsel, Richard Thompson, called the mandate “a monumental attack on religious liberty.”

“If this appeal is lost, the government becomes the head of every religious denomination in the country by its assumed authority to determine what is in fact a sin,” he said.

The brief argues that the neither the government nor the lawyers on the Supreme Court bench “can determine whether an act does or does not violate a person’s religious beliefs.”

“Rather, the Supreme Court must accept the non-profits’ assertions that the notification requirement is indeed against their religion.”

To accept otherwise, the brief says, “is to supplant the church and the Bible with the government, allowing the Supreme Court and the government to interpret [tenets] of faith.

“This slippery slope would subject all religious exercise to the whim of the government’s approval.”

The brief points out that it’s already been decided that the fines for noncompliance are a substantial burden, leaving essentially the question of “whether compliance is actually against the petitioners’ religion.”

“This is something that is for petitioners to determine, not the court,” the Thomas More Law Center says.

“The court is not the arbiter of sacred Scripture and cannot determine whether the notification form and letter are attenuated enough from the provision of contraceptives that they do not substantially burden petitioners’ religion,” the brief says. “Delving into this inquiry requires the court to interpret petitioners’ religious beliefs on the morality of the different levels of complicity with sin.

“Therefore, the court can only determine whether petitioners are being compelled to do something that violates their faith – here, filling out the notification form or writing a notification letter to HHS, both of which trigger the dissemination of contraceptives and abortifacients to their employees in connection with their employee health plans.”

The brief point out that a woman’s right to get contraceptives is not unlimited.

“This does not mean they have a right to free contraceptives and abortifacients. Moreover, this right certainly does not mean that a person has the right to obtain contraceptives and abortifacients – either directly or indirectly – from their employer at the expense of pillaging the employer’s religious liberty,” the brief states.

The Little Sisters charge the government is forcing them to violate their faith by giving them a choice between providing contraceptives and abortion pills directly or ordering them to sign over their responsibility to someone else.

“These notification requirements trigger the non-profits’ insurers to provide free contraceptives and abortifacients to the women in the non-profits’ health plans. This notification requirement makes the non profits complicit in the provision of a service that they find sinful, thereby causing them to sin themselves,” the brief explains.

The law center argues there should not even be a case.

“The government already subsidizes contraceptives and abortifacients through its programs and could find ways to expand or increase the efficacy of those existing programs,” the brief says.

“The government could offer grants, go directly to insurers, or engage in countless other options that do not involve the cooperation of petitioners.”

Further, providing “free contraceptives and abortifacients” is not a compelling government interest, the law center argues, quoting the Supreme Court itself.

“The many exemptions already provided for under the regulations necessarily destroy any argument that the HHS mandate serves a compelling interest.”

It was the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that took on the authority of determining what is sin.

Another recent brief challenged: “Perhaps the apex among a host of acts of governmental arrogance in this case was displayed not by HHS, but when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit acted as if it had ecclesiastical powers of absolution, having decreed that by just signing a paper, Little Sisters would not be ‘morally complicit in providing contraceptive coverage.'”

The brief said one would expect that “on the issue of who the God of Heaven and Earth will hold ‘morally complicit,’ it would be the Little Sisters which would have the greater expertise than a federal judge.”


http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/government-seeks-authority-to-determine-...

Views: 526

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The fact that this even comes up for discussion is evident of Satan's hold on this country and world..God help us!

Prayer is the strongest thing Christians have to fight with Ive posted this before, but in 1945 a bomb was dropped on Japan and around 93,000 people were killed leading to the end of WWII. And in the Book of 2 Kings 37:38 a prayer that called on God to help with the enemies of the King God sent a Angel ' just one and he killed 185,000 of the enemy. I'd say there is a message here that the demons don't want to be told.
Here's the first sin the SC has made and they call it a good thing? As of January 1,2016 these new taxes have taken there place in the tax codes.

As a brief reminder for those who forgot or for many that didn't know



Here is what happened, quietly, on January 1, 2016


Medicare tax went from 1.45% to 2.35%


​Top Income tax bracket went from 35% to 39.6%



C​apital Gains tax went from 15% to 28%

Dividend tax went from 15% to 39.6%

Estate tax went from 0% to 55%

A 3.5% Real Estate transaction tax was added.

These taxes were all passed in the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.


If you think that it is important that everyone in the U.S. should know this as there are many millions who don't, then pass it on.

Why do you think the Affordable Care Act had to be passed BEFORE READING IT... look at all the hidden tax increases... and you have your answer.

Col.Nelson,
These are only a few that just started in January there is still more yet to come in 2017 these are even worse. I haven't seen the list, but one of the men I trained when he's leaving the Army Special Ops went to work for the IRS as a criminal investigator. But the real shocker is yet to come.

Skip, agreed, most of us knew this was a play on insurance. The only thing it was, was a massive tax increase, period.  Also started in the senate not the house.  Totally illegal.

yup - the time has come for THE decision of our culture, and you and I individually must make -- Who is my ultimate authority and provider? Our creator or government. Can there be any more clear indicator government sees itself as replacing God as the ultimate authority than it aspiring to define sin? Can there be any more clear indicator of the time for us individually to decide which is 'my' ultimate authority has come?

All Democrats, Liberals, Progressives and Bronco Bama worshipers need to bow towards Chicago five times a day and say the following prayer.

Bronco Bama is my Lord and Shepherd; I shall not work.
He maketh me to lie down and watch Oprah;
He leadeth me beside the still factories.
He restoreth my bling;
He leadeth me in the paths of idleness for Barrack’s name sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the sharing of the wealth,
I will fear no workforce: for thou art funding me;
Thy pen and thy phone, they comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of people who actually produce;
Thou annointest my teeth with gold; My pipe runneth over.
Surely rebates and Earned Income Credits shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Obama forever.
Ax not what you can do for your country, but ax what other people in your country who work can do for you! PERIOD!

The Muslim in the White house seeks to overthrow our country and eliminate our rights of self determination and religious freedoms. Get ready to go to war America!

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service