Obama's Frontal Assault On Religion

Toby Toons
Toby Toons | Source

March 6. 2012

This country was founded upon moral and biblical principles passionately inspired by the fundamental need to escape from tyranny.

The definition of tyranny is:

tyranny

[tir-uh-nee]  Origin

tyr·an·ny

[tir-uh-nee]Show IPA

noun, plural -nies.

1.

arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.

2.

the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.

3.

a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.

4.

oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler.

5.

undue severity or harshness.

If we look to the history of British tyranny, one of the main reasons people felt the need to escape was to be able to freely express their religious beliefs and be granted the ability and the right to worship in freedom without fear of retribution.

The first amendment of the constitution clearly states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof....

There is absolutely no question that President Obama and his administration has aggressively plotted, and to a large degree, succeeded to erode, if not destroy these constitutionally protected freedoms.

The Obama administration would have us believe this latest attack is all about a woman's right to choose. The problem arose when the Catholic Church objected to having to provide birth control in their religiously owned health facilities and institutions. As The Wall Street Journal editorial so perfectly describes:

“A student demands that a Catholic school give up its religion to pay for birth-control pills.”


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203370604577263271726764402.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion

Absurdly, the President personally called the left-wing activist, aptly named "Fluke", who testified before Congress about this college institution's lack of free contraception, to cheer her actions. So let me get this straight, the President of the United States was happy a woman is attempting to force the Catholic Church to provide her with free tools she feels she needs to have sex. As the Brits would say, "Brilliant!"

What is brilliant and insidious is the Obama administration wants us to believe this is a debate about women’s “rights.” If they succeed, it would indeed be a brilliant and clever ruse.

What this actually is We the People, is a frontal assault on religious freedom.


This woman – who Limbaugh wrongly used a slur to describe (and has since apologized for using that descriptive term) was a student who knowingly chose a Catholic institution of higher education she knew did not provide free birth control.


The WSJ article used a kinder term "misleading” in reference to testimony by Fluke, left-wing activist, who under oath claimed it costs over $3000 a year for a woman to buy contraception.

I'm not quite so delicate. She lied. Either that or she's a very stupid woman who has lived on a deserted island for the past fifty years. Contraception costs zero at Planned Parenthood thanks to our tax dollars and it costs approximately $9.00 a month for birth control pills if you buy at Target or Walmart.

Seriously? Or as Mr. Obama likes to say often using his campaign slogan, WTF?! Is this woman attempting to "Win the Future" with this kind of testimony and expect not to be laughed right out of the congressional hearing?

I do not condone what Limbaugh said about the women (all you whining liberals calling for Limbaugh’s head on a platter, check a few videos of Bill Maher and his comments about Sarah Palin). Yet while I do not condone it, I still have to say what I’m thinking.

Honey if you need (the key word here is “need”) $3,000 worth of birth control a year paid for by the Catholic Church, you’ve got a heck of a lot more to worry about than just getting pregnant. Think herpes, AIDS and other STD’s. Think that although someone is paying for your higher education (ten to one it's not her), your brain can't hold onto tiny bits of common-knowledge-info like, contraception is free at your local Planned Parenthood clinic. Or poor challenged Fluke -brain can't grasp there are stores called "discount" stores which means you don't have to buy your pretty pink plastic pill dispensers at Nordstrom.

Whether or not Fluke is the “s” word is irrelevant. Even if she had sex only one time, why should the Catholic Church or anyone but Fluke pay one penny for her sexual encounter? Why should any institution, no less a religious one, pay a cent towards toys for her social life? It’s not like this is an inhaler or diabetic insulin, something one needs to live. This is sex we’re talking about. Or Gee...how about go to another school that does pass out free birth control it if you don’t like this institution’s moral and religious philosophy. Show me that gun to her head forcing her to remain at the school she chose and I'll be able to elicit a tad more sympathy for her plight.


Does logic always elude liberals?

Ms. Ruse, who is a senior fellow for legal studies at the Family Research Council so aptly poses the question in her WSJ article, what about condoms for the men? Who should pay for those? I’m willing to guess liberals believe the Catholic Church should.

Make no mistake, one way the Obama administration is going to rally its base is to convince the public that the big bad Republicans want to snatch your “right” to use contraception. It stands to reason. Why else would George Stephanopoulos dog this contraception question, seemingly out of nowhere during a televised Republican debate?

He was setting up the talking points for Obama's campaign that's why. The Lord knows Obama can’t possibly run on his record (when all the smoke and mirrors clears, the economic bottom line is, the U.S. has lost at least 3 million jobs since BHO took office and the actual unemployment rate is around 17%. That's just a few sniggley looming problems for his reelection hopes).

I found an interesting article that has an equally interesting theory about the Obama administration’s alleged sleazy campaign strategy: http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/03/04/obama-invites-himself-to-speak-both-to-and-for-women/

Do not fall prey to the media left-wing lies. Do not fall victim to the administration’s attempt to steer public opinion, with the help of the leftest media, down the road of pro-abortion and birth control “rights.” This is a direct assault on religious freedom and the smart money is on the American public recognizing it.


If there is need for further proof, I provide only some of the direct assaults on our religious freedom that began the moment Obama took office. This is not even a comprehensive list as it leaves out a U.S. bill Obama signed almost immediately after taking office that once prohibited U.S. tax payer funded abortions in Mexico City but since his signing, allowed U.S. tax payer funded abortions.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/jan/09012309

Your tax dollars not only pay for Planned Parenthood abortions in our own country, but they pay for them in Mexico City. Think about that.

Do not be misdirected, this is all about taking away your religious liberty. When one major constitutionally protected right can be taken away, the rest will follow. Just look at the last four years.

While obviously not a primary source – here is an excerpt from the article that condenses the Obama administration’s direct attack on religious freedoms, in particular, Judeo/Christian rights:

Acts of hostility toward people of Biblical faith

  • April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren't like them” 1
  • February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011. 2
  • April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus' name be covered when he is making his speech. 3
  • May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House. 4
  • April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three. 5
  • October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence – an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions. 6
  • November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by federal law. 7
  • January 2011 – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law, and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court. 8
  • February 2011 – Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress. 9
  • April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring. 10
  • August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception. 11
  • November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial. 12
    November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving message. 13
  • December 2011 – The Obama administration denigrates other countries' religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.14
  • January 2012 – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis. 15
  • February 2012 – The Obama administration forgives student loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion. 16

There are many more examples listed in this article designated by sections where other such violations have occurred under, “Acts of hostility from the Obama-led military toward people of Biblical faith”, “Acts of Hostility toward Biblical Values”, “Acts of Preferentialism for Islam”. See the link below for the entire article.


More by this Author


Comments 26 comments

SoozBlooz 4 years ago

Excellent article and citing of egregious examples of religious intolerance and persecution by Team Obama. Quite right: this is the Wizard obfuscating and dreaming up a non-issue to divert our attention from his abysmal record.

Besides, is it just me? Since when did promiscuity become laudable? Just saying. $3,000 a year to be a player? You know, I thinks she's going to be Obama's Monica Lewinsky. Trashed her life for her 15 minutes of fame. She was bought. . .and now I wonder who will want her in the future.


Onusonus profile image

Onusonus 4 years ago from washington

Good article.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Thanks Sooz - you and I totally agree!

And you're a peach for leaving such pithy comments!


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Thank you very much Onusonus!


SoozBlooz 4 years ago

Oh, Sweetie--it's just that I am ENTIRELY frustrated by the ninnies out there who really think this issue is REAL and that conservatives are out to get women. You know, if I ever met this Fluke chick, I would be, like, WHERE'S THE HAND AND BODY SANITIZER? I don't see a law degree in her future, do you? I also wonder a) who is providing her scholarship to Georgetown, b)if they're sorry, and c) wondering how she has so much time for bedroom Olympics.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

EXACTLY Sooz!! I wanted to say first of all - whoever is paying - you can be SURE Fluke isn't paying for her own education ---- must be disgusted. If not, they're as idiotic as she is. The trouble is - she WILL become a lawyer, a lawyer of Obama's ilk!! Lately - I'm very sorry to say, "higher" education merely means higher up the "arse" of the liberal brain-washing machine because they're sure not learning anything of value in most of these so-called "higher education" institutions. If she has THAT much time on her hands it's a complete waste of an education.


SoozBlooz 4 years ago

The world needs more nuns making sure there are no men in the dorms. . .you never hear of a young woman suffering because she was forced to abstain, do you. Oh. But there I go again, sounding like I want to squelch a women's RIGHT to act just as basely as (some) men.


SoozBlooz 4 years ago

Somehow my last comment got euthanized. I was just opining that there should be MORE nuns keeping an eye on dorm doors being open or shut. After all, you never heard of any young woman suffering because she abstained from sex.

BTW: This from the American Heritage Dictionary--SLUT. 2.a A woman of loose morals.

You know I HAD to look that up.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Sooz - no - your comments just have to be approved by me before they appear. I've been remiss in checking - so sorry - but so glad you persisted anyway! You add so much to the conversation. And I absolutely loved the dictionary definition!! LOL! Perfect!


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

Great piece, Carol. I read that Fluke went to Georgetown for the sole purpose of causing a stir with this issue. Obama is out to squash religion in our nation, which is all part of the socialist plan. As for birth control being the issue of our time, well for me it is a diversion that serves only to divide the nation and steer us away from the real problems. Up and awesome.


American Romance profile image

American Romance 4 years ago from America

When will someone bring the male in on this debate? If fluke ran an add saying all boys who furnish their own condoms can have sex with me, I have no doubt there would be tons of takers! This proving Fluke is a FLAKE and as in typical liberal cannot think by herself!

Maher can call a sweet family woman a slut and that's OK, but for someone to need $3000 dollars a year in contraceptive and we can't call her a whore? What does that mean? Is it now not politicaly correct to tell the truth? Ok I realize I am technicaly incorrect, Fluke is not a whore because she is GIVING it away, ..........so can we call her a crazied nympho maniac???????????


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

There is no way I could have said it better Pop. Always such a pleasure to see you here and SUCH an honor!


SoozBlooz 4 years ago

Hi American Romance--

Rush played the Maher audio lip, as did Mark Levin. I was shocked to hear that Maher called Palin the C word (OMG, no excuse for that EVER) and her child a "retard." The clip is incredibly disgusting, and I don't say that lightly. Everyone should hear it so they can understand why we talk about the hypocrisy of the media. Besides, I believe Limbaugh actually said, "What do we call a woman who gets paid for sex? A prostitute." But I do get the logical extension of the argument. Cheers.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Well done Sooz!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

I am so looking forward to supplemental moral outrage from the left relative to Bill Maher's crudities toward Palin and Bachmann. Surely the Progressives want to be fair.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

ROTFL nicomp! Surely!!!!!

;)

Thanks for the good laugh today!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

The bottom line is that Progressives are held to a lower standard. Bill Maher is not expected to demonstrate the same level of integrity as Rush Limbaugh.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Bill Maher isn't expected to demonstrate the same level of integrity because he's subhuman - he is actually a great argument for Darwinism. He's the missing link...


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX

Nice to see you putting the pen to paper so eloquently once again Carol. Did you notice that the new coin out doesn't have the words "In God We Trust" on it? How'd that happen?

As for me, I'll continue to cling to my Bible and guns until death do us part.

I'm just sayin...

The Frog


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Amen to that Frog and no - I hadn't noticed that on any new coins. Sigh. Maybe someday - when he is gone we can undo SOME of Obama's horrible damage to this country.


sheila b. profile image

sheila b. 4 years ago

The only good thing about Obama's war on Christians is he's showing his true colors and won't get their votes.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Don't get your hopes up TOO much though Sheila - there is a segment of the electorate that is really SO stupid. I recently read a Wall Street Journal article where a black minister of a black church said he was "convinced" of Obama's Christianity - even though - to the date of that article Obama had only been to church six times since he took office. The minister waxed eloquent about how Christian of a man Obama was strictly given the fact 1) Obama said he was a Christian and 2) He was a member of Wright's church for so long. Seriously?! My mouth just stayed wide open by the stupidity of that. I believe many black Christians unfortunately WILL vote for the man--blindly. Did this minister ever read the New Testament and how Jesus called out the Pharisees who were SO pious and "religious" and made so many claims as to their good religious selves...?? But for the most part, Christians ARE discerning and as a block, I do think you're right THIS time, won't vote for the wolf in sheep's clothing. But we need to continue to pray for this nation because as long as Holder is at the helm or any idiot Obama puts in that position - who will uphold the laws of the land and ensure that Obama doesn't STEAL the election like some third-world despot?


Rodric29 profile image

Rodric29 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

You have incensed me with this hub. Not you personally but what you revealed about the covering of the monogram. Why? Now I have to research. Maybe there is a reason, but why would a Christian care if the monogram representing Christ showed or not.

Seventy percent of this nation is Christian or Christ believing! I am at a lost. See I don't watch much tv. I get all my news online. I am late with this one, very late.

I might not be mainstream with the Christian Right, but I am so tired of people taking Christ out of everything!


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Thanks for your comments Rodric.


ShalahChayilJOY profile image

ShalahChayilJOY 4 years ago from Billings, Montana

Very informative article! One can get a free life education on HP and become literate if they can read. Once a lie is lodged in someone's mind, it takes the illumination of a TRUTH higher than another person to awaken them it's, a lie. Bless you for speaking out in defense of TRUTH.


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan Author

Thank you Shalah for your generous comments.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working