• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Obama Gets Hit with Another Religious Freedom Lawsuit

    The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has already filed two lawsuits challenging the Obamacare regulation that requires many religious employers to provide health insurance coverage for sterilization, contraception, and what many people believe are abortion-inducing drugs.

    Those lawsuits are on behalf of Belmont Abbey College (a Benedictine Catholic college in North Carolina) and Colorado Christian University (a nondenominational Christian university in Colorado).

    This morning, the Becket Fund sued the Obama Administration again, this time on behalf of Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), the Catholic television network that was started nearly 30 years ago by a cloistered nun named Mother Angelica in her monastery garage.

    According to its press release, the network objects to paying for—and refuses to pay for—“contraceptive services and for drugs that destroy human life”:

    “The federal government cannot force people to violate their religion like this,” said Mark Rienzi, Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund and a constitutional law professor at the Catholic University of America. “Mother Angelica founded EWTN to spread the teachings of the Catholic Church—not to betray them.”

    EWTN claims it is “the largest religious media network in the world” and transmits programming “24 hours a day to more than 148 million homes in 144 countries and territories.” If EWTN wasn’t already covering the Obama Administration’s “unprecedented” assault on religious freedom before, it seems likely that viewers will be provided ample coverage in the days to come.

    The Heritage Foundation has repeatedly criticized the Obamacare contraception mandate as a violation of religious freedom. Heritage has also pointed out that the Obama Administration’s actions, though entirely counter to the freedom of religion, “should not be surprising given the nature of the President’s health care law.” Religious freedom goes hand in hand with limited government and with freedom more generally. With intrusions of freedom as broad as those made by the Obamacare legislation, burdens on freedom of religious and moral conscience are likely to follow. Indeed, they have.

    To achieve greater freedom of religious and moral conscience, Americans should seek greater freedom over health care decisions and greater freedom in general. Reducing government power by repealing the Obamacare statute would advance all these goals.

    Posted in Featured, Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    10 Responses to Obama Gets Hit with Another Religious Freedom Lawsuit

    1. steve says:

      As Christ would say, such hypocrites, amazing the Christian conservatives have no problems passing laws against Mormon on polygamy and Muslims on sharia law, but want to talk about freedom of religion. We regulate religions all the time in this country with laws.

      • thrushjz says:

        @Steve, You must be joking, but of course you're not because you think like all liberals think like, devoid of any logic. You are saying that multiple wives is a good thing? That's good for women to be slaves to one man?, You think sharia law is good? the religion that straps bombs on children and makes them walk out into the street and blow up themselves and 50 other people? But a Christian College (which my son goes to BTW) is wrong for telling Obama and his forceful cronies to get off their backs as it pertains to Abortion drugs and contraception? Surely you jest, but you're not. If it wasn't moronic and sad it would be funny.

        • Rick says:

          First, just because someone makes an argument with which you disagree, it is not necessary to claim their argument to be a either a joke or "devoid of any logic." There are many grounds to the arguments @steve was making, whether you agree with them or not. Laws dealing with religious issues are made, passed, and regulated on federal, state, and local levels all of the time. By the way, why would you say that wives are "slaves"? Last I checked, marriage is voluntary in the United States, so that statement is absolutely ridiculous. If you want your arguments to be taken seriously, please be sure to think about what you are saying before writing with such matter-of-fact tone.

      • Guest says:

        As usual, people resorting to the term "hypocrite" don't know what they're talking about. Polygyny, covered under the statutes against bigamy, had been outlawed in every state before Joseph Smith ever had his first vision. This is why they practiced "plural marriage" in secret. That's also why the Mormons left the US and went to Utah. But that was Mexican territory and the practice was still illegal as Mexico had its own bigamy laws. The Mormons had never practiced bigamy anywhere where it hadn't already been outlawed prior to the founding of their religion. The 1862 Morrill act simply confirmed that the laws outlawing bigamy would remain in force. It did nothing new.

        Bigamy had been a common law offense in England since 1603 and we inherited our legal system from England. You really want to try to make the case that the laws that had existed in England this country for over 200 years were predicated on the knowledge that someday there'd be a Mormon religion and we wanted to establish our animus toward it early?

        As far as the supposed hypocrisy of passing laws against Sharia, you'd have a point if Roman Catholic Canon Law or Jewish law (Halakha) were part of the criminal and civil law of the land. Or if Catholics or Jews were campaigning to incorporate their religious laws into the body of civil law. But they're not, and nobody is pushing for it. There are Muslims pushing to make Sharia part of the law of the land, and there is nothing hypocritical about treating it the same as other bodies of religious law and legislatures passing laws stating such.

        Requiring a religion to collectively participate in a grave sin would be something new. Nothing at all like the examples your brought up, which certainly don't make your accusations of hypocrisy anything less than baseless.

        • mzk1 says:

          Just one slight correction. It is quite likely that Halacha and Canon law are sources for Common Law and American law. Halacha prohibits, for eaxmple, double jeapardy. (On the side, some think that Halacha had a great deal of influence on early (before the Jews were expelled from England) Common Law given that illeteracy was high, and it is possible rabbis as well as friars were asked to draft contacts.)

          I dod not see, though, why Moslems cannot push for laws based on their beliefs, as long as they realize (as we Jews do) that they are a minority, and they certainly will not get all of it.

          Of course, anti-contraception laws certainly existed in the US, and not just in Catholic areas – until the Supreme Court invented a right to privacy.

    2. O_Henry says:

      “Ask yourself, ‘Are you better off than you were four years ago?” RWR 10-28-80

    3. Lloyd Scallan says:

      Another lawsuit against Obama and his administration? What good will it do except to hang next to the tolit when the Charman runs low? Obama has the majorty of the courts and judges, along with the entire news media (including FNC) in his pocket. Why sould Obama worry about another suit?

    4. Hello there, You have done an excellent job. I will definitely digg it and in my view suggest to my friends. I am confident they will be benefited from this web site.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.