• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • VIDEO: Sen. Roy Blunt Vows to Fight Obamacare's Anti-Conscience Mandate

    Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) introduced legislation to protect religious organizations from Obamacare’s overreach last summer. Now, as President Obama presses forward with his anti-conscience mandate, Blunt is prepared to keep the pressure on the White House.

    “This is a genuine assault on First Amendment freedoms,” Blunt said in an exclusive interview with Heritage following a speech here Monday.

    Obama’s controversial mandate, a result of Obamacare, requires religious institutions to provide for contraceptives, abortion-inducing drugs and sterilization in their health coverage — even if it violates the beliefs of those institutions.

    Blunt dismissed Obama’s “accommodation” announcement last week as an “accounting gimmick.” He said it’s not an issue of money as Obama portrayed it Friday.

    “This is not about cost. It’s about the Constitution,” Blunt said. “And if you can decide this no longer offends me because I don’t have to pay for it, I guess you’re concern is financial all the time and not faith-based.”

    Blunt introduced the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act last August. It would allow employers to decline coverage of services in conflict with religious beliefs. He tried to offer it as an amendment last week, but was blocked by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).

    “We want to be sure we’ve established the principle here that the Constitution establishes — that President Washington understood and President Jefferson understood, and my guess is, every president between them and right now understood — and that is respect for conscience is respect for religious freedom,” Blunt said.

    The interview runs about 4 minutes. Hosted by Rob Bluey and produced by Brandon Stewart. For more videos from Heritage, subscribe to our YouTube channel.

    Posted in Obamacare, Scribe [slideshow_deploy]

    9 Responses to VIDEO: Sen. Roy Blunt Vows to Fight Obamacare's Anti-Conscience Mandate

    1. Joe Giardino says:

      Last time I checked, the ban on Contraceptives is a CATHOLIC edict, not a Christian one, so why is Senator Blunt saying any health care plan can ban it from their Health Care plan? Sounds like establishing a preference to one particular religion to me!
      Some of us Republicans still hold to the Principles of this Country first.

      • jetstream says:

        The Affordable Health Care Plan (Obamacare) mandates that all private health care plans, including those offered by religious employers, cover not only contraceptives but also abortifacient drugs (those inducing abortion, like Ella and morning-after pills). The "accommodation" is a farce, as the churches ultimately end up paying for the policy that offers the same coverage, thus forcing the churches to operate outside of the framework of their faith, violating their basic beliefs. This is a violation of the First Amendment and an assault on EVERY religious institution in the country. You do NOT have to oppose contraceptives in order to oppose abortion, in any and every form. "Some of you Republicans" had better come to the realization that your liberties are being sold off with a smirk. If you "hold to the Principles of this Country first," as you contend, you'd better start holding onto this one pretty hard!!!!!!!!!!!!
        Scream it to the high heavens: this is not about women's health, it is about relgious freedom!

    2. There is also a class of religious believers in this country who, as individuals, often choose to shun medical insurance, and for a variety of religious reasons. As a practitioner of Christian Science, I am among them. There seems to be no attention being paid on the depth of this intrusion on personal rights, which involves musch more than just the issues of contraception and abortion. The right to shun insurance coverage at all is even more reasonable than is the provision of "accommodations" . "Congress shall pass no law…impeding the free exercise of religion" I make my case for those who practice pure spiritual healing, myself included, who do so with a documented record of success for the past 150 years; a record record of success and happiness, I might add. The results of spiritual treatment quite often produce results quite contrary to those expected or predicted by the medical comunity. You, fellow citizens, are just as free to reject these guidelines for your personal life, as you are to accept them. And you are obligated not to enforce your version of how to observe life, on me. This is called religious freedom. The religious "accommodation" offered by President Obama only gives meaningless lip service to religious freedom.

      The purchase of insurance itself necessitates a conviction that sickness, disease, and accidents are natural occurrences controlled by an assumed absolute law of randomness and are therefore, in that view, simply unavoidable. This is not the view of those who depend upon God exclusively for their own care and protection. They instead follow a line of thought which manifests God's natural harmony and the expectation of it, in every aspect of their lives.

      A secondary assumption in favor of insurance would be that, given the occurrence of such an event, the monetary costs of attending to the results would be prohibitively expensive. Those who truly practice pure spiritual healing continually demonstrate, as a way of life, that God's law of infinite supply is continually provable and proven in human experience. Witness Christ's feeding of the multitudes, for instance.

      Those who practice purely spiritual healing exclusively, do not at all believe either of these two human premises to be true. They generally strive to live their lives contrary to them. Therefore, the concept of required health insurance itself is contrary to their system of religious belief and practice. In this writer's opinion, this law is an infraction of the right to practice religion as we personally see fit.

    3. Colleen Barry says:

      Thank You Senator Blunt

    4. Ray says:

      You guys are dense. This is about the right of any religious institution to not be forced by government to violate its own teachings.

      You can't make Mormon's run a brewery. You can't make Hindus eat beef. You can't make Southern Baptists dance at a club.

      This is about government mandates to private, church run institutions.

    5. Ron says:

      Thank you Sen. Blunt; our constitution is our best hope of stopping our progression to despotism. Your defense is appreciated by those who have not ignored the defense of our God given liberty.

    6. Christel says:

      YAY for Blunt! Thank you, senator, for your truthful stand.

      Any reasonable person must agree that Obama's anti-Catholic edict violates that part of the First Amendment prohibiting Congress from “respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Catholics oppose abortion –including abortifacients, and most forms of contraception. In the free exercise of religion, Catholic hospitals choose not to perform abortions or provide contraceptives.
      Defiance will be very costly (See Stephen Combs' Friday Letter #163 of Feb. 3, 2012). Since the Church promises not to back down, it faces an unpleasant and awful choice: Close down its hospitals and universities or pay fines of $2,000 per employee per year.

    7. Rochelle says:

      Senator Blunt is correct. I am glad he is standing up to counter Obamacare. It is not so much about religion or philosophy as it is about CONTROL! The Government wants to control us. The Government will tell us when and what we can do. That is the heart of Obamacare. It makes no difference to the Government if we morally reject the idea of abortion or contraception which is not just a Catholic religion tenant. It is part of most Orthodox religions: Christian, Jewish, Muslim. Just remember history. Prior to WWII, Jews were allowed to get abortionsby the NAZI's but the arian Germans were not as all individuals were important (to take over the world).

    8. Lesley Dowden says:

      Most of you are nuts. This about women's rights to continue to decide their health protections. Keep religion out of this equation and you will see the men trying to tell women what to do. The doing the same stunt with voters rights, and union rights. The white boys are using as many different methods to return to the precivil rights era.

    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.