USA: Secularists’ Battle Against Supreme Court’s HHS Mandate Ruling Is Based on Ignorance of Law and Science
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT has ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby, a chain of stores owned by a Christian family, the Greens, in their refusal to cover four of the twenty birth control methods required for employer health plans under Obama’s national healthcare program. These four “contraceptives” induce abortion by preventing the fertilized egg from implanting in the mother’s womb. The Freedom From Religion Foundation is currently engaged in a marketing campaign to overturn the ruling against the HHS mandate, in favor of government funding of their sexual liberties. The arguments of these “free-thinkers” are based on a complex and contradicting web of propaganda and hypocrisy, as is typical of those lacking a moral compass. In their eagerness to promote themselves, their campaign is positively ill informed by the wisdom of empirical science, logic, democracy, and common sense.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) is composed, by their own assertions, of 20,000 “atheists, agnostics, and other skeptics”, termed “free-thinkers.” On their website, they claim to dedicate themselves to promoting democracy and “protecting the constitutional principle of the separation of Church and State.” It should be pointed out, firstly, that the phrase “separation of Church and State” does not appear anywhere in the American Constitution or in the landmark amendments to the Constitution known as the Bill of Rights.
It is a popular misconception that “the wall of separation between Church and State” is constitutional, that is to say, is language contained within the text of the document that constitutes the supreme law of the United States. This is false — and it is certainly inadmissible that an organization concerned with civil liberties should be ignorant of the fact. The phrase was used in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson (third President and principle author of the Declaration of Independence), twelve years after the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights (concerning the principles of religious freedom and free speech) verbatim: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
So confident of the weight of their arguments, the FFRF went so far as to put a full-page advertisement in the New York Times, with three specific aims: to deconstruct the Supreme Court’s ruling; to slander the Catholic faith; and to increase dues collected from old and new members. Contradictions and misinformation nonetheless characterize the arguments the “free-thinkers” make. Science, logic, democracy, or common sense was evidently not high on their list of intellectual priorities. This will soon become evident.
To bring my point home, I have taken the liberty to comment the actual ad, developing my clarifications, briefly, in continuation…
The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, which brought the United States into being, states the following: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” We are living in political and media culture unfortunately that has less and less respect for the dignity of human beings, their equality, and their liberty, especially the most vulnerable and the poor. This should come as no surprise as without acknowledgment of the Creator mentioned in our Declaration of Independence, go too “the unalienable rights” with which He has endowed us.
The arguments developed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation mirror other arguments promoted by secularists whereby the disenfranchised in the United States will not have access to contraception or to abortion without government funding — whereas in reality, minorities are specifically targeted by the likes of Planned Parenthood in their methods of population control. That is to say, while champing the rights of African American women and other minorities, secularists insure their demographic and social decline.
On the other end of the spectrum, the narcissistic, status-and-wealth-obsessed Homosexual community — a veritable war horse for the Secularists — has successfully advocated for the buying and selling of newborn children to satisfy their seemingly insatiable need to create others in their image. This trafficking of human children now takes place, while African American women in the United States — but not only — are repeatedly presented with only one solution to their historically complex social problems: kill off their offspring, or prevent them from ever coming into being, “to not burden” society.
It is by now a well-known fact that Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger publically endorsed eugenics and promoted, with her sex education what she called “a purer race.” Among Sanger’s racist jewels is the following: “[We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”
Like the FFRF and other tyrannical political minorities, Sanger claimed she wanted no masters, yet actively worked to create new ones. Sanger claimed that she wanted no gods, but helped create a new type of dehumanized woman that thinks of no one but herself and require of family, society, government, and religion to bend over backwards to suit to her distorted notions of human rights — sometimes with their pocketbooks and often times, with their blood.
Similarly, the FFRF and other Secularists claim to work in favor democracy, civil liberties, and the common good. On the contrary, between the now-debunked myth of Malthusian overpopulation and the unscientific claim of emotional stability among homosexual partners, the order they promote is destructive and socially unsustainable. Common sense and empirical evidence prove it.