Miracles Do Happen

People ask all the time do miracles still happen and I would have to say they do.  In their Sunday, 12 January 2014 editorial, USA Today's editorial board criticizes the President for his attack on the Little Sisters Of The Poor.

While I missed the original editorial in my post on the subject, it is clear that we see things similarly. As their line notes "nuns and birth control just don't mix."

I did not realize the disparity, but as USA Today notes, the government is losing 95% of its cases.  In nineteen out of twenty cases, courts are issuing stays to non-profits from having to comply against their consciousness.  When President Obama says the American people want this, I think me might just be incorrect.  Worse for Obama and Co. is this statement:

In several cases, even if the government wins, the whole exercise will not result in a single woman getting a single free contraceptive, because under a different law, the insurers themselves are exempt. So what exactly does the administration hope to gain?

It shows the militant nature of those against the policy that they would rather pick a fight with nuns than simply allow them to care for the elderly poor as they have done for years.

The Biggest Threat

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As you walk down the street are you afraid?  If you live near a convent, you should be.  Nuns everywhere wearing their habit and holding their rosary are ready to pounce.  That’s right…if you believe the mainstream media, the Little Sisters Of The Poor are about to derail the brilliant piece of legislation which is the Affordable Care Act.

In a recent piece of glaring anti-Catholic fervor, Alex Wagner of MSNBC actually referred to a group of nuns as a threat.  And what atrocity had these poor women committed?  Well , they would not put pen to paper to sign off on a third party providing contraception services to its employees as it is against the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church of which they are affiliated.  (You should not be surprised from MSNBC to see no one on the show defending nuns from the attacks of Howard Dean and Cecile Richards - two who support abortion on demand and have never been willing to discuss any of the protections and safety issues a large majority of Americans want when it comes to abortion.)

When I first started this blog with a single post, I made note of Henry VIII and his Succession Act.  That piece of legislation basically allowed him to pull England from Rome and form what would become the modern day Episcopal Church.  When one of his chief supporters found himself in disagreement with the legislation that would ultimately lead him to divorce and the marriage to Anne Boleyn, he didn’t write a book as former Defense Secretary Gates did, he didn’t run to Fox News to get his side heard, he simply retired back, but this was not good enough for King Henry VIII who required him to sign onto his marriage to the future headless queen.

Similarly, Obama says you can disagree with me, but you still have to provide the services, because contraception which is widely available should be subsidized by those who find it anathema, which brings us to the Roman Catholic Little Sisters of the Poor.

What is it the Little Sisters of the Poor do anyway?  Well, in both Baltimore and Denver they care for the elderly poor in nursing homes for those who can not afford a nursing home replete with its poor care and regular infections.  The Little Sisters prefer that the elderly not be warehoused with uncaring providers, but by persons such as themselves who have abandoned world pleasure to care for the elderly.  This would seem to be a goal of the Obama administration and the Affordable Care Act.  Instead it is the starting point to regular anti-Catholic bigotry which few in the media seem willing to call out.

In a recent, US News piece, Jamie Stiehm goes on a personal attack against Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor, for issuing a preliminary injunction on behalf of the Little Sisters of the Poor.  Again and again, her histrionics go on about the six Catholics who sit on the Supreme Court and the poor Jews who must contend with them.  The anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic rage she has should be grounds for termination in almost any other field, but US News stands by its “reporter.”

What is amazing is first, Justice Sotomayor’s move was only to stay the penalties to be issued by the IRS until the legal arguments could be made for and against the issue of whether or not nuns, who are caring for the poor elderly, should be made to provide contraception against their conscience.  Two and equally interesting, Justice Sotomayor is hardly the face of the conservative wing of the court so why would you blast her so publicly unless your argument just that desperate?  Could it be that the dream of big government liberals could come crashing down because of the efforts of a few nuns?  Not efforts to stop the law of course, just efforts of nuns to care for the sick and the old in their way, without interference from a US government who hasn’t been able to provide adequate healthcare to the elderly for decades or adequate care to our returning military veteran’s for generations?

If you argument is that weak, perhaps the Little Sisters of the Poor are a threat and your law is about to topple like the Tower of Babel.

Equal Protection...Henry VIII Style

"...no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws..."

Something is amiss.

Recently, the President of Chick-Fil-A, Dan Cathy stated he supports marriage between a man and a woman.  The firestorm since has hardly been surprising, but it has represented an interesting turn of events in terms of how those who oppose Chick-Fil-A's stance argue the Constitution.

While Dan Cathy expressed his personal opinion, the response from Mayors, who do not represent private entities, but rather public ones, have stated they will turn away a business that employs people who then pay taxes even in an economy where growth is staggering along at an anemic rate.  That's right both Boston and then Chicago decided that because of  private company's CEO's personal stance, they would preclude them from future economic opportunities.  It is not clear to me how this isn't a violation of their same equal protection they claim homosexuals suffer because a private individual believes that homosexuality is outside the bounds of his religious convictions.

The conversation is interesting because it is clear that for those with the opposite view it is not enough for them to get the 'right' to marry or the right to do this, that, or the other, but rather they are happy to express their viewpoint that I may not only not express my opinion, but I can't have it either.

Much like England under Henry VIII and his Succession Act, America is eliminating the ability to disagree and like Henry's England it has nothing to do with higher calling, but is rather about personal selfishness and political expediency.  The Succession Act, which placed the King of England as the head of the Church in England, was considered heretical to those who held onto their Roman Catholic beliefs.  At the time, Thomas More left government so that he would not have to swear allegiance to an idea that was contrary to his personal beliefs, but even this was not good enough for the king and the self doubt that clearly clouded his mind to kill his former trusted advisor and friend.

This story is not dissimilar to the ideas espoused now where Catholics are being forced through the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, to perform abortions, provide and pay for contraception, and many other manner of procedure contrary to both Catholic teaching and personal conviction.  Perhaps people would consider this as they move forward in their discussions on Chick-Fil-A, Obamacare, and such.  For me, I will stand with the man whose name I took when I was confirmed into the church.

I die the king's faithful servant, but God's first. - Thomas More