Frustrated with the Fortnight for Freedom

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Fortnight for Freedom is a desperate attempt to hold onto religion's privileged position in relation to our secular laws under the laughable guise of religious persecution.

The idea that you get a freedom or right based on what religion you profess to be is antithetical to the entire idea of rights and freedoms as laid out by our Constitution. There is supposed to be one set of laws, responsibilities & rights for everyone. Not a customizable set based on one's personal beliefs.

Our laws and Constitution guarantee that each citizen has the right to make their own religious decisions about things that affect themselves. All of the freedoms that Bishops' want to preserve are about forcing their religious decisions onto someone else.

Your religion says not to marry someone of the same gender? Great, don't do that. It is not a Religious Freedom for you to tell anyone else that they cannot. It is not a Religious Freedom for you to be able to discriminate against them either.

Repeat this formula with all the other agenda items on the Fortnight for Freedom.

Contraception? You don't approve of it? Good for you, then don't use it. That does not give you the right to make it more expensive to your employees.

Is the pattern apparent yet? This not about Religious Freedom. There are no new laws or mandates that infringe on anyone's personal religious freedoms. This is about the Bishop's wanting to be able to influence other peoples choices. That is not a freedom. That is coercion. That is control.

I find it obscene that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have marketed their Campaign to preserve Control & Coercion as a one to preserve freedom.

 

A rebuttal was published on 2012-07-11:

Bishops defend religious freedom

In his July 5 letter (“Campaign for coercion”) Steve Schlosnagle says of the U.S. Catholic bishops’ Fortnight for Freedom Campaign, “All of the ‘freedoms’ that the bishops want to ‘preserve’ are about forcing their religious decisions onto someone else.”

No, they are simply saying they do not wish to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization, which violate their strongly held religious beliefs and consciences.

Those who wish to obtain these services are free to pay for them themselves, either directly or through insurance. Those who believe these services are immoral should not be coerced to pay for them. The idea that a government may coerce people to violate their consciences is the definition of tyranny.

Schlosnagle also says the bishops’ characterization of the regulations in question as an attack on religious freedom or as religious persecution is “laughable.” He fails to note that, recognizing this as an attack on religious freedom, representatives of at least 10 religious denominations other than Catholic have spoken out, written formal letters of protest or filed lawsuits against the mandate.

In Matthew 23:34-40, Jesus made it clear that the two “greatest commandments” require Christians to love God (in worship) and their neighbors as themselves (in service). Matthew 25:31-46 also tells us that whatever we do for others, we do for the Lord.

By ruling that only churches are exempt from its mandate, but not religiously affiliated hospitals, universities and social service agencies (of whatever denomination), the government is telling Christians they may observe only the first of the two greatest commandments, but not the second, unless they are willing to violate their consciences or face harsh penalties for noncompliance.

Clearly, this mandate breaches the wall of separation between church and state and is unconstitutional.

Raymond J. Adamek
Kent

And here is my rebuttal to that:

In Mr. Adamek's July 11th reply to my Letter to Editor of July 5th, he says that I fail to understand that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops do not wish to "pay for contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization". Well, simply speaking, Mr. Adamek the mandate does not change in anyway whether they do or not.

If one of their employees wants to purchase contraception, they will do so with either money that was paid to them as salary or via insurance that is provided to them as part of their salary. I fail to see how one way is more of an affront to the Bishops' beliefs than the other.

Similarly I do not see how this will, in Mr. Adamek's words, "coerce people to violate their consciences". If using contraceptives is against your conscience, then do not use them. You do not have a right to make it harder for anyone else to purchase them.

That 10 other religious denominations agree with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is completely immaterial, this is solely a matter of the employee's rights. Your individual right to freedom of religious belief does not extend to making choices about another's health care.

Our secular laws have always told us that we cannot impose our own religious restrictions upon others.

Mr. Adamek, if you think that your "Second Greatest Commandment" is to force others to live by the same religious limitations that you place on yourself, then I would point out that is precisely the sort of tyranny our country has worked to eliminate since its beginning.