Little Sisters of the Poor subjected to Obamacare abortion mandate is a huge First Amendment violation

(Freedom.news) Nothing exemplifies the constitution insult and tyranny that is Obamacare more than this particular case.

As reported by LifeNews.com, an organization of Catholic nuns – Little Sisters of the Poor – is in a legal battle of epic constitutional proportions in a case that smacks of Left-wing persecution, something this administration has a nasty reputation of doing.

You may have heard that the nuns are in a fight with the administration over an Obamacare requirement that the group pay for abortion-causing drugs and contraception because, as the administration says, these are essential healthcare services. But of course, the Catholic faith teaches that abortion is a major sin, and the Church is one of the last staunch defenders of life – all life.

Last week the one-short U.S. Supreme Court heard an appeal from the Little Sisters of the Poor and 37 other religious groups, an attempt to stop the Obama administration from forcing them to comply with the mandate. If the nuns and the other religious groups do not get some relief from the nation’s highest court, they face millions in fines from the weaponized IRS.

Here’s the icing on the tyranny cake, however, as LifeNews.com reported:

While arguing publicly that religious groups should be forced to comply with the HHS Mandate, the Obama administration quietly exempted several major companies from those same rules. Lawyers for the religious groups used this point to argue against the federal government’s overarching mandate…

Nice, huh? So while mega-corporations that can afford the mandate and can otherwise muster no legitimate legal or constitutional objection to it are given a pass because they have better lobbyists and deeper pockets, the administration is attempting to force compliance from some of the nation’s foremost Christian groups and charities for the poor.

If that’s not cynical persecution on the part of our “compassionate” president – the same guy who loves to embrace tyrants and dictators – nothing is.

The larger issue, of course, is whether or not the First Amendment means what it was intended to mean, and whether there are enough Supreme Court justices who think so.

That said, given that there is currently a 4-4 ideological tie – the Sisters are in fairly good shape, since a lower appeals court ruling that sided with their religious exemption argument would stand if the high court votes a tie.

But it shouldn’t because the constitutional principle surrounding this case is so obvious. Yet, we wonder because of the manner in which justices (and lower court judges) are selected.  The selection and appointment of federal judges and justices based on political ideology, not on whether they were competent enough to base decisions on the meaning and intent of the various constitutional provisions.

This one really ought to be a slam-dunk (and, honestly, if were any other religious group other than Christians, it would be) – either the Constitution, via the First Amendment, guarantees religious freedom or it doesn’t. It’s that simple.

There may be some elements of disdain for Obamacare in general and this president in particular at play here, but viewed purely through a constitutional lens, there is no question that forcing the nuns to go against their closely held religious beliefs – being made to pay for medicines that are used to prevent and end life – is a violation of their First Amendment religious freedom rights. But because we have politically motivated, politically chosen activists on the high court, it’s very likely that the nuns’ rights are going to be ignored.

You may or may not agree with the practice of abortion [another “right” imposed on the entire country by politically motivated, politically chosen activists on the high court] but it is hard to imagine any American disagreeing with the fact that Christian faithful, and especially Catholic Christian faithful – should not be made to violate a core tenet of their beliefs.

Maybe someday if, say, a Muslim baker or florist refuses service to a gay or lesbian couple, then we’ll get to reclaim our right to religious freedom.

See also:

LifeNews

Freedom.news is part of the USA Features Media network.