Why is the New Hampshire Democrat Party attacking religious freedom in the State of New Hampshire? From the state party chair, to Democrat candidates for governor, right down to elected members, Planned Parenthood, and EMILY’s list lobbyists. The entire morally bankrupt Democrat party machine has a laser-like focus on denying you another first amendment right. The right to religious freedom is under attack again.
New Hampshire Democrats are still objecting to legislative language that would allow religious groups to opt out of paying to insure for things that are in direct opposition to their religious beliefs. The left would like to continue forcing these groups to pay for things they find morally objectionable. But in the grand scope, since the left wants them to pay for what to the religious person amounst to murder, how bad can contraception be?
So it’s an easy leap. Democrats don’t believe in much, including sin. They can’t be bothered to follow the laws they write themselves, let alone some divine moral code. The only reason they tolerate the idea of a power greater than their collectivist cabal of elitist busybodies is because even after decades of controlling the entire American education system there are still a majority of people in America who can actually envision a power greater than the Department of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, or the Chief executive–when they happen to be a Democrat. (They have to pander to them to get their votes.)
So what is the offensive language being added..
“No employer shall be required to include in its coverage for its employees the provisions of this section if the employer has a religious objection.”
Screw that, say New Hampshire Democrats, who are not at all interested in religious rights or their constitutional underpinnings. So to make their “objection” to this proposed change, they have chosen the years fashionable propaganda of the moment, the “attack on Women’s health.” The opportunity for Religious freedom is an attack on women’s health?
What facts would have to align for that to have even a thread of truth?
For it to be a threat, contraception would have to be both a dominant feature and a critical ongoing part of every woman’s entire life, critical to her very existence, and literally inaccessible to women who…
– Have voluntarily chosen to freely work for some religious group that might find it objectionable in the first place.
– Have voluntarily chosen to freely work for some religious group that finds it objectionable and chose to act upon its objection in this manner.
– Are women of child bearing age (or if we were to include condoms–who regularly pursue high risk sex)
– Actually want access to this or similar services through insurance.
– Have no access to any other insurance (spouse or partner) or any publicly or privately funded alternatives already in place.
– Are employed but still are somehow incapable of paying for their own contraception should they actually need it.
And as if this did not narrow the pool of potential “victims” on the New Hampshire front in the “war on women’s health,” despite our Constitutionally protected right to freedom of religious expression, we have these additional considerations that are relevant to the Granite State.
– New Hampshire is one of the least religious states in the nation .
– Many of the religious groups in the state are social justice churches that support abortion and contraception.
So the entire Democrat party has rolled out the war machines and pushed them up to walls of the first amendment, for what amounts to less than a handful of likely women in New Hampshire–most if not all of whom will have, of their own free will, accepted the circumstances of their employment (with the religious groups in question) in the first place.
Can we say the Democrats doth protest too much? (Again!) Can we be embarrassed for them? Because they are never right about anything.
A few examples. Do you recall their whining about the risks of pregnancy to young women when the New Hampshire legislature re-instituted parental notification–even with exemptions? There was little or no evidence of any risk at all in New Hampshire, except among women in their forties, for whom the legislation did not apply. That did not stop them from misleading us. Or how about open and concealed carry in the State House? (Also here, and here for starters) Innocent Children shot in the cross-fire as witnesses (our wives, husbands, sisters, and brothers) are gunned down in the midst of some heated debate. Never happened, and it never would. (Well, maybe if the NH House full of armed and unbalanced leftists I suppose.)
But notice a pattern?
The New Hampshire Democrat Party is not just the chicken little party that cried wolf, they are wrong on just about everything. And I think they are OK with that because the only reason they protest anything at all like this is because of who they really are. Everything the left does is a brick in a wall that when completed will deny people freedom. The goal is to build more walls until the people are separated from every decision, including who will pay for it all. And Democrats just assume we all think that way. So they can claim that getting the government out of the way is an intrusion on someone elses rights because it infringes on their desire to use government to meddle in every aspect of everyone’s life.
Besides, these are just…religious groups. Who cares about them, except when you need to pander to them for their votes?
Democrats don’t care. Democrats object to religious freedom–any religious freedom–because it presents a very simple, constitutional objection, to important parts of their agenda. And while they can song-and-dance their away around more than a few provisions in the constitution, “shall make no law”…is almost easy enough for a child to understand. Unless they are a Democrat child trained to see the constitution as tissue paper.
And New Hampshire Democrats are no different. They were told to go to the State House and cry wolf on women’s health care. New Hampshire candidate for governor, Jackie Cilley (D), said…
“Today, we’re here to stand up for the freedom of women and their doctors to make healthcare decisions without interference from politicians and bureaucrats.”
As someone in a recent Union Leader editorial was kind enough to point out, how does removing the (constitutionally suspect) government interference equate to government interfering? Only a Democrat would think that, because what you are interfering with, Constitutions or not, is their agenda.
So all hail the Lefts latest effort to abolish the constitutional right to Religious freedom. It’s just one more thing standing in their way.