Friday, July 11, 2014

Patty Murray's Bill Puts Free Abortion Pills Above Religious Freedom

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
Washington State's Senator Patty Murray has introduced a bill that places abortion pills above religious freedom and freedom of conscience.

When the Supreme Court ruled a couple of weeks ago in favor of religious freedom in the Hobby Lobby case, Murray told the Seattle press "if Congress won't fix this, I will."

Well, the fix is in.

She has authored a new legislation that is designed to override the Supreme Court ruling.

The Seattle Times is casting her effort as being in sync with Chief Justice Robert's suggestion in the ruling and is, as expected, championing her as a true hero, attempting to fight discrimination and restore free abortion pills to women.

But not all agree with Murray or the Seattle Times.


The Seattle Times is reporting that Murray is acting on "advice from the chief justice of the US Supreme Court."

Murray, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and 17 other senate Democrats filed an amicus brief with the Court Wednesday.

Murray told the DC press yesterday, women "are tired of being targeted and are looking to Congress to right the wrong by the Supreme Court."

If the Court was wrong, then free abortion pills are more important than religious freedom in Murray's brave new world.

Planned Parenthood is organizing a national campaign to pressure elected officials to get on board the good ship lollipop and help right the wrong.

Newspapers across Washington State are echoing the Seattle Times story and bias.

Sen. Harry Reid, Murray's leader in the Senate said, "We're not gonna let five white men have the last word on contraceptive mandates."

I wonder how Justice Clarence Thomas felt about the "white men" part of Reid's statement?

Nancy Pelosi told the press yesterday, "We should be afraid of this court. That five guys should start determining what contraceptives are legal or not...it is so stunning."

Pelosi said her sensibilities are offended "that five men should discuss the specifics of whether a women should use a diaphragm and should pay for it herself or her boss."

You will note the same article linked above is also reporting that homosexual groups are withdrawing support of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which has been their flagship legislation for the past several years.

The reason they are now withdrawing is because congress is carving out an exception for religious groups that believe homosexuality is destructive and it is sin.

Murray, Pelosi, Reid and the other far left secular progressives are not having a good summer.

Pelosi says the court's decisions have "inflamed" the debate.

Translation: "Why are these people allowed to disagree with us?"

The heat she may feel is the resistance of decent people across this nation who believe freedom of religion is more important than free abortion pills.

Patty Murray's bill defines itself as an effort "To ensure that employers cannot interfere in their employees' birth control and other health care decisions."

Ms. Murray told NBC's Andrea Mitchell "the five justices turned the 'Freedom of Religion Act' (sic) upside down in their interpretation."

Actually, it is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which Hillary's husband signed in 1993.

The problem Ms. Murray and other far left secular progressives may have is that they are suffering from a form of Psychogenic Veritgo which Medical News Today says is associated with anxiety and gives one the sensation of having just fallen off a merry-go-round. Medical News says people generally recover.

The secular progressives have believed that up is down, right is wrong, wrong is right and evil is virtue so long that they become disoriented when traditional moral virtue is actually restored.

And they panic when the ship of religious freedom and liberty is righted. They loose their balance.

IIlse Hogue, president of NARAL said a "collective gasp" went up across the country when the Supreme Court ruled as they did.

Actually, Ms. Hogue, that was a sigh of relief from the majority of Americans who have grown weary of your assault on religious freedom and traditional values like "life" and marriage and family under the guise of equality and fairness, tolerance and inclusiveness, and choice. They no longer believe aborting an unwanted child is "healthcare."

When this and other rulings favoring religious freedom came out this past month, the "collective gasp" Ms. Houge heard was actually a collective sigh from our Founding Fathers who believed freedom and liberty was more important than free abortion pills.

I do not believe Patty Murray's bill will succeed. It may get Senate approval, but I cannot imagine it passing the House of Representatives.

We'll see. Please contact your elected officials in Congress and tell them you oppose Patty Murray's bill.

Yes, even if Patty Murray "is" your elected official.

Have a great weekend.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Encouraged. Be Prayerful. Be Blessed.

6 comments:

  1. She has no sense.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Once Patty Murray regains her equilibrium, I hope she will initiate a veteran's exemption to Obama care, since they paid a price of service for their health care, and there was nothing in Obama's bill to account for that, as if paying for health care by service to their country shouldn't count like paying for healthcare by money......unless of course, that the health care bill really wasn't about healthcare as much as for other things, like having one's own private army, and then a little later we hear things about the government buying up all the hollow point ammunition off the shelves....but who can think of everything pertaining to healthcare?

    It's not the government's job to run healthcare.

    If Patty Murray wants a cake with two grooms on it, or abortion pills, or whatever else is contrary to righteousness and the commandments of God, those who serve God will have to put her wishes above his, it seems, in her opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  3. To require others to do something against their will and conscience, when all that about a thing is right, true, and just, is in no way being about freedom.

    I wonder if some have been in government so long, they don't know what freedom is about anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  4. People are meant to serve God, not to be used by the state for whatever the state wants that is contrary to God.

    They should be seen as property of God rather than property of the state.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Which is the greater burden, requiring a God fearing person by law to provide something which has the purpose of ending another's (innocent) life, or passing legislation to protect religious freedom while those who wish to end another's life would have to go somewhere else to get the job done?

    We should be willing to bear another's burden, but not when it causes us to be a partaker in their sins.

    We seem to have plenty of people in government right now that don't judge righteously, and don't seem to know the difference between a light thing and a grievous one.

    We should have people in government that are about freedom rather than about oppression.

    ReplyDelete
  6. There is a higher court than the US Supreme court, though we have some in government who have either forgotten that, or would like to argue that point.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.