The First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Understand that the “exercise of religion” includes the doctrinal positions of a given body of believers and is tied to the notion of “freedom of speech.”
Obama cannot make the argument that he is “only concerned for the reproductive health of women,” in view of the fact that his funding of “Planned Parenthood” makes free access to contraception a fact of American life. With that in mind, his only purpose for this reform law is to dumb down the full effect of the First Amendment.
There is only one overriding reason for this administrative and divisive decision and that is to continue the process of tearing this nation down as he fundamentally transform our very system of governance.
Talking point: The need for a civil disobedience is just around the corner, if it is not already here. While Conservatives hate the notion of “structured chaos” and a civil [none violent] disobedience of law, the time is "now" when this may be demanded. At some point in time, people are called to stand up for their principles. I am already there. Although retired, there were things I was required to do, as an employer, that I refused to do on principle and supplying insurance that covers abortions was one of those things.
 |
| An eight week old "fetus" is recognizable as a human being. This little guy is even sucking his thumb as it waits to be torn apart during the abortion process by an army of women who care no more for life than did Hitler's female butchers.. |
The First Amendment is short and sweet, and really cannot be misunderstood. Only the godless secularists pretend there is confusion. You want to murder your unborn? Move to China. You will have a home, there.
Obama’s decision to “double down” on the legalization of unborn murder is a call for those who care about life to “go thou and do likewise” and I mean, double down on our efforts to oppose the legalization of this slaughter. It is time for those who believe in life and the defense of the unborn to “take it to the streets,” and do all that is possible to resist this genocidal lust for an unrestricted lifestyle. Well over a million babies are torn apart, extracted and thrown away, each year, simply because some loser woman [and her man friend, as well] does not want to be bothered. Are there exceptions that allow for abortions? Perhaps. But 99% of all abortions are done so the "mother" can continue to spread her legs for the next fun loving reprobate that comes alone. And some of you think that "Christians" are wackos, here. Geeeese.
In my single days, one of the "qualifying" opinions a potential wife had to exhibit was an opposition to abortion. I would have never married a woman who would abort my off-spring. Some of you need to to start with this approach. How many lives would be saved if we, men, refused to be complicit in this shameful disregard for human life?
In the end, a departure from protected religiosity supplied by the First Amendment, is the back door being used by the anti-life movement to continue its life-denying agenda. In time, this assault against the First Amendment will render this very article as "illegal." Such is the case, already, in several countries in this world.
Update: I need to make clear the complicity of the "male member" in this business of abortion. Understand that men, the "fun loving reprobate" mentioned in my article, above, is as guilty of this tragedy as is the "loser woman" of this post. My complaint, however, is this: in the haste to put women [solely] in charge of the campaign to limit reproductive life, we have allowed a complicit male population to run and hide from the realities of pre-birth fatherhood -- except to make them pay if their child happens survives its first nine months.
Update: I need to make clear the complicity of the "male member" in this business of abortion. Understand that men, the "fun loving reprobate" mentioned in my article, above, is as guilty of this tragedy as is the "loser woman" of this post. My complaint, however, is this: in the haste to put women [solely] in charge of the campaign to limit reproductive life, we have allowed a complicit male population to run and hide from the realities of pre-birth fatherhood -- except to make them pay if their child happens survives its first nine months.