Share This Article with a Friend!


Religious Freedom Fight Against Obamacare Continues

The shocking decision of Chief Justice John Roberts to uphold the Obamacare mandate as a tax left undecided many important issues created by this odious legislation.

Of course there is the overall question of the future of the legislation, and that will be decided first by Congress and then by the voters – to express your opposition to Obamacare and demand its repeal please sign our petition here.

But just as important as the mandate as a tax matter is, the issue of whether or not the Obamacare mandate constitutes an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of religion still remains.

Imagine for a moment the outcry if Obamacare included a tax on the hijab, the traditional headwear of many devout Muslim women. Or if Obamacare included a tax on the kippah or yarmulke, the traditional skullcap worn by many Jewish men to demonstrate humility before God.

Yet the fact that Catholics and Evangelical Protestants who oppose abortion and certain forms of contraception might be taxed in the same way elicited hardly a comment from the mainstream media.

It is as if Obamacare imposed a tax on mantillas, the traditional head covering many devout Catholic women wear, and no one cared.

In the face of this oppression, Catholic Bishops and Church-affiliated institutions filed some 23 lawsuits in 14 states and the District of Columbia involving more than 50 plaintiffs.

According to Hannah Smith, senior counsel with The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, these lawsuits will "all go forward."

Smith has been quoted by FOX News as saying her group's clients would all opt to disobey the Obama administration rule, in turn subjecting themselves to a $2,000-per-employee fine. She estimated this could cost those groups between $300,000 and $600,000 a year starting in 2013.

The Becket Fund argues that the provision violates what's known as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act -- a federal law that bars rules that would impose a substantial burden on religious expression. If you agree, please sign our petition to repeal Obamacare.

PilgrimsBut more importantly, the Obamacare tax on religious belief reminds us of one of the foundational reasons for the European migration to the New World of North America – to escape the oppressive rule of the established state religions of European states.

And one of the ways the kings and the states of Europe imposed their will and tried to erase the freedom of conscience of their subjects was by taxing them if they did not adhere to the state religion.

During the time of religious upheaval in England, Catholics and other non-conformists were fined -- or should I say in the words of Justice Roberts -- “taxed” as much as $77,000 a year in today’s money for the privilege of practicing their beliefs.

As Steve Ertelt noted in LifeNews.com, “Nestled within the ‘individual mandate’ in the Obamacare act — that portion of the Act requiring every American to purchase government — approved insurance or pay a penalty — is an ‘abortion premium mandate.’ This mandate requires all persons enrolled in insurance plans that include elective abortion coverage to pay a separate premium from their own pockets to fund abortion.  As a result, many pro-life Americans will have to decide between a plan that violates their consciences by funding abortion, or a plan that may not meet their health needs.”

This “abortion premium” is nothing more than a fine or “Roberts tax” for not adhering to the new Obama-imposed state religion of secular humanism. 

When the oppression of monarchs and state religions grew too great, our ancestors had the choice to make the perilous journey to the New World to exercise their freedom of conscience. Those of us living in the 21st Century have no New World to harbor us, as our ancestors did, if we want to flee the oppression Obamacare represents. 

With no place left to go, we must stand and fight in the Courts and in the ballot box if we want to preserve our religious freedom in this, the last best hope of man on earth. To express your opposition to Obamacare and demand its repeal please sign our petition here.

Share this

Once again.. religion is seperate [sic] from state


Hey, shad:  Don't look now but by your post "Once again..." you are revealing yourself as an uninformed lib.  Responses to your comments are in the body of your post.


“..the issue of whether or not the Obamacare mandate constitutes an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of religion still remains.”

How? Is this because Christians want women to pop out babies even if it kills them? Hmm. Doesn’t sound like freedom there.
//////No, it is because the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether the mandate is constitutional or whether it is an infringement on freedom of religion.  The constitutionality has nothing to do with whether "Christians want women to pop out babies even if it kills them," although, of course, natural childbirth is safer than abortion.////
“Imagine for a moment the outcry if Obamacare included a tax on the hijab, the traditional headwear of many devout Muslim women.”

How is a scarf at all related to healthcare?
///A hijab/scarf is not at all related to healthcare and the author did not intend for you to get that meaning--he simply was providing an example of an infringement of religious rights.////
“Yet the fact that Catholics and Evangelical Protestants who oppose abortion and certain forms of contraception might be taxed in the same way elicited hardly a comment from the mainstream media.”

Reap what you sow?
////incoherent/////
I like how you use a picture from times when people were still ignorant to what we know today, and still learning how their body even functions.
////The author was just showing an activity of the Pilgrims, the first settlers of what became the United States who came here precisely for religious freedom and the United States, the greatest nation in the history of man, remains the bastion of religious freedom./////
Religion is still separate from state. Religion is open to the interpretation of whoever learns from it. Basing an argument against a basic right on so many different possibilities of beliefs seems like just shooting yourself in the foot to please everyone.
////incoherent/////
Those who oppose these basic rights tend to be fundamentalists who would rather see anyone who doesn’t believe the same as them suffer for being different. That is NOT what our country is about.
////Not at all:  Fundamentalists and true Christians in general respect other religions and are ardently in favor of the rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, inluding life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and which are protected by our Constitution but perverted by Chief Justice Harry Blackmun's wife and daughters in the Roe v Wade decision which they wrote.  Or which "basic rights" were you talking about?////
Who are you to decide a woman’s fate over life and death, or her body even?///Your expression is incoherent, but we think you mean something like "who are you to decide whether a woman allows an abortionist to murder the baby in her womb or not?" and since the baby is a human person and murder is a crime, she cannot murder the baby--Blackmun's wife and daughters said that they had found a "right to privacy" implied in the Constitution which allowed a doctor to murder a baby in the mother's womb by tearing it to pieces, but even foaming at the mouth lib constitutional law people say that Roe v Wade was incorrectly reasoned, that there is no right to privacy in the Constitution.


shad, if you want to make any intelligent points that folks read and get convinced by, YOU HAVE TO GET INFORMED--you simply do not know what you are talking about and you can't write very well either.

Once again.. religion is seperate from state

“..the issue of whether or not the Obamacare mandate constitutes an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of religion still remains.”

How? Is this because Christians want women to pop out babies even if it kills them? Hmm. Doesn’t sound like freedom there.

“Imagine for a moment the outcry if Obamacare included a tax on the hijab, the traditional headwear of many devout Muslim women.”

How is a scarf at all related to healthcare?

“Yet the fact that Catholics and Evangelical Protestants who oppose abortion and certain forms of contraception might be taxed in the same way elicited hardly a comment from the mainstream media.”

Reap what you sow?

I like how you use a picture from times when people were still ignorant to what we know today, and still learning how their body even functions.

Religion is still separate from state. Religion is open to the interpretation of whoever learns from it. Basing an argument against a basic right on so many different possibilities of beliefs seems like just shooting yourself in the foot to please everyone.

Those who oppose these basic rights tend to be fundamentalists who would rather see anyone who doesn’t believe the same as them suffer for being different. That is NOT what our country is about.

Who are you to decide a woman’s fate over life and death, or her body even?

Worse than a tax on a garment

This abortion tax is far more egregous than a tax on a mere garment. It is a tax against the basic tennents of our religion. Try a tax on the Koran or a tax on ANYONE who wants to marry a Muslim. It would have to be a substantial tax, but even that is not serious enough. The consequences of this abortion tax is far more serious. I really can't come up with a sufficient comparison at the moment. This ObamaTax has to go, but I'm not hearing enough from the religious affiliates. They preach to their choir. The average man on the street is still oblivious to the battle ensuing, and this if profoundly sad.