Tag Archive for: U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

Obama Executive Order once again attacks Christian Organizations — Will the Catholic Bishops stand up to him?

/in , , , , /by

Obama launches a new attack on Christian organizations by signing yet another Executive Order that forces them to hire homosexuals!

The $17 trillion question:

Are the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and the leaders of the Holy Catholic Church going to stand up to King Obama this time around and have every single Catholic institution file a law suit against this liberal administration or are we just going to continue to roll over and take our orders from the “Liberal sees” in the White House instead of the “Holy See” in the Vatican?

Hope all is well as I truly mean that. Seriously – “Hope all is well”…With the way this world is going today – when was the last time that “all was well”? It’s almost impossible to watch the news or read the newspaper in the mornings with a positive attitude as there are more conflicts going on around the world in this day and age than I have seen in my 56 years. I honestly think that if we were to combine all of the conflicts, violence and wars going on all over the world today and put them all together as One Big War – it would be equivalent to a World War III…It’s that bad and we have grown almost immune to it. Nothing phases us anymore. Even in our own country – where we fight the greatest war of all – “OBAMA’S WAR AGAINST CHRISTIANS”.

Friends, when the President of the Free World is able to use his dictatorial powers at free will – with the incompetent Congress scratching their heads at King Obama’s every move – why do we even have a government in the “Land of the Free”? Who is governing what? What is governing who? Where are the checks and balances? Why are there so many checks that don’t balance? Why do we have a House of Representatives? Why do we have a Senate? What does the term “judiciary” mean? How come we had never heard the term “Executive Order” until the “Executive & Almighty One” put his feet up on his desk in our White House back in January of 2009″?

And, if you have not heard the latest coming from the “Gay President” – (there is nothing wrong with saying that because in Obama’s world – anything goes and he is proud of that) – get ready for yet another “Executive Order” coming from the “left-handed” one. Beyond excruciating. Beyond surreal. Beyond the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution has no bearing in the way King Kenya runs our country. It hasn’t for the past 6 years…and counting…That pen and cell phone have wreaked havoc on our nation, our unborn, our Christian communities, our beloved citizens…

And, while Obama should be taking care of the more critical “world crisis” issues all around the world and even at our own borders (where a humanitarian fiasco is about to take place with the tens of thousands of illegal immigrants coming over from the Mexican border) – while watching former KGB wild man, Vladimir Putin, do as he pleases in shooting down airliners as if it were a “Russian roulette” game – Obama has no clue as to what is transpiring in Russia and the Ukraine – let alone, the volatile Middle East, even among our own ally, Israel, and their relentless struggle against the Palestinians. Does he have a clue of what is going on in Syria and Egypt? How about the 276 Nigerian young ladies who disappeared months ago at the hands of Boko Haram in his home continent of Africa?

No, Obama thinks it is more important to continue to attack the Catholic Church and the Christian organizations in our country by signing on more Executive Orders to try our patience and to tick off all the wholesome Christian faithful in this country. Obama seems to be focused on this issue as he knows that he only has a little more than two years left on his 8-year contract to try to turn our beloved United States of America into the “Divided States of Obama” – his twisted version of Sodom and Gomorrah. So, where are the President of the United States’ priorities at when so much conflict and strife is going on around the world? And, is signing a “Gay Executive Order” a priority in the Home of the Brave while the rest of the world is burning?

So, without further adieu, please take a look at the this article from our good friends at Catholic Vote as Joshua Mercer tells it like it is. This latest Executive Order by King Obama demands that all Federal Contractors and Subcontractors grant special treatment based on “sexual orientation” and “gender equity”. Truly amazing and absolutely unfair to every Christian organization – including the Holy Catholic Church – that does NOT believe in the immoral act of sodomy and the homosexual lifestyle. Forcing a conservative and religious organization like Catholic Charities to hire homosexual employees while knowing that it is against their religious beliefs (based on Holy Scripture) – is as blatant an act as I have ever seen. And, if the USCCB, our Church leaders and wonderful organizations like Catholic Charities, do not stand up for their religious freedoms like the bold and courageous Hobby Lobby did against the liberal Obama administration (and won) – once again, we can all kiss our Holy Rosaries a fond farewell and continue to pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet over and over and over again until all 50 states in our beloved United States all turn gay…19 and counting…

May God give the USCCB the intestinal fortitude to instruct every single Catholic institution in the United States to file a lawsuit against this administration.

May all Christian organizations in the United States stand up for their religious liberty and freedoms and take this administration head on!

IN GOD WE MUST!!!
CV
Dear CV Friend, 

The Supreme Court has already rebuked Obama twice on religious liberty. 

But that isn’t stopping this president from launching another attack on religious liberty. 

This time, Obama is using the purse strings of the federal government to marginalize employers with religious convictions. 

President Obama today signed an executive order which demands that all federal contractors and subcontractors grant special treatment based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” 

The executive order signed by Obama thankfully preserves an exemption put in place by President George W. Bush which allows religious employers the freedom to favor employees of a certain religion in making hiring decisions. So under the new rules, a religious university could not fire a teacher for being a lesbian, but could fire her because she’s not a Catholic. 

Legal experts say that Obama’s new executive order will launch a flood of lawsuits against employers who have deeply-held convictions that certain kinds of sexual behavior is inconsistent with their moral or religious beliefs. 

The executive order, expected to take full effect in 2015, will affect 24,000 companies employing approximately 28 million American workers, or about one-fifth of the country’s workforce. 

President Obama could have easily issued this executive order for LGBT employees while maintaining a robust exemption for religious liberty. 

Once again, Obama has shown his strong hostility to religious expression in American life. In his mind, we have only “freedom to worship” inside the four walls of our church. But we dare not practice “freedom of religion” where we take our faith to the public square. If we do that, Obama believes that we must also sacrifice any religious principles out of sync with the federal government. 

In Obama’s mind, it’s ok if you go to Church on Sunday, but don’t you dare act like a Christian any other day of the week. 

Joshua Mercer 
Political Director

Catholic Bishops file amicus brief in support of Defense of Marriage Act

/in , , , /by

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on January 29, 2013 filed amicus briefs in the United States Supreme Court in support of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8, both of which confirm the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

DOMA was passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton in 1996 and defines marriage for federal and inter-state recognition purposes. Proposition 8 is a state constitutional amendment approved by the citizens of California in 2008. Both laws are challenged because they define marriage exclusively as the union of one man and one woman.

Urging the Court to uphold DOMA the USCCB brief in United States v. Windsor says that “there is no fundamental right to marry a person of the same sex.” The brief also states that “as defined by courts ‘sexual orientation’ is not a classification that should trigger heightened scrutiny,” such as race or ethnicity would.

It added that “civil recognition of same-sex relationships is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition—quite the opposite is true. Nor can the treatment of such relationships as marriages be said to be implicit in the concept of ordered liberty, such that neither liberty nor justice would exist if they were sacrificed.”

USCCB argued that previous Supreme Court decisions “describing marriage as a fundamental right plainly contemplate the union of one man and one woman.”

The USCCB also cautioned that a decision invalidating DOMA “would have adverse consequences in other areas of law.”

In a separate brief filed in Hollingsworth v Perry urging the Court to uphold Proposition 8, the USCCB states that there are many reasons why the state may reasonably support and encourage marriage, understood as the union of one man and one woman, as distinguished from other relationships. Government support for marriage, so understood, is “recognizing the unique capacity of opposite-sex couples to procreate” and “the unique value to children of being raised by their mother and father together.”

The USCCB brief states that “[T]he People of California could reasonably conclude that a home with a mother and a father is the optimal environment for raising children, an ideal that Proposition 8 encourages and promotes. Given both the unique capacity for reproduction and unique value of homes with a mother and father, it is reasonable for a State to treat the union of one man and one woman as having a public value that is absent from other intimate interpersonal relationships.”

The USCCB brief adds that “While this Court has held that laws forbidding private, consensual, homosexual conduct between adults lack a rational basis, it does not follow that the government has a constitutional duty to encourage or endorse such conduct. Thus, governments may legitimately decide to further the interests of opposite-sex unions only. Similarly, minimum standards of rationality under the Constitution do not require adopting the lower court’s incoherent definition of ‘marriage’ as merely a ‘committed lifelong relationship,’ which is wildly over-inclusive, empties the term of its meaning, and leads to absurd results.”

“Marriage, understood as the union of one man and one woman, is not an historical relic, but a vital and foundational institution of civil society today,” the USCCB brief states. “The government interests in continuing to encourage and support it are not merely legitimate, but compelling. No other institution joins together persons with the natural ability to have children, to assure that those children are properly cared for. No other institution ensures that children will at least have the opportunity of being raised by their mother and father together. Societal ills that flow from the dissolution of marriage and family would not be addressed—indeed, they would only be aggravated—were the government to fail to reinforce the union of one man and one woman with the unique encouragement and support it deserves.”

The USCCB brief also notes that “Proposition 8 is not rendered invalid because some of its supporters were informed by religious or moral considerations. Many, if not most, of the significant social and political movements in our Nation’s history were based on precisely such considerations.Moreover, the argument to redefine marriage to include the union of persons of the same sex is similarly based on a combination of religious and moral considerations (albeit ones that are, in our view, flawed).As is well established in this Court’s precedent, the coincidence of law and morality, or law and religious teaching, does not detract from the rationality of a law.”

USCCB notes that a judicial decision invalidating Proposition 8’s definition of marriage would have adverse consequences in other areas of law.

“[R]edefining marriage—particularly as a matter of constitutional law, rather than legislative process—not only threatens principles of federalism and separation of powers, but would have a widespread adverse impact on other constitutional rights, such as the freedoms of religion, conscience, speech, and association.Affirmance of the judgment below would create an engine of conflict in this area, embroiling this Court and lower courts in a series of otherwise avoidable disputes—pitting constitutional right squarely against constitutional right—for years to come.