An Ol' Broad's Ramblings

…Free Exercise Thereof…

9 January 2013, 10:27 am. 9 Comments. Filed under 1st Amendment, ObamaCare, Opinion, Socialism, Taxes, U.S. Constitution.

U.S. Constitution – Amendment I

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.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I see nothing in that Amendment that says anything about forcing a person, or company, to go against their faith. (I also see no words stating there is a separation either.)  What so many seem to miss is that this amendment is for OUR protection against a tyrannical government.  If you learned your history, you’d KNOW why this amendment is important, as are every other in the Bill of Rights.  That’s the first 10 Amendments for you ‘low information voters’.

The sad fact of the matter,  ObamaDOESN’Tcare, aka Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,  does neither…no protection and it damn sure isn’t affordable…IS unconstitutional.  It’s that simple.  I’m not real sure where John Roberts learned his Constitution, or history, but he was WAY out of line when he voted with the leftards on the Court.  Not only is it a tax, contrary to what the Dims kept claiming, it is a violation of practically everything the Founders stood for, and wrote into the Constitution…to PROTECT WE, THE PEOPLE. 

Ordinary citizens beat the greatest empire of the time over taxes, and the constant violation of God given rights.  I’m fairly sure it can be done again, if the need arises.

I’ll stand with Hobby Lobby, and every other company, and individual, who believes God is in charge of their lives…NOT the state!  For HE is the Captain of my ship!

Defying the Obama Administration on Religious Liberty
The Foundry

Hobby Lobby gained national attention when its leadership announced they would not bow to the Obama Administration’s violation of their religious liberty. Thousands of Americans pledged to shop at the retailer over the weekend to show their appreciation for this stand—a stand that could cost the company up to $1.3 million in fines per day.

Like many other companies, Hobby Lobby’s health insurance plan renewed on January 1, causing them to be subject to the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate under Obamacare. This mandate forces employers to pay for coverage of abortion-inducing drugs like the “morning after” and “week after” pills, which directly violates many Americans’ deeply held beliefs—including Hobby Lobby’s owners, the Green family. The Greens, who founded the company, close all its locations on Sundays and seek to operate in accordance with Christian principles—including offering an employee health care plan that aligns with those values.

The Obama Administration’s outrageous position is that business owners’ rights to religious freedom end when they walk into their workplaces, claiming that “for-profit, secular employers generally do not engage in any exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment.

If employers don’t change their health plans to comply, they will be hit with fines—up to $100 per employee per day. But if they stop providing health coverage, Obamacare’s double whammy means that, come 2014, employers with more than 50 employees could instead be hit with fines for that.

Thirteen for-profit companies have received rulings touching on the merits of their cases from the courts so far. Ten have secured relief—though temporary—from having the mandate enforced against them. Three companies have been denied relief: Hobby Lobby, Autocam Corp., and Grote Industries.

Hobby Lobby founder and CEO David Green said, “The conflict for me is that our family is being forced to choose between following the laws of the country that we love or maintaining the religious beliefs that have made our business successful and have supported our family and thousands of our employees and their families.”

Hobby Lobby has more than 13,000 employees, so the $100 per employee per day fine is crippling.

John Kennedy, CEO of Autocam in Grand Rapids, MI, says his employees “are like family” and that he “can’t in good conscience choose between violating my beliefs and meeting my associates’ needs. It just doesn’t seem right.”

William Grote III, CEO of Grote Industries, which manufactures vehicle lighting and safety systems, has said, “It would easily destroy the company should we not do it.”

For family business owners like the Kortes, a Roman Catholic family seeking to manage their construction company, K & L Contractors, in a manner consistent with their faith, this means penalties of as much as $730,000 per year, an amount that would be financially ruinous for their company and for them personally.

But at least one federal appellate court has expressly rejected the position that the Kortes’ religious freedom rights depend solely on the fact that they operate a secular, for-profit business, and litigation over this key legal question, which affects other family business owners like the Greens of Hobby Lobby, is likely headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Late last year, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to issue a preliminary injunction in favor of the Kortes, concluding that their Religious Freedom Restoration Act challenge to the HHS mandate is likely to succeed when their case is ultimately decided. It criticized the government’s position for “ignor[ing] that Cyril and Jane Korte are also plaintiffs” who “would have to violate their religious beliefs to operate their company in compliance with [the HHS mandate].” “That the Kortes operate their business in the corporate form is not dispositive of their claim,” the court held.

In other words, the fact that they operate a business doesn’t mean they give up their rights.

Pastor and author Rick Warren said in a statement about Hobby Lobby’s stance:

Every American who loves freedom should shudder at the precedent the government is trying to establish by denying Hobby Lobby the full protection of the First Amendment.

Freedom of religion doesn’t stop when an American walks outside his or her home or place of worship. For these business owners trying to live out their beliefs in the way they run their businesses, this mandate forces an excruciating decision.

Watch the Green family talk about their convictions and their work

Watch John Kennedy of Autocam explain why he is fighting the mandate

Heritage research fellow Dominique Ludvigson contributed to this article.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!


  1. nyp. 10 January 2013, 9:18 pm

    So if my boss is a Jehovah’s Witness, he can keep my employee health insurance plan from covering blood transfusions?

  2. olbroad. 11 January 2013, 11:07 am

    Does he pay for it?  It’s his choice what he is willing to do that goes against his faith.  Personally, I find their doctrine faulty, as Acts 15 refers to abstaining from blood.  Prior to 1945, there was no problem.  What changed…who knows, but it still their priority on whether or not they pay for it.  It’s also YOUR choice on whether or not you have insurance through your job, or if you even work for a JW.  And in case ya didn’t know, which obviously you don’t, the folks at Hobby Lobby are evangelicals….finding ALL life precious….even yours.  *roll eyes*

  3. Nyp. 12 January 2013, 8:53 am

    Guess it’s too bad for me if my wife gets hit by a car and needs a transfusion!
    What if  my boss is a Scientologist — does that mean that if my son has bi-polar disorder my boss can forbid my insurance company from paying for mental health care?

  4. olbroad. 12 January 2013, 2:55 pm

    What if you used what little sense God gave you, and buy your own bloomin’ health care?

  5. Nyp. 12 January 2013, 4:55 pm

    Can’t afford an individual plan.  Those things are super expensive.  
    How about this — my friend is a Quaker, and opposes all forms of war.  He thinks it violates his deepest religious beliefs for a portion of his tax money to go towards funding national defense.   Is it  unconstitutional for the government to force him to pay his  income tax?

  6. olbroad. 12 January 2013, 5:03 pm


  7. Nyp. 12 January 2013, 5:07 pm

    Wow.  Not sure you can run a  country that way!

  8. olbroad. 12 January 2013, 5:26 pm

    You have any idea how this country is suppose to run?  No…didn’t think so.  So, since I have no more patience, and feel like hell, I’m going to put it bluntly…..READ THE FREAKIN’ CONSTITUTION.  READ THE FEDERALIST PAPERS.  And for the love of all that’s holy, stop watching PMSNBC!  Now…go away.

  9. nyp. 12 January 2013, 8:20 pm

    Here is how one Judge rejected the approach that you (and Hobby Lobby) are taking:
    “The government’s ability to enforce generally applicable prohibitions of socially harmful conduct, like its ability to carry out other aspects of public policy, “cannot depend on measuring the effects of a governmental action on a religious objector’s spiritual development.” To make an individual’s obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law’s coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State’s interest is “compelling” — permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, “to become a law unto himself,”  – contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense.  Any society adopting such a system would be courting anarchy, but that danger increases in direct proportion to the society’s diversity of religious beliefs, and its determination to coerce or suppress none of them. Precisely because “we are a cosmopolitan nation made up of people of almost every conceivable religious preference,” Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. at 606, and precisely because we value and protect that religious divergence, we cannot afford the luxury of deeming presumptively invalid, as applied to the religious objector, every regulation of conduct that does not protect an interest of the highest order.