The HHS contraception mandate has received “more comments than any other regulatory proposal on any subject government-wide” according to the Sunlight Foundation. Today is the final day for public comment on the proposal to require businesses and non-profit charities of more than 50 employees to provide health insurance coverage for abortion-causing “contraceptives” and sterilization.
To make your voice heard please click HERE
Priests for Life Youth Outreach Director Bryan Kemper, who was banned from holding a pro-life sign during a peaceful protest rally at Sinclair Community College last year, will return to the Dayton, Ohio school tomorrow, after the college agreed to uphold its students’ First Amendment rights.
In June 2012, during a Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally – one of more than 100 simultaneous rallies that Priests for Life helped organize across the country – Kemper was among those who were told by Dayton police that they could not hold up signs describing their opposition to government-mandated free contraception.
The Thomas More Society filed a federal lawsuit against the college on behalf of Kemper and two students. As a result of the suit, the college agreed in January to revise its campus access policy, which now stipulates that “any group may use, without prior notification, any publicly accessible outdoor area” (with some exceptions) for the purposes of speaking, non-verbal expressive conduct, the distribution of literature, displaying signage, and circulating petitions.”
Go to www.priestsforlife.org/deddens-v-warren.pdf to read the full settlement agreement.
Tomorrow, at the invitation of the school’s Traditional Values Club, Kemper will address students in the school library, from 1:30 to 5 p.m.
“This case has implications for the whole country, especially those of us who express opinions that aren’t politically correct in our current climate,” said Kemper, the founder of Stand True Prolife Outreach. “But it was also important to me, personally, because my son Jaemison, who was 7 at the time, was with me, and I wanted him to see that we can fight against injustice, and we can win.”
Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, commented: “Free speech is protected precisely because it can make people so angry that they will try to shut up the speaker. This case shows that the protection still works, and we need to use it!”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: February 1, 2013
Contact: Leslie Palma
347-286-7277
STATEN ISLAND, NY — Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, responded to the announcement on contraception coverage from HHS with the following statement:
“The HHS is giving the public an opportunity to provide its feedback to the proposed rules. I first of all want to urge the public to take advantage of this opportunity.
“Moreover, we at Priests for Life remind the Administration that religious liberty does not just belong to religious groups and individuals; it belongs to all Americans. Objections to contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs aren’t based just on dogmas and Bibles, but on adverse health consequences and the fact that human beings, no matter how small, should not be killed.
“We see only one acceptable change regarding the mandate: rescind it completely.”
Priests for Life was one of the first organizations to launch a federal lawsuit against the HHS mandate last year.
Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: December 20, 2012
Contact: Andre Kim
347-286-7277
STATEN ISLAND, NY – Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, issued the following statement today regarding another positive development in the ongoing legal battle against the HHS mandate.
On Dec. 18, the D.C. District Court ruled that the Obama administration must suggest another alternative to the contraception and abortifacient mandate for two plaintiffs – a Catholic college and a Christian college — and the court said it will check in with the administration every 60 days to see what progress has been made.
“We are pleased that the court is willing to take this stance with the Obama administration,” Father Pavone said. “At the same time, we don’t expect any cooperation from Obama’s team, because they simply oppose religious freedom.”
Priests for Life filed suit against the HHS mandate in February, and has been in open violation of the ruling since Aug. 1. Those covering the various lawsuits and those who are just interested in protecting the U.S. Constitution are invited to visit priestsforlife.org/hhsmandate. A wealth of information, including summaries of every one of the lawsuits, can be found there.
“Every American has a stake in this situation,” Father Pavone said. “It’s important that all of us keep a close eye on what the administration does in regard to this unjust mandate. The only acceptable outcome to us is the total reversal of the HHS mandate, and we will continue pressing for that through our lawsuit.”
Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: November 20, 2012
Contact: Leslie Palma
347-286-7277
STATEN ISLAND, NY – Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, commented today about divergent court rulings in suits challenging the HHS mandate.
On Friday, Nov. 16, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., granted a temporary injunction in a suit brought by Tyndale House Publishers. The judge ruled that the mandate “substantially burdens” the Bible publisher’s right to exercise its religious freedom by imposing financial penalties for failing to offer birth control and emergency contraception coverage to its employees.
“We are, of course, gratified by this injunction, and in our own lawsuit, maintain that we at Priests for Life are similarly burdened by the unjust HHS mandate,” Fr. Pavone noted.
In regard to yesterday’s ruling by a federal judge in Oklahoma City who said that Hobby Lobby Stores must provide insurance coverage for morning-after and week-after abortifacients, Fr. Pavone said.
“These Christian owners of the arts and crafts business have said they will not pay for abortifacient drugs. We stand with them in defiance of this violation of their rights.”
“Actually, with so many lawsuits filed against the HHS mandate, we expect divergent rulings in different courts. Ultimately, this will raise the likelihood that the Supreme Court will take up the issue, which it should,” Fr. Pavone explained.
Father Pavone said he remains confident that Priests for Life will prevail with its lawsuit, which was filed in February and was the fourth one to be launched.
“As I’ve said, this administration is on a collision course with those who treasure religious liberty. Now that the lawsuits can no longer be seen as campaign issues, they will be judged on their merit. And merit is on our side.”
Father Pavone issued an invitation for all American citizens to express their solidarity with Priests for Life by signing the “Citizens’ Amicus Brief” at www.priestsforlife.org/hhsmandate/amicus-brief.aspx.”
Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: November 9, 2012
Contact: Leslie Palma
347-286-7277
STATEN ISLAND, NY — Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, welcomed news that the first lawsuit filed against the Obama administration’s HHS mandate will be heard by a federal appeals court.
The suit, brought by Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina, will be heard Dec. 14 by the U.S. Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia.
Priests for Life’s lawsuit, filed in February, was the fourth of some 30 actions that challenge the constitutionality of the mandate.
“A different outcome on Election Day, followed by the elimination of this mandate, would have resolved the problems these lawsuits seek to correct. Now, however, they are more important than ever,” said Father Pavone. “This administration is on a collision course with the Catholic Church, and with anyone who treasures the religious liberty guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. It’s encouraging that the Court of Appeals has decided to hear the Belmont Abbey suit, and I’m confident Priests for Life’s suit also will have its day in court and that we will prevail.
“Meanwhile, we invite all citizens to express their solidarity with us by signing the “Citizens’ Amicus Brief” at www.priestsforlife.org/hhsmandate/amicus-brief.aspx.”
Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Someone wrote to me on Facebook yesterday, saying that it is wrong for Christians to promote voting Biblical values because of the Separation of Church and State. The writer spoke of being offended because I was coming against the sanctity of Separation of Church and State by asking people to pray to God before voting, and vote God’s values. People think that the original intent of SOCAS was to keep God’s Church from ruling the government. Actually, the opposite is true. Separation of Church and State is intended to prevent exactly what the government is trying to do currently. The government is attempting to muzzle the voice of God’s people by punishing the right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
THE HISTORICAL TEST: THE JUDICIAL STANDARD EMERGING FROM COLONIAL POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS HISTORY TO BE APPLIED TO CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES BASED ON THE RELIGION CLAUSES OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT
by
Tayra de la Caridad Antolick
© May 2002
The Law and Liberty Foundation gratefully acknowledges the author’s permission to use this Brief as part of the Foundation’s mission of “education in the public interest.” (Click on the author’s name above to read about her.) The popular idea of Separation of Church and State is one of the most intellectually dishonest, and legally indefensible ideas to ever come down the pike. John Sterling
Read full article here. http://www.lawandliberty.org/chur_sta.htm
Excerpt:
The current use of the “wall of separation” between church and state as a legal defense for the removal of the expression of American religious culture from governmental institutions and the prohibition of the free exercise of individuals working within them goes contrary not only to the original intent of the Founders and the Framers but also to the religious, political, and legal history and traditions of the United States of America. Courts, county school boards, teachers, and individuals, unwittingly devoid of the knowledge of the substantial role religion (primarily Protestant Christianity) played in the birth and formation of the United States are taking the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment beyond its scope: they are using it as a weapon against the free exercise of religion and abusing it by extending its interpretation beyond separating the jurisdiction of each institution. If the historical reasons or contentions for the separation of church and state were to be applied to the Establishment Clause as they were argued, it can be deduced that neither Congress nor any state legislature, after the incorporation of the First Amendment to the states, has never violated the clause, since there has never been a governmental declaration of a legally recognized national denomination or religion. The two jurisdictions have remained separate since the beginning. However, the presence of American religious culture within the public sphere has also been present since the birth of this country. Therefore, the “separation of church and state” can only be interpreted as the separation of jurisdiction of each institution and not the separation of the American religious culture from the public sphere.
Jefferson’s reply to them reassured that the “wall of separation” was a wall barring only the legislative body of government, the external entity, from establishing a particular sect of the Christian religion and prohibiting the free exercise of all religion. The text does not indicate that the people are barred from any action. Contrary to Kramnick and Moore’s view that “a wall of separation, after all, prevents trespassing in both directions,” [61] the First Amendment is only prohibiting one party from such trespass. A physical wall may prevent two parties from trespass, but a legal wall may prevent only one party from acting—much like an injunction—and that one party is the legislative branch, whether it is Parliament or Congress (emphasis added).
It is not difficult to deduce from historical revolutionary pamphlets and other documents that the consensus among the colonists and the consequent intent of the Framers was that government could not bestow special privileges to one Christian sect and deny them to others. Government could not legislatively establish one Christian sect over another in the same manner that the Church of England was the national church nor could government compel members of nonconformist religions to pay taxes to support a government-approved established religious institution. If one sect was endowed with special privileges, all should receive the same consideration. Furthermore, government could not bar anyone from public office because of the content of his or her religious convictions or lack thereof. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment has already effectively accomplished all these goals, and participation in the republican form of government guarantees representation in the legislature to secure the equal treatment. Nothing in the Clause or in the historical record alludes to the prohibition of government funding of religion as long as it is available to all religions, even if one religion is in the majority within a particular community. Thus, the Dworkin “conception” within the Establishment Clause is very narrow. Its enlargement can occur only by ignoring colonial history.
Read full article here. http://www.lawandliberty.org/chur_sta.htm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: October 19, 2012
Contact: Leslie Palma
347-286-7277
STATEN ISLAND, NY – Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, will speak at a Standup for Religious Freedom Rally at 1 p.m. PT on Saturday, Oct. 20, outside the Federal Building in San Francisco.
The rally is one of hundreds that have taken place nationwide in an ongoing protest against the Obama administration mandate to make employers provide contraception, sterilization services and abortifacient drugs to their employees free of charge.
“Priests for Life will continue to defy this mandate,” Father Pavone said. “Our lawsuit, filed in February, is continuing to make its way through the legal system. The mandate attacks freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the right to life itself.”
Priests for Life organized Standup rallies in Manhattan in March and June that were attended by thousands of people. Saturday’s rally in San Francisco is sponsored by the California Civil Rights Foundation. Its founder, Walter B. Hoye II, has described the mandate as “a grave and mortal threat to our religious freedom.”
The federal building is at 90 Seventh St. in San Francisco.
For more information about this nationwide event, go to www.standupforreligiousfreedom.com.
Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.
Pastor Walter S. Moss has published a booklet, “Why I Am a Black Pro-Life Pastor.” Recommended reading. For copies of this powerful message, contact Pastor Moss at Walt11111@aol.com.
Pastor Moss joins the growing ranks of African Americans who are speaking out and up for life and marriage and Bible values. African Americans are fighting for LIFE AT ALL COSTS. At http://stow.ohio.com/news/pastors-address-abortion-in-the-african-american-community-1.327845 Moss is cited as saying: “We need to know what’s going on with our people and we need to be able to help them with whatever they’re going through,” Moss said. “In dealing with the issue of abortion, we need to be ready with information to help women better understand all of their options, including adoption. We need to embrace those who have already had abortions and let them know that we love them and that God loves them. Abortion, like so many issues facing our community, has become political. It’s time we stood up, as pastors, with the support, resources and help that our people need to make a well-informed, moral decision.”
Sunday, October 7th is Pulpit Freedom Sunday. Many pastors accross america are going to speak up to protect and promote the rights of our churches. The future of religious freedom depends on a free pulpit to communicate fundamental, biblical principles to congregations across America. These bold pastors will preach biblical Truth about candidates and elections from their pulpits.
We need to implement a movement where pastors across America will preach moral values to their congregations, not in a condemning way but in a loving Christ-like way. Just as Pulpit Freedom Sunday seeks to protect our religious freedom, this movement would seek to protect our very souls. Many in today’s society are making uninformed moral decisions because those who have received a calling to minister and to inform God’s people are failing in their responsibilities.
We need to pray for our religious leaders that God will guide them and that they will choose to obey God and speak the truth.
Dozens of people have already been arrested over the weekend for kneeling and praying in front of the White House.
ActsFive29, a group of like-minded, pro-life defenders launched the D.C. prayer rally knowing their members could indeed be arrested, but asserting it’s worth it, because, “The future of religious freedom in America is at risk.”
The group claims Acts 5:29 – “But Peter and the Apostles answered, ‘We must obey God rather than men’” – as their basis for protesting the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services mandate requiring employer-provided health insurance cover birth control measures.
“Obamacare will force institutions, churches and individuals to purchase abortion-inducing drugs and pay for sterilization and abortion in direct opposition to their beliefs, conscience and historic teachings of the Church,” says the group. “With the recent Supreme Court ruling affirming Obamacare, the future of religious freedom in America is at risk and in grave danger of being entirely wiped out.”
On Saturday afternoon, 22 members of the group knelt on the sidewalk in prayer and were arrested by Capitol Police, with the prayer rally (and possible arrests) planned to continue through Oct. 2.
The group says that the only basis for their arrest is that the sidewalk in front of the White House is a “restricted zone” for free speech.
Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life told WND, “We have stood up for life and religious freedom in hundreds of cities. Today we do so at the president’s house. I am delighted to be here.”
The group says that the president is “dictating to Christians how they should live their faith” and that they are taking a stand, while risking arrest for doing so.
Bryan Kemper, director of youth outreach at Priests for Life, told WND that he was arrested on Saturday afternoon for kneeling on the sidewalk near the White House while holding a sign that said, “Stand Up for Religious Freedom.”
“I am here today as a father of seven children who is willing to lose my freedom to protect my children’s future freedom,” he told WND. “I was arrested yesterday when I knelt and prayed holding a sign for religious freedom, and I will kneel and pray again today, risking arrest again.”
He told WND that this issue is vital for all American’s to understand.
“We must take this stand now, or we will have no freedom to do so tomorrow,” he said. “I will obey God rather than man.”
He finished, “The HHS mandate violates God’s law and forces us to sin, and I will not comply.”
Brandi Swindell, National Director of Generation Life, a pro-life group dedicated to mobilizing activists, students, artists, musicians and young professionals to end abortion and spread the message of sexual integrity, told WND that she had a “divine appointment” in Washington today.
“Three of us chose to attend church at St. John’s this morning,” Swindell said, “and at the last minute found out that Kathleen Sebelius, the architect of the HHS Mandate was holding an adult forum between services.”
Swindell told WND that she got the secretary’s attention, and in front of a packed auditorium asked her, “Why are you forcing the American people to pay for abortion-inducing drugs that harm women? It’s a severe violation of religious freedom.”
The secretary ignored the question and left the stage.
Video of the exchange, and the critical reaction of other church attendees, can be seen [at http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/d-c-police-stop-prayers-outside-white-house/]
Swindell told WND that just four years ago she was arrested and deported from communist China for standing up for religious freedom there.
“I stood in Tiananmen Square holding a banner that said, ‘Jesus Christ is King’ and was arrested,” Swindell said. “I never imagined that just four years later I’d be standing in front of the White House risking the very same thing.”
She told WND that she intended to hold the same banner declaring “Jesus Christ is King” in front of the White House Sunday afternoon, and fully expected to be arrested for it.
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, says of the Stand Up for Religious Freedom rally, being held across the street from the White House, “For the faith community, we can never be silent or indifferent when it comes to matters of justice, human rights and religious freedom.”
He continued, “As people of principle and faith, we must purpose in our hearts that we will never comply with an unjust or immoral government mandate [that] would require us to violate our conscience, the teachings of the Scriptures and the historic teachings of the church.”
“We want to make it clear to President Obama and all public officials,” he concluded, “that we would rather spend time in jail than to be forced into complying with a mandate that crushes religious freedom.”
 Subscribe via RSS |
You are currently browsing the archives for the Religious Freedom category.