But we can still have our Chuck NOrris movies, right?  (I love the b movies of that era and never noticed the bump- thanks boys!)

For Sibelius and Obama, the re-election cannot come quickly enough. One shudders at what they have planned for religious Americans afterwards.

What is remarkable about those within the current administration who are working so hard to remove religion from everyday life is that they claim to be Catholic. Kathleen Sebelius is one of the most ardent supporters of abortion and contraceptive ‘rights’ out there - and yet she claims to be Catholic. Nancy Pelosi has claimed the she wants an amendment to the US Constitution to change the First Amendment. No where does she claim that in this desire she wants to protect the free exercise of religion. Do either of them ever stop and ponder the impact that their choices and actions are having on Catholics across the United States? I am sure they *think* they are doing good work through their efforts because they clearly want the Church to change.

The Church has survived 2000 years of horrors far worse than Sebelius and Pelosi, and there are passages in the Gospel that remind us that if it is of God it cannot be stopped, and if it isn’t - it will fail or fade away. Perhaps this discussion is God’s way of reminding us of the very real and present dangers to our freedom that exist and how close they really are to our every day lives. Sadly, I often think that the people most betraying the freedom of the Catholic Church and Christians in the United States are those who work within the US government that are Catholic.

On an upside, even Joe Biden and Bill Daley (neither of whom I have a great amount of respect) had the courage to stand up and say ‘This whole contraception mandate is a bad thing and will not end well.’ There is even speculation that Daley quit his job as Chief of Staff over this very issue.

The whole thing could have been avoided by offering two plans - one that included the morally offensive products/services and another that didn’t. Of course, we know though, that the option to provide those items for ‘free’ wouldn’t be possible due to financial constraints which is the lynch pin in the whole argument.

Wow.  Good thing for Sebelius the senator ran out of time, because she was getting bloodied.  I would say that she looked like a complete idiot, but that would be like calling a tsunami a little ripple.

Its so sadden that the devil is us from within, but i know the mighty one in heaven is gonna fight for us from within. May God help us Amen.

Bottom line fact is this, and argue all you want. The Catholic Church has Religious Freedom, not Religious Reign. A Pagan Demon Worshipper cannot sacrifice human beings and then hide behind the 1st Amendment and Religious liberty, regardless of belief or conscience…Research Reynolds vs. United States. The Religious Group LOST. Thanks for playing.

Thanks for the suggestion to pay attention to the BUMP.  It is clear that there is a big problem, the problem is with the Congress signing and then the president signing.  The elected folks need to re-do this.  Others are only bureaucrats and their religion is irrelevant anywy.  CONGRESS & THE PRESIDENT….I am pleased to know the supreme court preceidents though but what about when some religion says they don’t do blood transfusions for kids, or they do female genital mutilations?? Though I support this situation I cannot and will not support the other two or the myriad others coming down the pike.  Good luck with this one though and Pax et Bonum.

Gloria and Dan,

I believe those situations are examples of the legal balance that Rep. Gowdy was referring to. There are times when other considerations, like the rights to life and liberty, could outweigh the right to free practice of religion. This is a legal issue that is often settled in court both ways. Another example would be the illegality of polygamy. Clearly, the state sometimes has to make a decision that curtails religious freedom, but they must also defend the decision. That is what Rep. Gowdy asked her to do, but she couldn’t. She could not provide a legal basis why this issue should trump the right to free practice of religion.

Imma ruin Tom Cruise movies for you too.  Look at his front teeth.  They’re off center.  He bares them a lot in that weird frozen grin of his, too.  Hahahahaha!  Now you can never take him seriously!  Oh, wait…  ;)

It’s a good thing that the President was a Constitutional law professor.  Wait…ummm…

I love the article and support the bishops in the fight for religious freedom.  But I would really like to know where the bishops were when the government decided to sentence to death a U.S. citizen without due process, even if he wasn’t in this country?  Where was the huge, overwhelming outcry when the current and former administrations supported laws to “liberate” citizens of the rights of search and seizure?  This might be a clue to why so many people are trying to make this an issue of contraception and abortion rather than freedom of religion that I’m told it is really about at Sunday Mass.  P.S.  Yes, I really would like someone to answer the questions, because I am really not understanding it.

To Erin, thanks I think you make an excellent point and I hope you are right and things will go well and make sense.  I still think that Congress could do another Bill(law) than makes this one Null and void, as it were and move on that way, after all they signed it they need to step up.  I think they are passing the buck here and trying to have it both ways.  People will need to really stand behind the Bishops on this one as well. Pax

Van Damme broke a man’s jaw to make his scene look better. Shouldn’t Van Damme have two bumps on his head?
Elby: Tom Cruise’s claim to fame is that he has perfect diction. Ts from Ds. Most actors have perfect diction and it is a draw. Cruise’s nose is to large for his face and his teeth, some of which may not be his are crooked. God bless us each and every one.
maxChohen: The bishops have found a leader in Archbishop Dolan.
I believe that this administrations contempt for its constituents is megalomaniac. Perhaps criminal is a better word. Thank you, Pat Archbold and Creative Minority Report.

“I believe that this administrations contempt for its constituents is megalomaniac.”  That’s a very good point.  That contempt and hatred for religious (Christian) individuals wasn’t seen in the past administration.  Thank you for responding!

This whole HHS Mandate outcry by the US Conference of Bishops, EWTN, and the Catholic Church as a whole serves two purposes. 1. It acts as a fantastic “Red Herring” to try and avoid the topic of the mess that the Philadelphian Archdiocese is in now, keeps that on “the back burner” so to speak, the CC and Pope Ratzinger dont want yet another embarrassing and public episode of pediophiles high in the Catholic ranks. 2. A fantastic way for a tax exempt Religious Organization to throw it’s weight and support and “endorsement” behind the GOP is to simply state “All Catholics must vote with their conscience/Obama is a liar.” This was shady as Hades in a year of Election. I still feel the CC will lose this lawsuit, or it will get thrown out as it creates too much of a “slippery slope” for other Religious Organizations to start “cafeteria’ing” what they will or will not cover. A Wiccan employer could refuse heart medication on the grounds that it has special herbs that they believe would prevent heart disease, or cancer meds for the same reasons.

I too wondered about a red herring and the fact that it’s a GOP backing platform, except for the fact that the current administration started this issue during an election year.

Please take a look at this other “bump” that you still missing.  We are a thorn on the side of the abortion industry and the mighty politically powerful Planned Parenthood as well as the God less Hollywood and the secular media that supports same sex marriage and just about everything that’s contrary to our Catholic beliefs.  Our country already manipulates and controls just about every institution in the world and they are now going after our freedom of religion but more precisely after our Catholic Church.  Our country has gotten away with manipulating institutions like the U.N., the World Bank, the IMF, NATO, just to name a few.  The Catholic Church remains a thorn on their side because of our strong moral Catholic beliefs.  We are not compatible with their agendas.  Everything that makes the Catholic faith unique is counter to their evil sinful ways.  We defend human life from the moment of conception; we are pro family between man and woman for the purpose of procreation, and many other virtues that sets us apart from their anti Catholic-Christian agenda.  They have declared an all out attack on us precisely to force their sinful secularism and destroy Our Church but our Church has survived over 2000 years of this and will survive this new attack.  The question to American Catholics will soon be would you stand by your country or would you stand by your Church?  I pray and hope it does not come to that.

How did she keep her cool while having to sit there and listen to this (jerk)!!!  Thank God his time ran out!!! dionne

“How did she keep her cool while having to sit there and listen to this (jerk)!! - so someone is a (jerk) because they ask a non-elected government official who has implemented a mandate that violates the US Constitution as it pertains to religious liberty by what legal method they arrived at their mandate? His questions are absolutely fair and valid, and revealed her incompetence and ignorance in igniting a very expensive firestorm against millions upon millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews in the United States of America without having conducted any legal reviews of her proposed actions. A little nugget for you - if you look at the CDC website (yes, the GOVERNMENT funded CDC website) and do a review of their studies regarding use of contraception, you will find that when they asked people why they don’t use contraception - less than .5% of respondents said they did so because they were too expensive or couldn’t afford them. This was the LOWEST percentage of any response on the list. The government has decided to create a mandate to provide something for ‘free’ (i.e. someone else would be paying for it because NOTHING is free) that no one really *wasn’t* buying because it was too expensive. In other words, what will be a great constitutional battle in the Supreme Court was ignited because the government mandated that we provided - against our moral convictions - a product that no one really decided they couldn’t afford.

Dan Almeida:Bottom line fact is this, and argue all you want. The Catholic Church has Religious Freedom, not Religious Reign.

FREEDOM IS FROM GOD. All unalienable rights are from God, our Creator. God reigns. Religion is only man’s response to the gift of Faith from God.
This war is against God. Caesar is created by God equal to all men in the human race. So, who would dare defy God without risking his immortal soul?

Felix Rivera:
Whose face is on the coin to pay the temple tax? Country and Church are two sides of the same coin, complementary, not in opposition. Therein peace reigns. This devisive Obamacare is the devil’s work.

Dan Almeida:A Wiccan employer could refuse heart medication on the grounds that it has special herbs that they believe would prevent heart disease, or cancer meds for the same reasons.

A baby is not a disease. A baby is another person. Preventing a baby by other than abstinence is immoral, a sin, not good for the users soul. Herbs and spices are fairly innocuous. In fact the court could order blood transfusions to asve a life. Any law can be broken to save a human life. Human life is that important. The life you save may be your own. When the human soul leaves the body, it is called DEATH. Abortion removes the human soul from the human body. That is messing with God.

maxCohen: Thank you for reading.

“balance between what they really want to do ... and what they can get away with for now…”

This is a good description of most humanist social engineering projects. Unless there is an immediate benefit (like welfare) the people don’t want to have anything to do with them. Such things as abortion, homosexuality and the destruction of the family are foreign to Christian minds. An intellectual minority is forced to prepare the people; slowly, over generations. Sexual liberation is typically the primary wedge. Over the years, a gap begins to form between the people we were, and the people we now are. How long would the Founding Fathers have tolerated a TSA fondling? As the pot begins to boil, the frog sits quietly, watching the latest episode of Survivor.

No offense intended, Mr. Archbold, but you and I had VERY different views on that video.  I felt like APPLAUDING Mr. Gowdy as he kept mentioning all those cases where the religious groups won.  That made me feel more hopeful again.  We should be welcoming the fact that the enemy is becoming less and less deceitful, because innately people are suckers for truth and rightness, and when they see they’re not going to get it from this administration, they’ll speak up.  This is the most foolish thing this administration could do in an election year.

This should be obvious to all Catholics, but it is not. The Catholic Church is the higher order of government. All other orders of government are subsidiary to the Church because the Church is charged with defending the deposit of faith given to Her by God the Son, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for purposes of our eternal salvation.  Open up your CCC, read the lives of the saints, or the Bible.  What do you see there? I have come to see that there in are records of the highest expression of the cultural tradition of the West.  This is not just some trifle to be dismissed with an “Oh, that’s nice.”  No, it is the narrative by which we can orient ourselves.

We will fail in the this challenge if the issue is pressed as a political question because we will have placed the Faith in a wrong relation to the thrones of man.  My speech may have an archaic flavor to it, but there really isn’t an alternative means to contextual the issue.

It should also be stated that there are a great many defeats on the horizon due to the near total rebellion of sin filled man.

Darren O, I hear you and concur with you and this is the precise reason why I know that Our Church of 2000+ years WILL SURVIVE regardless of what happens here in our 200+ year old country.  The challenge, however, I do not see it as “political” but rather a challenge to ‘American cafeteria-Catholics’ to discern and choose between the Mother Church that Jesus built to withstand “...the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18) or fall prey and succumb in the evilness of our country.

Thank you Mr. Archbald!  Congressman Gowdy, what courage and clarity of mind and heart! Sad and frightening that Sec. Sebelius didn’t even consider the legality or constitutionality of the HHS Mandate, but not surprising.  Great insight and reason to pray for all our leaders and souls affected by HHS.

That is exactly what I saw when watching the video (before reading this post).  This IS who they are.  This IS what they intend.  Spot on article.

I wish I could have been in the room when Sec. Sebelius was getting schooled on constitutional law.

The strict scrutiny test does not mean that the religious group always wins and the government always loses. It means the state’s compelling interest (e.g. saving a human life from human sacrifice) has to be a really super-duper, extremely important one.

The Catholic Church did not ask for this fight; it was handed to us when President Obama reneged on the promise he made to Archbishop Dolan. The timing with the Archdiocese of Philadelphia trial was purely coincidental.

Dan: If you haven’t noticed, the Church has been getting raked over the coals for some time now and I don’t believe any of us seriously expects it to end anytime soon (though I don’t quite understand how someone who frequents this publication could fail to take advantage of the daily news to see what progress is being made, news which you aren’t likely to find almost anywhere else).  Meanwhile, combox denizens never seem to make Jerry Sandusky jokes, but it would be a stretch even for me to say that…well, suppose they were in danger of losing their accreditation over something they could fix (maybe there’s a better example, please work with me here).  It would be a stretch even for me to insist that it was all some kind of wag-the-dog scenario.  Restitution and vigilance within the Church is important ongoing work, but this is also extremely important and it needs to be addressed in the immediate here and now, not ignored until all our members become perfect and all our problems go away—which is never.
Next issue: When did it become an inalienable right to have health insurance provided by one’s employer?  I always thought it was a nice thing and a perk that also gave businesses another tool to attract top-flight workers, a win-win (akin to the reason for having comics sections in newspapers—ultimately, it was to sell more papers).  But if it isn’t for every employer across the board why should it be expected of them?  Personal finance writers speak often of “lifestyle inflation;” I believe we can also speak of “rights inflation.”

It is clear the Secretary doesn’t understand or care for the Rule of Law and the Natural Law principles of the Constitution under which the State’s institutions are established and operate. Neither does she appear to understand the purpose of the Attorney General’s Office. I suspect the AG was not prepared to give an Opinion finding the then-proposed law to be in compliance with the Constitution. In fact, there could very well be written advices finding the opposite. Hence, the lack of a legal memo for a law that proposed a radical new departure in interfering with constitutional rights and freedoms.