Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton weighed-in on the Hobby Lobby decision yesterday (see above), and her analysis is so egregiously in error that I could not let it pass without some comment. She claims first of all that this is the first time that the Supreme Court has found that a corporation has religious freedom and thus that employers can impose their religious beliefs on employees. Now this is a curious characterization of yesterday’s opinion. Religious freedom does not give anyone—individual or corporate—the right to impose one’s beliefs upon someone else. Yet Clinton speaks as if the right of individuals to “impose their beliefs” has now been given to…
-
-
Grateful but Sobered by the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Verdict
I have said before, and I will say it again that Obamacare’s contraception mandate forces one of the most egregious violations of religious liberty in our nation’s history. It forces pro-life business owners to pay for insurance plans that cover abortion-inducing birth control methods. For this reason, there was much at stake today in the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision. That is why I breathed a sigh of relief when the Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby earlier today. In a narrow decision (5-4), the Court ruled that the federal government cannot run roughshod over the religious liberty of its citizens. In short, the Court found that the government…
-
What’s at stake in the Hobby Lobby decision tomorrow?
Ross Douthat said something last week that sums up my feelings exactly: “Not ashamed to say that I fear only three things: nuclear war, carnies, and the Hobby Lobby decision.” It is a clever line that might have been funny if it weren’t true. There is so much riding on what the Supreme Court decides tomorrow morning. What is so alarming about our national debate, however, is that so few of our countryman seem to be aware of what is actually at stake. The court could do the right thing and protect our first freedom, or the court could end religious liberty as we know it. Is anyone paying attention?
-
Sin infantilizes us
Profound wisdom here: “People whose lives are riddled with unrestrained sin act like rebellious children. Sin, when unrestrained, infantilizes a person. Here I had thought that I was so mature, so capable, so ‘important’ in the world, and the truth remains that I didn’t even know how to act my age! After conversion, I was surprised to discover how old I really was.” –Rosaria Champagne Butterfield, The Secret Thoughts of and Unlikely Convert, p. 108
-
Is it cruel and harmful to acknowledge your baby’s gender?
Christin Scarlett Milloy says calling a baby a “boy” or a “girl” at birth is like playing Russian roulette with your baby’s life. Why? Because what if your baby grows up to disagree with the gender they were assigned at birth? Milloy says that such children grow up depressed and perhaps suicidal. Milloy’s argues, therefore, that we should not risk a child’s well-being by assigning him/her a gender at birth. Instead, we should just let them figure it out for themselves.
-
The Wild Goose Festival wilder than ever
Readers of this blog know that I have written in years past on the annual “Wild Goose Festival,” which is taking place right now in Hot Springs, North Carolina. The yearly meet-up is a kind of Woodstock for progressive Christians. It features music, speakers, art displays and more. Many of the personalities there are disaffected evangelicals. In fact, Frank Schaeffer described it today as a place for “survivors of evangelical backgrounds.” He writes:
-
Supreme Court strikes down “buffer zones” outside abortion clinics
The Supreme Court just ruled that “buffer zones” outside abortion clinics restrict the free speech of sidewalk counselors wishing to persuade women not to have abortions. The decision nullifies a Massachusetts law that creates such zones. The court overturned the law in a unanimous 9-0 ruling. So far, so good. There is another side to this ruling, however, that is not so good. The Court refused to recognize that the Massachusetts law unfairly targeted pro-life speech in particular. For this reason, Scalia issues a scathing opinion. He writes:
-
The future of gay marriage within evangelicalism
Recently, Ed Stetzer interviewed Trevin Wax, Jonathan Merritt, and Sarah Pulliam Bailey about the future of evangelicalism (see above). This is an interesting conversation that circles back around to the issue of same-sex marriage several times. At about the 38-minute mark Jonathan Merritt speculates on “one possible future” for gay marriage in evangelical churches.
-
Should you allow your children to go to sleepovers?
I came across a provocative passage today in Jim Dobson’s book Bringing Up Girls in which he discusses the issue of children’s sleepovers. In short, Dobson argues that the day of sleepovers has passed. There are simply too many risks involved. Parents, therefore, should be wary of allowing their children to participate in what for many of us was a very common part of our growing-up years. A big part of this is simply understanding that times have changed. Our hypersexualized culture requires parents to exercise special vigilance over their children—not only because of the pervasive availability of pornography, but also because of predators who are more than willing to…
-
Heads-up about Supreme Court on Hobby Lobby
It is very likely that the Supreme Court will issue its verdict this week in the Hobby Lobby Case (aka, Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc). When it comes down, the court’s decision has the potential to be the most consequential religious liberty case in our lifetimes. It could set the trajectory for religious liberty—for good or for ill—for generations to come. What’s at stake? Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate requires certain employers to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs. That means that some Christian and other pro-life employers will be forced to violate their consciences or face crippling fines from the government. I have no idea how the Court will rule…
