HHS regulations are a violation of religious liberty Re: “Obamacare regulation tramples on religious freedom,” Editorial, Feb. 1
This editorial stated well that President Obama’s new Health and Health Services Department regulations are a violation of religious freedom guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. It’s not clear which part of the First Amendment’s “shall make no law” Obama missed, but that is exactly what the Obamacare regulations do because they force millions of Catholics and evangelical Protestants to support abortion practices that violate their most deeply held religious beliefs.
Upset by Obama’s attempt to eliminate their religious freedom, the Catholic bishops have implored their congregations to protest. However, when asked about this reaction, Jay Carney, Obama’s press secretary, heaped insult upon injury, saying, “I don’t believe there are any constitutional rights issues here. …”
In effect, he is telling Catholics and their bishops that they don’t understand the meaning of religious freedom.
John Naughton
Silver Spring
HHS regulations are a good compromise
Re: “Catholics can’t, and won’t, comply with Obamacare,” Feb. 2
Donald Devine and the bishops discount the fact that Catholic hospitals, universities and charities serve and employ large percentages of people of all faiths — and receive generous public funding for doing so.
If these institutions are exempt from the Health and Human Services Department regulations dealing with birth control, they will be infringing on the religious freedom of many of their clients and employees, including a great many Catholics who do not agree with the moral teachings of the bishops.
The Obama administration’s HHS rules are actually a good compromise, as they exempt institutions that are primarily religious.
Edd Doerr
Silver Spring
Editor’s Note: The HHS exemption is only good for one year.
D.C.’s dreams of statehood are nothing but dead end
Re: “D.C.’s statehood road show will go on after shaky start,” Jan. 29
It’s about time someone suggested that the D.C. statehood movement is a shocking example of the educational deficiencies of the city’s elected leaders.
Article I of the U.S. Constitution establishes the District as a uniquely federal city subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Congress. Article 1 also limits representation in Congress to the states. Since D.C. is not a state, it cannot be granted congressional membership.
But before it can become a state, its status as the federal district would have to be changed. This would require a constitutional amendment passed by a two-thirds vote in each chamber of Congress.
Even assuming D.C. could muster the votes of 67 senators and 274 House members, ratification then requires approval from three-quarters of the state legislatures. Looking at the red state/blue state map, even a third-grader can see that there is absolutely no likelihood of getting 37 states to ratify an amendment that would give the Democrats two additional senators forever.
Those who perpetuate the D.C. statehood myth do a disservice not only to District taxpayers who fund boondoggles like the “roadshow,” but to D.C. children who are being fed propaganda contrary to what they learn in civics and math.
Ric Fiore
Fairfax
