Wednesday, July 9, 2014
To the Editor:
So the Supreme Court decided that “closely held” corporations are entitled to “religious” beliefs, and that the civil government cannot force them to violate those beliefs by paying for drugs that kill babies.
This decision, seen by some as favoring Christianity, has upset many advocates of the other major religion in America –Secularism. I believe this decision is a step towards leveling the playing field in our ongoing cultural dialogue.
We are told by some that by deciding not to pay for the abortion drugs, these companies are forcing their religion on their employees.
But doesn’t this cut both ways?
By forcing these corporations to pay for these abortion drugs, isn’t the federal government forcing its religion on the corporations?
Isn’t it just as much a forcing-of-religion to require as to deny?
The truth is that religion is inescapable because law is religious (and anarchy is religious too.)
Every “ought” or “ought not” comes from a conviction about what is or is not “good.” It is no less religious to define “good” by popular opinion or “progressive” doctrines than to define it by appeal to the Word of God.
By narrowly defining “religion” as a set of beliefs that must include a deity, Secularists have long claimed the high ground in our national dialogue about what is and is not “good.”
If your beliefs are rooted in the revealed will of any kind of god, they have been denied a place in our public discourse about what is and is not “good” for the nation.
In this way a new religion has gradually taken control of our nation and our lives.
This decision begins to turn this around, and the Secularists are screaming “foul.”
The News is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not The News.