A new Romney campaign ad accuses President Obama of declaring a “war on religion” – a common critique of Democrats made by those on the right. Instead, it's Mitt Romney who shares the values of religious Americans, declares the ad.
The ad highlights the flap over a portion of the president’s health care law that required employers to cover contraceptives in their insurance plans. Churches were already exempt from the law, and, after protests from various groups, the Obama administration also added a workaround for religiously affiliated organizations, such as hospitals and universities.
From the Romney ad:
Who Shares Your Values?
President Obama used his health care plan to declare war on religion, forcing religious institutions to go against their faith. Mitt Romney believes that’s wrong.
When religious freedom is threatened, who do you want to stand with?
"War on religion" also calls to mind the Democrats' attack line on Republicans' anti-women policies this year, which was dubbed the "war on women."
President Obama again defended the health care law's inclusion of contraceptive coverage Wednesday in Denver at a campaign event.
“When it comes to a woman’s right to make her own health care choices, they want to take us back to the policies more suited to the 1950s than the 21st century…The decisions that affect a woman’s health, they’re not up to the politicians, they’re not up to the insurance companies – they’re up to you,” he said Aug. 8. “And you deserve a president who will fight to keep it that way.”
It’s not the first time another politician has tried to paint the president as anti-religion despite his longtime, well-documented Christian faith. (Can one have a controversial pastor in your background and ALSO be anti-religion?)
Remember then-candidate Sen. Barack Obama’s gun-religion gaffe about a certain swath of Pennsylvania and how the right (not to mention then-competitor Hillary Clinton) ran with it by painting Obama as an elitist, religion-hating, gun-hating liberal?
Obama’s full statement described how those who had been ignored and neglected by the government, particularly the unemployed, might be more likely to “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”
As recently as April, Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania Republican senator was using that phrase for 2012 presidential politicking, declaring: ‘Damn right” we cling to our guns and Bibles.
Leave a Comment:
I still haven't spotted any "Evangelicals for Romney" bumper stickers.
If the do they will do it in secret
Obama isn't anti religion he is anti Christan
For example as a Muslin you are exempt for participating in Obama care because insurance goes against their religion
But as a Christan you have to provide contraception including the abortion pill even though it goes against your religion
why are Muslims exempt because of religious views but Christan's ain't
When Jesus was asked how one would identify his followers, His reply was, "By their love for one another you shall know them." The president is much closer to Christ's teaching, "Go sell all you have and give the money to the poor." than is Governor Romney. The former serves the poor; the latter serves the super rich.
Do you think Jesus would approve of you giving money to someone to kill a unborn child ? so don't you dare even go there trying to tell me what Jesus would want us to do
There lies your problem and all humanity.
Jesus also said "Salvation is the reward for those that obey my Father's commandments"
By trying to save or condemn those you believe to be doing something wrong you yourself are
in conflict with the Lord for you have not been appointed a judge on His behalf, but He has been appointed by the Father and
He will deal with the rebellious that disobey his commandments including you.
Being righteous in disobedience will not score you any points in heaven.
Your job is not to save the world but to teach others the gospel of the Lord to others and save yourself by practicing his teachings.
Anything other than that is sheer hypocrisy.
Romney's definetely goin' for the curmudgeon vote. Curmudgeon is a good word for the pundits to use. The GOP is primarily the Grand Old Curmudgeons Club. They just wanna' kick everybody else in their kerfuffles.
TRFjr speak the truth.
You said it correctly (Amen) That is first thing I thought of when I heard Romney as a Mormon trying to declare that our President is against religion. As a christian let me add this. JESUS WAS AGAINST RELIGION. IT WAS THE RIGHT WING NUTS THAT KILLED HIM>>>>>>>>>He haven't forgot that although he did forgive them.
So let me speak from experince Jesus is not worried about who tacks his name onto their cause. He made it known that many in that day will boast about the work they done in his name and he will answer them with DEPART FROM ME I KNOW YOU NOT. So so things they are doing not mean a hill a beans.
Many think we are fooled by all things false righteousness, but MY JESUS HAS TAUGHT HIS CHILDREN WELL.... WE know the truth and it has made us free from this so call crap that the made up self appointed church proclaim that claim to be of GOD.
He said if you do those things to the least of his brothern (the poor and disadvantage) you have done it unto him,
Know this God got some people he has raise up the knows his heart and will speak TRUTH TO POWER and it will shut down all those so call appointed/anointed leaders who has exalted their truth over his truth.
One other thing they were killing BABIES in Jesus day. This is nothing new. God kill a few baby to when they Pharaoh came against his people and would not let them go to worship him. The first born of Egypt died (babies). When the Jews when into the promise land to take possession He instructed then to kill the inhabitants (to include women and children).
So those who know Christ we know the truth........ Sell that lie some where else.
There lies your problem and all humanity.
Jesus also said "Salvation is the reward for those that obey my Father's commandments"
By trying to save or condemn those you believe to be doing something wrong you yourself are
in conflict with the Lord for you have not been appointed a judge on His behalf, but He has been appointed by the Father and
He will deal with the rebellious that disobey his commandments including you.
Being righteous in disobedience will not score you any points in heaven.
Your job is not to save the world but to teach others the gospel of the Lord to others and save yourself by practicing his teachings.
Anything other than that is sheer hypocrisy.
Claims that the health law violates religious liberty are based on a "big lie"--a gross falsification constantly repeated and embellished to lend credibility. Notwithstanding claims to the contrary, the health care law does not force employers to act contrary to their consciences.
Employers may comply with the law by choosing either of two options: (1) provide qualifying health insurance plans or (2) do not provide such plans and instead pay assessments to the government. Unless one supposes that the employers’ religions forbid payments of money to the government, the law does not compel them to act contrary to their beliefs.
The second choice does not amount to "violating" the law and paying a "fine," as some suppose. As the law "does not explicitly mandate an employer to offer employees acceptable health insurance" (), there is no such "mandate" to "violate." Rather, the law affords employers two options, either of which is as lawful as the other.
Nor are the assessments set so high that paying them would drive employers out of business, as some speculate. The law provides that if a "large employer" (i.e., one with at least 50 employees) chooses not to provide health insurance, it must pay assessments of $2,000 per year per employee after the first 30 employees. That is much less than an employer typically would pay for health insurance. Small employers would pay no assessments at all. Because of this potential saving and because the law affords individuals realistic opportunities to obtain insurance on their own, many employers are considering this option--for reasons entirely unrelated to religion.
()
In recently issued commentary on the various options of employers, the National Catholic Bioethics Center acknowledges, albeit grudgingly, that the option of not providing health insurance and instead paying assessments is "morally sound." While also considering this option "unfortunate" in that the insurance employees would find on their own would include coverage the Center deems objectionable, the Center concludes that the employers' "moral connection" to that coverage would be "remote."
Bottom line: Employers are not forced by the law to act contrary to their consciences. Rather, as recognized by even those who object to some aspects of the insurance the law makes available, the law affords employers with similar objections the morally sound option of not providing such insurance and paying assessments instead.