While Kim Davis was Illegally Put in Jail, Obama did This
Posted by
URL of the original posting site:
http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/09/while-kim-davis-was-illegally-put-in-jail-obama-did-this/#PlhU4bqhzWEILszD.99
The Obama administration follows the Rahm Emanuel sentiments at every turn in taking advantage of a crisis. The illegal jailing of Kim Davis for following the law and ignoring an unlawful order from Bush appointed pro-sodomite Judge David Bunning was used as cover for the Obama administration to illegally plan regulation, which is imposing law (something the Executive Branch has not been given authority in the Constitution to do), to pay for mutilation surgeries for mentally ill men and women who think they are the opposite gender.
The Daily Caller reports:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced a planned new regulation Thursday that will require health insurers participating in Obamacare to cover more health procedures sought by the transgendered.
The new rule applies to every health insurer offering plans through Healthcare.gov or any of the state-run Obamacare insurance exchanges. It declares that insurers are prohibited from engaging in discrimination not only on the basis of sex, but also on the basis of gender identity.
In the past, several health insurance plans have categorically excluded health care related to transitioning between genders, often on the grounds that such procedures are often cosmetic, not medically necessary, and elective in nature. Now, such categorical bans will be disallowed, and insurers will have to cover many of the procedures.
HHS says the new rule won’t require insurers to cover all hormone treatments or sex reassignment surgeries, but it will almost certainly require them to cover a large number of them.
First, let’s put in place that the Executive Branch is acting unconstitutionally. Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution reads:
All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
How much power for legislation is left for the Executive Branch? How about for the federal courts? None, zero, zip, nada. The Congress has not passed any legislation that requires paying for mutilation surgeries or hormone treatments for mentally ill people under the judgment of God (Romans 1:18ff). Therefore, the Executive Branch has no authority to issue such a rule against health insurers. They are usurping it.
Why don’t the insurance companies band together and tell the feds to go pound sand?
“We are not requiring coverage for gender transition surgery,” said Jocelyn Samuels, director of the Office for Civil Rights at HHS, who makes me wonder for the appearance if she is not some sort of transgendered person. “We are simply saying that insurers must apply nondiscriminatory treatment … if they all exclude all gender identity treatment that will be a violation of the law.”
Well, Samuels can say that all she likes, but the reality is that the federal government, under the Constitution, has no authority to tell anyone who they may or may not discriminate. We discriminate all the time. It’s protected in the First Amendment under the idea of peaceably assembling. We assemble with those of like mind and discriminate from assembling with those we are against ideologically.
How is Samuels attempting to justify her claims?
CNBC reports, “As an example, Samuels said the department would question a decision by an insurer to deny coverage to a person for a hysterectomy—the removal of ones’ uterus—if it were recommended by their doctor as part of a gender dysphoria diagnosis, and if that insurer covered hysterectomies for other diagnosed reasons.”
Wait, so a hysterectomy is equivalent to a man who thinks he is a woman and wants to cut his privates off and have breast augmentation? Seriously? See what a reprobate mind does people? See why those who encourage reprobate minds are also worthy of the same punishment as the reprobates? This is insanity!
And at the end of the day, who will pay for all of this? That’s right, you Mr. and Mrs. America, because it will be money that will be added to your premiums and, of course, with the people in the illegal Obamacare program, there is no doubt that taxpayers will be on the hook for some of the costs as well.
So, the criminals continue to run the show while the rightful governors, the people, stand back and allow it. I’m wondering just how long it’s going to take the people to pull out the pitchforks, torches, tar and feathers and, of course, exercise their rights under the Second Amendment to “secure a free state.”
be jailed for not breaking the law
What Did You Say? 
Rowan County, Ky., is a lesson for America in how not to resolve social conflict. The local head clerk is sitting in jail, and a judge has ordered her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in her absence. When the Supreme Court redefined marriage for the nation in an activist decision this June, it took the issue out of the democratic process and made it much harder for citizens to navigate our differences on this fundamental institution. Both sides of the debate knew the decision would have significant social effects. For civil servants like clerks who issue marriage licenses, the implications were also immediately personal.
Rowan County clerk Kim Davis could not, as a matter of religious conviction, issue same-sex marriage licenses. Davis’ further dilemma is the fact that her name is attached to every county marriage license, and she believes issuing them to same-sex couples would constitute precisely the kind of endorsement of same-sex unions her faith forbids. Because of that, her office stopped issuing all marriage licenses after the Supreme Court decision.
A lawsuit followed and a federal court on August 12 ordered her to issue licenses despite her faith-based objections. She did not comply with the order, and at a hearing Thursday the judge sent
Davis to jail for contempt of court, even though the plaintiffs had specifically asked she be given fines instead of jail time. The judge ordered the deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses or also face contempt of court and five out of six said they would comply. Meanwhile, the judge has told Davis she will stay in jail because she will not comply with his orders.
This situation could have been avoided. This problem would not have even existed in Kentucky and many other parts of the country had the Supreme Court allowed states to deal with the marriage question democratically—with the give-and-take that naturally leads to compromises, the balancing of competing interests, and a diversity of solutions over time. Instead the Supreme Court redefined the institution for the entire country in one fell swoop but did not say how our constitutional guarantee of religious liberty would be reconciled with the new order of things.
Conflicts have been warned about for years, and all four dissenters to the Supreme Court’s marriage decision predicted dire consequences for religious freedom.
Given the inevitable challenges to this fundamental freedom, it is imperative that we seek solutions to navigate the complex road ahead. In this particular case, there are a number of potential ways forward so that same-sex couples can get licenses as required by the courts and Kim Davis can be released from jail without having to agree to resign or violate her conscience.
One help in finding the way forward is Kentucky’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which requires the government to avoid substantially burdening religious expression absent a compelling government interest. There is no compelling government interest in keeping Kim Davis’s name on the licenses instead of the name of the deputy clerks who are willing to issue them. If it’s “just a little form”—as Davis’ critics would like to suggest—then change the form, not the beliefs.
There are a number of other possible accommodations that could be adopted by the legislature, courts, or executive agencies in the state. Davis is not interested in stopping all same-sex marriages in her county. She is only asking that she not be forced to participate in them in a way that violates her beliefs.
Opt-out systems like this work in many walks of life. In fact, we already have examples of such options being adopted in the marriage licensing context. For example, North Carolina allows objecting clerks to choose to not get involved with marriage licensing at all, and the state will guarantee that someone will take their place if needed. Hawaii has an online registration system for marriage licensing that gets rid of many of these concerns.
Whatever the method, people of good will want a solution that leads to better outcomes than the impasse in Rowan County this week. Reaching such a solution in Kentucky is still feasible—and desirable, to respect the legally protected interests of the plaintiffs and the religious conscience of Kim Davis.