Smokescreens on the water, and fire in the sky

Excuse me while I borrow from Deep Purple’s awesomeness and remember one of rock’s greatest guitar riffs.

Years ago, we were driving toward the south entrance of Yellowstone National Park past massive Yellowstone Lake one evening when we saw thick, gray smoke hovering on the water on the other side of lake, and above the smoke, seemingly floating in the sky, massive flames obscuring the hillsides to the east. Deep Purple’s Smoke on the Water immediately came to mind. With what’s going on regarding the latest manifestation of Obamacare mandates, I am reminded of that bizarre sight, and wonder if what we’re seeing is really what’s going on.

Following is a response I posted to a Human Events article by Rep. Charles Boustany and Rep. Phil Gingrey today which discusses not only the trampling on religious freedom that mandategate, as I like to call it, engenders, but also the abortifacient agenda it exposes.

Once again, we have a terminology impasse: liberals keep trying to frame the issue in terms of women’s rights while most everyone else is framing it in terms of religious freedom. It reminds me of the post-Roe v. Wade era in which liberals were repeating the mantra about women’s rights, and everyone else was talking about life…which makes me think that it’s really not about contraception at all, but the morning after pill–and thus, abortion. Just in the way that we see a shift of more people being pro-life these days because of the pro-choice smokescreen being exposed for being the pro-abortion agenda it is, we need to expose how Obama tried to sneak in this abortifacient under the guise of contraception.

Representatives Boustany and Gingrey correctly point out the abortifacient aspects of the Obama contraception mandate. And while there certainly is the issue of religious freedom at issue, I believe that Obama is using the firestorm surrounding the religious aspect of the mandate to obscure his real agenda which is greater access to abortion at will under any circumstances. A pundit on one of the Sunday shows this last weekend spoke about liberals “worshipping at the altar of reproductive rights” (the latest, greatest euphemism for abortion), which Obama certainly does, for if nothing more, than to appease his leftist base.  On one hand, I find Obama’s enthusiastic support of abortion oddly counter to the social justice agenda he promotes, considering the path of destruction abortion has wreaked on the black community. Lloyd Marcus in an article yesterday in American Thinker points out not only Margaret Sanger’s (founder of Planned Parenthood) call to exterminate the black community, but also reminds us of these chilling statistics:

“Seventy-eight percent of Planned Parenthood clinics are in black  neighborhoods.  Blacks make up only 12% of the population, but 35% of  America’s aborted babies are black.  Half of black pregnancies end in  abortion.”

On the other hand, Obama’s support for abortion is completely in line with his ideology.  And, he is an ideologue. And that is the real point here, that increased access to abortion is the goal.

I am not trying to minimize the importance of freedom of conscience as it relates to religion, I am simply saying that Obama is sitting back, bemused by all the Christians and evangelicals–who have united with Catholics–fussing over contraception. Thus, we saw him on Friday appear to soften, and subsequently, “compromise” by shifting the cost and dispensation of contraceptives (the smokescreen) and abortifacients (the real goal) to insurance companies which many pundits have called, accurately, a shell game. Was the heavy-handed, all-out mandate at the beginning a calculated effort to give him wiggle room that he already knew he’d fall back on? I wouldn’t be surprised. At any rate, we’re all still going to have pay for it through higher insurance premiums, taxes or fines–seared consciences be damned. He still gets exactly what he and his fellow Progressives/Statists want.

George Will commented this weekend about the Catholic bishops “getting what they deserve” for supporting Obamacare.  I don’t recall the bishops’ reasoning at the time for supporting Obamacare, but I remember thinking it was odd.  They should have known what greater government control of such a thing as health care would mean. It’s not rocket science.  Now, I don’t think it’s right to revel in someone “getting what they deserve”, but Will has a valid point in noting the bishops should have anticipated that with the individual mandate would come other mandates. And, with this latest manifestation of Obamacare, Stupak settling for an executive order was also revealed as a fool.

Senator Santorum said it well in an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox New Sunday on Feb. 5:

“…this is the problem when government tells you that they can give you things.  They can take it away. But even worse, they can tell you how they’re going to exercise this new right that they’ve given you, consistent with their values instead of the values guaranteed in our Constitution.



Now, to that I give a hearty, “Amen!”

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: