RELIGIOUS JUSTICES FORCE THEIR BELIEFS ON NON BELIEVERS
I am not raising a question concerning the use of contraceptives or the
Hobby Lobby decision relative to health care.
The religious involvement in this Hobby Lobby case has stirred me to ask a question that I have not seen others in the media ask.
The question is:
Should supreme court justices make decisions on cases that place them in
conflict with their own religious beliefs.
If their own religious beliefs figure into a decision, wouldn't it seem reasonable
for the justices to recuse themselves. Take themselves off the case.
The five Supreme Court justices who decided the Hobby Lobby contraceptive
case are all members of the Roman Catholic faith.
If the justices had voted the other way on contraception, they would have been
guilty of a serious sin against their Catholic religion.
My question is, if they could not violate their own faith, was it fair for them to
make a decision based on their religious beliefs that impacted people of
different faiths or people of no faith?
Should these Justices ever vote on a subject that could cause them to commit a mortal sin against their Catholic faith?
Wouldn't that be a conflict of interest ?
The question about the Roman Catholic position on contraception was address
in a web site called Catholic Answers. You can look it up yourself.
Here is what it says.
In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued his landmark encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Latin, "Human Life"), which reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.
The Church has always maintained the historic Christian teaching that deliberate acts of contraception are always gravely sinful, which means that it is mortally sinful if done with full knowledge and deliberate consent (CCC 1857). This teaching cannot be changed and has been taught by the Church infallibly.
There you are
Contraception is a mortal sin which is the worst sin in the Catholic Church, and as you can see , it says that it is taught by the church infallibly.
That means it came directly from God and cannot be changed.
If the Supreme Court justices had voted the other way on this matter they would have been guilty of a mortal sin against their church and literally would lose their salvation and possibly face excommunication..
Now you may be anti abortion or anti contraception, and I understand that.
But what if the 5 Justices were Jehovah Witnesses and they decided on a case based on their religion and said that the insurance does not have to cover blood transfusions?
If a justice has a religious belief that you do not have, and that justice has the power to define a law that subjects you to his/her religious belief, does that bother you?
Well that is exactly what Judges do in Iran. They base their decisions on their own religious beliefs.
So now we have a situation where here in the USA our supreme court is deciding cases the same way that they are decided in Iran.
On the basis of the religious belief of the Supreme Court Justices
Bill
bdona910782000@yahoo.com
www.hiddenmeanings.com
