Under Obamacare, some Religions of Peace are more equal than others

bow down before the one you serve
The buzz around Twitter the past couple days has been that Obama’s new government-run healthcare law will exempt Muslims because insurance supposedly violates Sharia law. Sweetness & Light posted several of the fatwas which describe Islamic objections to insurance as well as the special provision on pages 273-4 of the recently-passed Senate bill:

18 (5) EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

—In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following information:

(A) In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual’s status as a member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe.

So, do ALL religions qualify as exempt? Or just certain religions?

If it’s the latter, then this law is in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by giving preferential treatment. In Emerson v. Board of Education, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black stated:

The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.

The Democrat party, however, seems to prefer an Animal Farm approach:
more_equal

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

Posted by FullMetalPatriot
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT

Leave A Comment