SCOTUS ruling in "Hobby Lobby" is all about child welfare

For those of you who have not heard about the SCOTUS "Hobby Lobby" decision, here it is for your

SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts "divining" on
the Hobby Lobby opinion

reading enjoyment.

For those of you who dare not muddle through the legalize, which I must say, Justice Ruth Ginsburg's dissent was eloquently scathing, have fun.

The controversy at hand is not, or rather, should not, be centered on an all male majority "He-Man-Women-haters Club" nor should it be on a woman's ability to have equal access to necessary medicine and medical procedures similar to men as Viagra is covered for men.

The issue at hand, which has failed to see the light of the legal and political pundits, is child welfare.

Yes, the Hobby Lobby case is about child welfare.

Some years ago, 2007, I worked with Michigan House Republicans to craft a Resolution on protecting Parental Rights.  This was taken to the federal level to be the Parental Rights Amendment.

The underlying base of the Parental Rights Amendment was the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

RFRA had been successfully used in cases involving Child Protective Services improperly removing children from parents.  The premise was, and is, parenting is a religious belief which bars government intervention, unless there is a "compelling governmental interest".

During the Michigan crafting period of its Parental Rights Resolution, the state was in its darkest days of defalcation of federal funding of child welfare.  It was a free-for-all where anyone who had a child welfare contract with the state could and would double, triple, phantom-bill, typically, Medicaid.

Court cases were fictitious whereby the family court policy of Lincoln Hall of Justice, under leadership of, then, Referee Kelly Ann Ramsey and Judge Judy Hartsfield where children, as young as 2 years of age, were being prosecuted as juvenile delinquents and contemporaneously adjudicated as wards of the court for foster care placement without a single person (no attorney, no parent, no Assistant Attorney General, no human being) ever being in the courtroom because all the orders were "rubber stamped".  Parents were tried of child abuse where there were never any charges nor pleas nor evidence entered into the record. (emphasis added.)

The Democratic leadership of Wayne County refused to publicly address the issue because money was being funneled to election campaigns via organizations like Black Family Development and even Michigan Supreme Court Justice Maura Corrigan (now, DHS Director).

West Michigan Republicans, many evangelical Christians, began to examine the application of RFRA into numerous other areas under the guise of economic prosperity of the family through the promotion of Christian values.

Now, the power of RFRA applications have been honed to parsimoniously craft a national agenda of child welfare via the Hobby Lobby.

Unbeknownst to the anti-abortion, pro-life, advocates, their rally cry to "save the babies" in basted in the juices of "compassionate cleansing".  This is the advocacy for children of poor, who are typically cognitively and psychologically developmentally disabled, to become productive, low wage, future workers of corporations and purge the human gene pool by naturally controlling human reproduction through the installation of "good Christian values" of abstinence, marriage and reducing life expectancy with chemical constraints of psychotropic medications, complete with social repression of sexual orientation, creativity and personal expression.

The logic of future cheap labor

I consider it social eugenics to create a cheap labor force for global competition in the free market.  The literal interpretation of the "best interests of the child" is to reap the future interest of workforce productivity from the investment in the human capital of the babies who are "saved".  Christian assimilation.

It begins with the removal of the child from the legal custody of the parent, either in vitro or ex vitro.

The Christian campaign of "saving the child" begins with the codification of a zygote/fetus for personhood.  The grant of legal custody and guardianship of the child is quickly being reclaimed as chattel as part of the national platform for the conservative movement but what is even more foreshadowing of this ruling is the possibility of that grant at the moment of conception.  This is the thrust of religious fervor behind the pro life movement.  "

If a woman is to abort or prevent, then her legal rights to the child have defaulted to the state.  The promotion of child protective services, eventually, under the theory of Christian compassion, removes that child from its human host as economic preservation of future productivity in human capital as the likelihood of that child growing up to pay taxes is not statistically significant according to conservative think tanks.

This conservation of Christian values revisits an era of err for which I identify as the beginning of civil rights, specifically the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.  The Emancipation Proclamation "erred" as it did not address the future grant of custody and guardianship of posterity.

Children are acknowledged in the U.S. Constitution as "our posterity" and this is what this precursive ruling addresses: the "peculiar institution" of child welfare, in the name of a Christian God.

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby by HuffPost Politics

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Conyers & Cohen: “Supreme Court Ruling an Affront to Reproductive Rights, While Opening Door to Employer Discrimination”

(WASHINGTON) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, ruling that closely-held for-profit companies with religious objections can opt out of providing contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act. After the ruling, Ranking Members John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice Ranking Member Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) delivered the following statement:

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.): “Today, the Supreme Court delivered yet another blow to women’s reproductive rights, based on the extraordinary conclusion that corporations – as opposed to their individual owners – have their own right to the free exercise of religion. Already, millions of women in America are benefiting from the protections found in the Affordable Care Act, including access to contraceptives. The ruling today could undermine this essential coverage for many women under the guise of ‘religious liberty.’ Alarmingly, the ruling also opens the door to the unnerving possibility that corporations could claim exemptions to various health and safety protections based on their asserted religious beliefs. Regrettably, the Supreme Court’s ruling today allows for bosses to wade into – and potentially discriminate against – the personal healthcare choices of their employees; healthcare decisions must continue to remain between an individual and their doctor.”

Representative Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.): “I am disappointed in today’s Supreme Court ruling that puts women’s reproductive care in a class of its own and strips it as an element of comprehensive healthcare. This ruling means that the Affordable Care Act’s benefit of contraceptive care is no longer guaranteed for the millions of American women who are employed by private businesses helmed by anyone who may object to providing basic, preventive care to its female employees. I am disappointed in this wrong-minded ruling and will continue to work to see that women have access to the care they deserve as prescribed by the Affordable Care Act.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Vista Maria Grows Its Own Human Crops

This is the intro to Vista Maria's girls foster care program:

 At Vista Maria, we serve over 1,000 children every year who have been abused, neglected and  traumatized.  They are confused, angry and scared.  Some are full of despair with little hope for a promising future.

This is what they forgot to include in its program description:

More than half our girls are pregnant.  Because we are not federally required to report nor maintain data on the number of girls each year who are raped or become pregnant in our foster care programs, we do not have to develop any maternal infant programs beyond taking the baby at birth and placing in foster care with the label of abuse and neglect.  

Due to the fact that we are a Catholic organization, we do not teach sex education nor do we condone the use of contraceptives.  These young girls become pregnant due to years of sexual abuse in foster care.  We offer no sexual abuse counseling and upon removal of the infant at birth, we have no intentions of immediate reunification as this is our way of accessing new funding, keeping our staff employed.  

This is the Catholic birth control hypocrisy of Michigan foster care.

I guess you could say Vista Maria is into in-house, green social harvesting.  It grows its own human crops.

Since Madame Corrigan, DHS Director, former State Supreme Court Chief Justice along with the current State Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Young have removed themselves from the Board of Vista Maria, I am quite sure they have not absolved themselves from the culpability of the treatment of these young girls.  Keep in mind, boys get raped in foster care, too.  Just ask Sr. Dorothy Doyle.

I dare anyone to ask Madame Corrigan to answer this question:  To whom do we report child abuse when the state is the abuser?  Make sure to have your cameras rolling, you do not want to miss her snotty dismissal of a serious issue.  And do not forget to send it to me.

Teen Pregnancy Among Young Women in Foster CareVoting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Catholic Birth Control Hypocrisy And Michigan Foster Care

This is what takes me for a loop with their logic.

There is a recent surge of young girls who are wards of the state, residing in or under the aegis of Catholic organizations like Vista Maria, who are getting pregnant and having babies.  Not only is the State of Michigan not reporting these pregnancies, the state is not providing services for the second generation of children being born in its care.

The reason a state, as this is not exclusive to Michigan, is not reporting pregnancies of foster girls, or we can take it a step further and not acknowledging in a court of law the father of the child, is due to the fact that it does not, or rather, is not mandated by federal law to report pregnancies of foster children.

The new crop of babies will go under a removal order with its statistics being sent up as abuse and neglect.

That is correct.  These foster children do not receive any sex education.  These foster children do not receive any access to protection.  There is no place for foster children to even report sexual abuse because the state does not report it.

To fault the behavior of a youth who has suffered under a child welfare system so financially corrupt is not very compassionate.

So the question I pose to you is this:  "Who holds the parent accountable for abuse and neglect when the state is the parent?"

"Who will hold the Roman Catholic Church accountable for abuse and neglect of children under their care paid for by taxpayers?"

Masses protest in Detroit, say health care law's change in birth control mandate not enough

More than 1,000 protesters rallied outside the federal building in Detroit on Friday to oppose the Obama administration's contraception mandate, saying their religious freedom is under attack.

The rally, organized by Catholic leaders, was one of 13 in cities across Michigan and more than 140 others across the U.S.

"Christians ... are a majority in this country," Teresa Tomeo, a Catholic author from St. Clair Shores, told the crowd. "We don't want this mandate."

The protesters, many holding signs that read "Stop Obama's HHS Mandate," listened to a range of speakers, from professors to a Catholic bishop to Protestant pastors.

"We will not comply," Professor Mary Healy of Sacred Heart Major Seminary said as the crowd cheered.

Healy said under the mandate, people could be forced to indirectly pay for "gourmet contraceptives" that give women "their choice of a sexually promiscuous lifestyle."

Catholic leaders say using contraception is morally wrong; under the mandate, most employers would be required to provide some sort of contraception coverage.

After an uproar, the White House modified the plan so that insurance companies, not religious employers, would pay for the contraception. But some religious groups say the change doesn't go far enough.

"We're on God's side," said Bishop Ira Combs, a Protestant leader from Jackson.

Quoting from the Bible and citing history, speakers said Christians were under attack by the government.

The president of Madonna University, Sister Rose Marie Kujawa, told the crowd that "the right to religious freedom is being ignored."

Auxiliary Bishop Michael Byrnes of the Archdiocese of Detroit said: "The purpose of freedom ... (is) for the pursuit of Christian excellence."

He also said people should "use our sexual powers for the building up of marriage and for the procreation of children."

A couple of counter-protesters were at the demonstration, holding up signs that read: "Catholic in support of the HHS mandate" and "Fund Church communities, not lawsuits," referring to the closing of Catholic parishes and lawsuits that Catholic groups have filed against the Obama administration over the mandate.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

John Conyers defends contraception mandate

The video is of the hearing has a bad reflector link but you can read the testimony.  I am working to upgrade Judiciary information access and hope to have streaming soon.

At a House hearing today, U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Detroit, strongly defended the contraception mandate from the Obama administration that has been under fierce attack from conservative Christians.

Saying that access to contraception helps women’s health, Conyers said the birth control mandate from the Department of Health and Human Services “is not just good law but good science.”

Conyers gave several examples of how access to birth control prevents health problems, saying that: “Over 200,000 cases of ovarian cancer and 100,000 deaths were prevented because of the health benefits of contraception.”

Conyers also said that: “Over 10% of infant deaths could be prevented if pregnancies were planned and if women had better access to family planning.”

The hearing today was held by the House Judiciary Committee and titled: “Executive Overreach: The HHS (Health and Human Services) Mandate Versus Religious Liberty.”

Released in January, the federal mandate drew criticism because it required religiously-affiliated institutions like Catholic hospitals and universities to include contraception coverage for its employees. It gave churches an exemption. The Catholic Church teaches that using contraception is morally wrong.

After the outcry, Obama announced a compromise this month that asks insurance companies, not the institutions themselves, to provide contraception coverage.

Conyers called Obama’s compromise "a Solomonic solution to a difficult problem. It balances competing rights in a respectful manner.”

Some conservatives feel differently, saying the compromise is still an attack on religious freedom.

Last week, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette joined a lawsuit with other states against the Obama administration over the contraception mandate.