The President's attacks on Catholics and the Constitution

The election is drawing near, so I need to add much more to my review of Hugh Hewitt's book The Brief Against Obama. So much to cover, so little time. Let me see if I can combine a couple of points in this one blog.

First, there is the President's attack on Catholics. On January 20, 2012, the President approved a sweeping regulation from the Department of Health and Human Services requiring all employers except for a very narrow category limited essentially to actual houses of worship to provide "morning after" pills, sterilization, and birth control to all employees. This was a direct attack on the Roman Catholic church and on the "Free Exercise" clause of the Constitution. A Philadelphia Archbishop wrote, "No similarly aggressive attack on religious freedom in our country has occurred in recent memory."

Then there is Obama's attack on traditional marriage. As a candidate, he said marriage was the union between a man and a woman and that he considered it a sacred union because he was a Christian. He consistently maintained the rights of states to decide this question – in favor of civil unions – for themselves. However, on February 23, 2011, Atty. Gen. Eric Holder announced the President's decision to no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act. So, we have a candidate for President who said in 2008 that he did not support gay marriage, but then unilaterally withdrew the federal government's opposition to same-sex marriage less than three years later despite no change in law, and no Supreme Court or federal circuit court review. It always had been the well-established policy of the Justice Department to defend a federal statute unless no reasonable argument was made in its defense. But Obama and Holder nullified a valid law by executive decree without the benefit of judicial review.

Again, we need a President who will uphold the law, rather than subverting it. Be sure to see some of my past blogs for other reasons to make this a one-term President.