Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Friday, 10 February 2012

"Thou This Be Madness, There Is [Even More Madness] In't."

     Given all the outrage over the Obama Administration's absolutely unconscionable violation of every American citizen's First Amendment right to freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech, I thought it would be helpful to take a step back from the talk of what's at stake, and look first at why it's at stake. It occurred to me that, as Polonius put it, "Though this be madness, there is method in't" (Hamlet, Act II, Scene 2). Or, in the case of Obama et alii, "Though this be madness, there is [even more madness] in't." From what anyone can tell, the sole intent of all the mandating that Obama and Sebelius are doing is to ensure that every single American (and more especially, every single woman) possible can have utterly unfettered access to contraception, and if that doesn't work, then to abortifacients (i.e. drugs that prevent the conceived embryo [read: microscopic baby] from safely emplanting in his/her mommy's womb), and if they'd rather not deal with those options, then to outright sterilization. Okay, fine. If someone wants these things, they're already readily available all over the country, and I can't and won't force them to stop doing/using them or to see them as wrong. That's their right human beings to make up their own minds and live with the consequences of their own choices. (That, of course, is not at all to say that I do not support those who want to re-criminalize the murder of innocent pre-born persons that we blithely refer to as "abortion.") But why the mandate the other way, why force Americans to not only see them as right, but also force every American to pay for them? Why shove all these things down our throats? Why not just let everyone believe and do whatever they want regarding these things? What's the ultimate goal behind the game plan? What's the "win" for Obama and friends?

     The only end-game I can see is that he hopes to de-populate the country. (Perhaps I'm just too far-sighted. Obama probably only sees as far as the dollar signs he gets from his backers at Planned Parenthood for pushing their agenda.) I mean, think about it. What is the purpose of every one of the things he's forcing everyone to pay for? The answer: No Babies. They want as many Americans as possible to be able to have no babies. The consequence of that kind of policy is, inevitably, fewer tax-paying American citizens every year; translation: more retirees with no young, active, working-age Americans to take care of them. (Want an example of this: look at the demographics of Europe at this moment.) This leads to─oh wait, this has already happened. Ammendment: this has led to an exponentially increasing national debt as the Federal Government has no choice but to cover the ever-increasing needs of the evermore abundant (relative to the overall population, of course) unemployed Americans. It seems to me that we're already in this downward spiral, yet what is the solution of the President who has spent more than dozens (possibly all) of his predecessors combined in just four painfully-long years? Simple: his solution is apparently to increase the speed of the whirlpool that's sucking America down the drain. His solution to the problems of under-employment and an imploding economy is to torpedo the next generation at its very source─the very first moments of human life─guaranteeing that, the further into debt we get, the fewer people we'll have to pay off that debt.

     I was under the impression that the role of government is to work for the good of the country, to ensure that said country has a more prosperous future than it had a past. Or, at the very minimalist least, the role of government is to ensure that said government has a country to govern in the future. Yet, this madman's mandate seems bent on the exact opposite of any of these fundamental roles of government. His sole consideration in all of this is clearly to make sure that every future as-yet-unborn American could be ensured a completely trouble-free exit-visa from planet Earth before they ever even see that planet. (For now, at least, whether their parents choose to use those exit-visas is up to us... but I don't hold out any hope that even that liberty will remain ours for long. Just look at China...) The Obama Administration mandates that we make it as easy as humanly possible for this generation of American citizens to obliterate the next generation of America citizens.

     Again, either there's something I don't see that he thinks he gains from this insane blotting out of the future of this country, or he just wants to see how badly he can screw up the United States before his term(s) is/are up. Honestly, the whole thing is utterly senseless to me. There is as little rational basis for this mandate as there is in the government encouraging monogamous "marriage" between two people whose gametes are completely incompatible (resulting in 0% capacity for offspring) when the only way the government can continue to exist itself is if this generation produces offspring over which it can govern. This whole business of "reproductive freedom," which is really the hedonistic freedom from reproduction, and "'marriage' equality," which is really the divorce of marriage from its primary purpose─the creation and education of children─is incredibly short-sighted, selfish, and self-defeating because all it can lead to is the depopulation of the very same society that enforces it. There is literally no future in this mentality.

     Now, all this is still just the background to the overt action of this blatantly death-minded President. In service of this nationally suicidal goal, he has now "accommodated" the religious organizations that object to providing these hateful things by telling them that 100% of all insurance policies─not the 99% or 98% that were previously required to; no, now it's fully 100%─throughout this country must now include the pill, the morning-after pill (read: abortifacient), and complete sterilization, thus removing even the pathetically narrow exemption that was previously allowed to perhaps 1% of those who object. How is this a "concession," according to the Administration? Simple. He claims that the objecting employers "will not pay" for those "services", just for all the others listed on the insurance plans (the same plans which must include the objectionable "services"). So who pays for the objectionable portion? Simple. "The insurance companies." Are they being paid directly by some agency or advocacy group that employs only those who support these "services" and garnders funds only from others who support them, so that those who object don't provide the money? Nope. They use "internal funds" which, obviously, only have one place to come from: those paying for insurance plans. Translation, 100% of Americans, whether they object to these morally questionable "services" or not, are providing the funds that will be used to pay for them. But, at least we can "feel better" about it because Obama promises that he'll insist that every single insurance company in the United States launders the money prior to filing their financial statements.

To summarize, let me say that again as simply as possible:
     The pathetically narrow exemption in the original HHS mandate has been completely revoked. Now the full 100% of all insurance plans everywhere in the U.S. must include the morally objectionable content (contraception, abortifacient drugs, and sterilization). And, to top it all off, he's added yet another morally objectionable (and, in point of fact, illegal) practice to the nation-wide mandate: forced nation-wide money laundering.

     There's a reason Planned Parenthood (P.P.) is happy with this new "compromise": it's worse than before, includes more evil, and forces many, many more companies across this country to engage in the very same money laundering shell-game that P.P. has been using to claim that the millions that the government has been giving them yearly "aren't being used for abortions," despite the fact that they're the largest abortion provider in the country (and perhaps the world and their primary goal, every year, is to increase the number of abortions they do).

     I implore you all, no matter your beliefs about contraceptives and sundry: oppose this mandate more now than you did before. If you don't want the government to be able to deny you your right to think for yourself, go to StopHHS.com and sign the petition. President Obama has now made it undeniably clear that he doesn't just want to abolish most people's First Amendment rights, he fully intends to revoke those Constitutionally guaranteed rights for absolutely every American citizen. We must fight this atrocious law, or face the end of America as we know it... forever... in more ways than one.

Saturday, 4 February 2012

Open Letter to Congresswoman Pelosi Regarding Her Fellow Catholics and the HHS Mandate


Representative Nancy Pelosi
Washington DC Office
235 Cannon H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515

Madame Speaker,

I am not one of your constituents, however I am a fellow Catholic, and as such I wish to speak with you regarding your recent statement in support of the HHS Mandate set down by Secretary Sebelius. You said, and I quote, "I'm going to stand with my fellow Catholics in supporting the Administration on this. I think it was a very courageous decision that they made and I support it."1

Since your days as Speaker of the House, I have watched your career with apprehension and, frankly, with disbelief. You continually stand in direct opposition to the blatantly obvious and incontrovertible teaching of the very Church to which you claim to belong, yet you simultaneously pretend to be operating in union with that Church. This time is no different, but it is even more shocking because of the wording of your opposition and its timing. At the very same moment that you purport "to stand with my fellow Catholics in supporting the Administration on this," the bishops, archbishops, and cardinals of 153 (and counting) out of the 183 Catholic dioceses2 in the United States are actively speaking out against this deplorable mandate in no uncertain terms. I do not know to what (undoubtedly tiny) group of Catholics you are referring in your support of this unconstitutional attack on the foundational freedom of religion in America, but I can assure you that, though they, like you, were raised within the Catholic Church, that unnamed "Catholic" minority neither speak for nor protect the interests of the Catholic Church in these United States. Allow me to present to you the words just a few of those who do speak for the Church, specifically for the Church in your home state of California, for the Church in Washington, DC, and finally for the Church in Rome (which is to say for the entire, world-wide Catholic Church):

1. Cardinal and Archbishop-Emeritus Roger Mahony of the archdiocese of Los Angeles said about the mandate:
"I cannot imagine a more direct and frontal attack on freedom of conscience than this ruling today. This decision must be fought against with all the energies the Catholic Community can muster. …
"This is a sad moment in the life of our country where religious freedom and freedom of conscience led to the formation of this new Nation under God."3
This man is a Cardinal in the Catholic Church, a leader of your "fellow Catholics," yet you clearly do not stand with him. You stand in blatant and undeniable opposition to him and to us. Are you sure you've chosen the Catholic side in this confrontation?
2. Bishop Patrick McGrath of the diocese of San Jose said,
"I write to you concerning an alarming and serious matter that negatively impacts the Church in the United States directly, and that strikes at the fundamental right to religious liberty for all citizens of any faith. The federal government, which we profess to be "of, by, and for the people," has just dealt a heavy blow to almost a quarter of those people—the Catholic population of the United States—and to the millions more who are served by the Catholic Church. …
"In so ruling, the Administration has cast aside the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, denying to Catholics our Nation's first and most fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty. …
"We cannot comply with this unjust law.  People of faith cannot be made second class citizens.  We are already joined by our brothers and sisters of all faiths and many others of good will in this important effort to regain our religious freedom. …
"Please join me in taking this action as soon as you can, indeed in the very near future."4
Bishop McGrath is a successor of the Apostles in your Catholic Church, calling you to oppose this unconscionable mandate, and yet you clearly stand in opposition to his authoritative request to defend the First Amendment. Are you sure that you have chosen "to stand with [your] fellow Catholics"?
3. Archbishop José Gomez of the archdiocese of Los Angeles said on January 25th, 2012,
"Last Friday, the day after the Pope's address, our federal government issued a ruling that confirmed his worst fears about our country's anti-religious and anti-Christian drift. …
"It is hard not to see this new mandate as a direct attack on Catholic consciences and the freedom of our Catholic institutions.
"The mandate does not promote any civil liberties and it does not advance any significant public health goals. … [P]regnancy is not a disease for which 'preventive medicine' is required. …
"In this case, the government is imposing a narrow, radically individualistic idea of religion—defining religion as only worship and moral teaching. As many have noted, under this definition, much of what Jesus Christ did would not qualify as a 'religious' ministry. …
"The Catholic Church is the only visible religious group in American public life that holds consistent beliefs regarding the morality of life issues, including abortion and contraception. ... So it is hard to escape the conclusion that the government is singling out the Church with this new mandate.
"But the issues here go far beyond contraception and far beyond the liberties of the Catholic Church. They go to the heart of our national identity and our historic understanding of our democratic form of government."5
This archbishop wrote in solidarity with the Pope, even quoting our Holy Father in defence of his call to oppose this anti-constitutional attack on religious liberty in America. Moreover, he blatantly indicated that this mandate specifically singles out the Catholic Church in an egregious attempt to subjugate our freedom beneath the contrary will of the Federal Government. How on earth can you claim "to stand with [your] fellow Catholics" when the very mandate you support aims to strike at the very heart of the Catholic Church in America?
4. His Excellency Bishop Jaime Soto likewise spoke out, saying,
"This is an alarming matter that negatively impacts the Church in the United States directly. It strikes at the fundamental right to religious liberty for all citizens of any faith. …
"This unjust law cannot stand. People of faith cannot be made second class citizens."6
This bishop, like all the others, could not be more clearly opposed to that which you support. Are you sure that those around you in the confrontation are faithful Catholics?
5. From the diocese of San Bernadino, Bishop Gerald Barnes said,
"The decision, as we understand it, puts our Catholic hospitals, schools and public ministries in the very difficult position of having to violate their consciences in order to comply with the law.  This appears to run counter to the ideal of religious freedom that has always been present in our nation.  Fortunately, we have the opportunity to make our voices heard when we see injustice in laws and public policies. In fact, our faith calls us to be Faithful Citizens and stand up for the values of the Gospel today.."7
Bishop Barnes clearly states that this is an assault on the religious freedom ensured by the First Amendment, yet you support this assault. Are you sure it is fellow Catholics with whom you stand?
6. His Excellency Tod Brown, bishop of the diocese of Orange, truly does "stand with [his] fellow Catholics", saying:

"Catholics make up ¼ of the population and this mandate flies in the face of our religious liberty.

"This unjust mandate cannot stand. In this election year, our combined outrage will have a strong impact."8

This bishop speaks of "our combined outrage" over this mandate, yet you are not outraged at all but rather admire the administration's "courageous decision," the same decision that so very many of our Catholic bishops call an "unjust mandate." How is it, then, that you still claim to "stand with [your] fellow Catholics"? I don't see them standing with you...

7. Armando Ochoa, bishop-designate of Frenso, likewise said,
"We cannot─we will not─comply with this unjust law. … Our parents and grandparents did not come to these shores to help build America's cities and towns, its infrastructure and institutions, its enterprise and culture, only to have their posterity stripped of their God-given rights. In generations past, the Church has always been able to count on the faithful to stand up and protect her sacred rights and duties. I hope and trust that she can count on this generation of Catholics to do the same. Our children and grandchildren deserve nothing less."9
This Bishop-designate calls on you to defend our religious liberties in solidarity with your ancestors, but instead you call the outright denial of those "God-given rights" a "courageous decision." How can you defy the clear will of our Catholic bishops and our Catholic forebears, who even now are watching us from Purgatory and Heaven, praying that we will listen to and obey the divine authority given to our bishops, all the while claiming "to stand with [your] fellow Catholics"?
8. Bishop Steven Blair of the diocese of Stockton said,
"In effect, the HHS ruling is presuming to define how the Catholic Church, or any religious institution, is to carry out its ministry as an expression of its faith. Essentially it is saying that freedom of religion pertains only to freedom of worship and religious teaching but not to the practice of religious faith in the charitable, social, and health institutions of the Church. Some have pointed out the irony that under this definition Jesus' miracles and care for those around Him would not qualify as religious.
"This ruling represents an alarming intrusion of government into the affairs of the Catholic Church and other faith communities. …
"The conditions of the mandate are unconstitutional and violate the First Amendment because the government is overreaching its power in legislating which Church ministries will be exempted and which ones will not. It is outside the power of government to define religion in any way whatsoever. ...
"If the government can intrude into the workings of the Catholic Church it can intrude into any religious organization in matters that are internal to the religious organization.
"We must explore and pursue every option to repeal or reverse this unjust mandate through persuasion, advocacy, litigation and other means to protect religious liberty for all. We must especially convince Congress of the need for legislative action to overturn this injustice. You can do your part by contacting your federal legislators to begin this essential process."10
As a Congresswoman, and especially as former-Speaker of the House, you are in far better a position than most Catholics, a position from which, if you were faithful to the bishops' will for you, you could make great strides toward striking down this anti-American mandate. I don't think Bishop Blair, or really any of the Bishops, could be more clear that where your fellow Catholics stand is not "in supporting the administration on this." Yet you stand apart, doing the very opposite of what the bishops ask of you. Why do you oppose us?
9. From the diocese in which you likely spend most of your time, Cardinal Archbishop Donald Wuerl has declared,
"The new mandate is the first federal regulation in our nation's history to require all faith-based institutions to pay for coverage of abortifacient drugs, sterilization and contraceptives. … Being forced to provide these services violates both our faith conviction and our freedom. …
"Even those who may disagree with the Church's teaching on the sanctity of human life, such as the editorial boards of the Washington Post and the New York Daily News, have stated that the government has no business forcing religious institutions to sponsor and pay for procedures and drugs which violate their beliefs.
"What will happen if this mandate stands? Our schools, hospitals, and charitable organizations will be placed in the untenable position of choosing between violating civil law and abandoning our religious beliefs. …
"There can no longer be any doubt that religious liberty in our country is in jeopardy. …
"This is the time to speak up. ... [A]s a community of faith we need to commit ourselves to prayer that wisdom and justice may prevail, and religious liberty may be preserved."11
How can you oppose the will even of this leader of the Catholic Church where you work daily, and yet claim "to stand with [your] fellow Catholics"?
10. And finally, if you do not care to listen even to these American bishops, perhaps you will listen to the final authority in the Catholic world: Pope Benedict XVI. On January 19th, 2012, he said,
"The Church's witness, then, is of its nature public: she seeks to convince by proposing rational arguments in the public square. The legitimate separation of Church and State cannot be taken to mean that the Church must be silent on certain issues, nor that the State may choose not to engage, or be engaged by, the voices of committed believers in determining the values which will shape the future of the nation.
"In the light of these considerations, it is imperative that the entire Catholic community in the United States come to realize the grave threats to the Church's public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political and cultural spheres. The seriousness of these threats needs to be clearly appreciated at every level of ecclesial life. Of particular concern are certain attempts being made to limit that most cherished of American freedoms, the freedom of religion. Many of you [the U.S. bishops] have pointed out that concerted efforts have been made to deny the right of conscientious objection on the part of Catholic individuals and institutions with regard to cooperation in intrinsically evil practices. Others have spoken to me of a worrying tendency to reduce religious freedom to mere freedom of worship without guarantees of respect for freedom of conscience.
"As the [Second Vatican] Council noted, and I wished to reiterate during my Pastoral Visit, respect for the just autonomy of the secular sphere must also take into consideration the truth that there is no realm of worldly affairs which can be withdrawn from the Creator and his dominion (cf. Gaudium et Spes, §36)"12 [emphasis added].
The very thing which our beloved Holy Father warns us against is that thing which you call "a very courageous decision," saying, "I support it." Referring to the Church of Rome, which this Pope now leads, St. Irenaeus said, "it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere."13 And in these United States, every Church does agree with Rome. Yet, you, a layperson on your own authority, do not. Where are these "fellow Catholics" with whom you claim to stand?

From your home state alone, 8 bishops have clearly spoken out condemning Secretary Sebelius' mandate. In Washington, DC, your local bishop has spoken out against it. From the Eternal City, Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, on whose shoulders rest the crown of Catholic Unity, has spoken against it. The voice of the Catholic Church has spoken from the many apostolic chairs in these United States. The voice of the Catholic Church has spoken from the Chair of Peter. The voice of the Catholic Church is clear and strong.
Regardless of whether Archbishop George H. Niederauer of your home diocese of San Francisco speaks out in the coming days or not, with over 80% of our U.S. Bishops, and even the Bishop of Rome himself, standing united against this grievously unconstitutional measure, with countless millions of faithful Catholics standing behind them, the will of the Church is undeniable. So I again ask you: which "fellow Catholics" are you thinking of when you speak of standing with them in your unconscionable support of this unprecedented attack on American liberties? Because I stand with my fellow Catholics in union with the bishops. After all, for almost 2000 years now, "wherever the Bishop shall appear... there is the Catholic Church."14 When I look around at those standing with us, I don't see you, Madame Speaker. Why is that?
I do not presume to tell you where you ought to stand on this issue. That is a matter of your own conscience. But I do ask that you be honest. Honest with yourself and with the American people. If you continue to stand where you do now, you do not stand with your fellow Catholics, because those Catholics who stand in solidarity with the Church oppose this anti-American mandate on the grounds that it strikes at the very heart and soul of this Union.

Respectfully, your fellow Catholic,
Jackford R. Macarius B. Kolk
Tenui Ecclesiam Catholicam nec dimittam.

1. "Pelosi: Obama's Anti-Catholic Birth Control Decision was 'Courageous'". http://nation.foxnews.com/nancy-pelosi/2012/02/02/pelosi-obamas-anti-catholic-birth-control-decision-was-courageous. Accessed 3 February 2012.
2. "Updated: *153* Bishops (Over 80% of Dioceses) Have Spoken Out Against Obama/HHS Mandate". http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=25591. Accessed 3 February 2012.
3. "Fedeeral Government Mandate for Contraceptive/Sterilization Coverage". http://cardinalrogermahonyblogsla.blogspot.com/2012/01/federal-government-mandate-for.html. Accessed 3 February 2012.
4. "US Health and Human Services Ruling". http://www.dsj.org/about-us/bishops/bishops-statements/us-health-and-human-services-ruling. Accessed 3 February 2012.
5. "A Time for Catholic Action and Catholic Voices". http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2012/01/a-time-for-catholic-action-and-catholic-voices. Accessed 3 February 2012.
6. "Health Coverage Announcement". http://www.diocese-sacramento.org/PDFs/SotoHealthCoverageAnnouncementEnglish.pdf. Accessed 3 February 2012.
7. "HHS decision stifles religious freedom".
http://sbdiocese.blogspot.com/2012/02/hhs-decision-stifles-religious-freedom.html. Accessed 3 February 2012.
8.  . http://rcbo.org/component/content/article/3/530-bishop-brown-speaks-out-on-hhs-mandate.html. Accessed 3 February 2012.
9. "Letter to Parishes". http://www.elpasodiocese.org/documents/letterToParishes012512.pdf. Accessed 3 February 2012.
10. "Helath and Human Services Statement". http://www.stocktondiocese.org/Our-Bishop/Bishop-s-Statements/Health-and-Human-Services-Statement-02-2012. Accessed 4 February 2012.
11. "An Impossible Choice". http://site.adw.org/pdfs/CardinalWuerl_e-Letters/January2012-An-Impossible-Choice.html. Accessed 4 February 2012.
12. "Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Bishops of the United States of America on Their 'Ad Limina' Visit". http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2012/january/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20120119_bishops-usa_en.html. Accessed 4 February 2012.
13. St. Irenaeus of Lyons, circa A.D. 185, Against Heresies, III,3,§2. ("Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere."). http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm. Accessed 4 February 2012.
14. St. Ignatius of Antioch, circa A.D. 100, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, §8. ("Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."). http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm. Accessed 4 February 2012.

Open Letter to Barach Obama Regarding the HHS Mandate


President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington D.C. 20500

Dear President Barack Obama,
In the history of our great nation, there have been many missteps, many poor choices made by  our leaders, and even many deplorable atrocities. To protect us from these, our founding fathers had the foresight to put in place the Bill of Rights, reminding us that there are lines that must not be crossed because the moment we cross them, we diminish not only those whose rights are thereby trampled upon but also ourselves and every American citizen. With the recent HHS mandate to force all religious institutions (except an imaginary and practically non-existent class of institutions1 which, as Bishop Zubik said, is so narrow that “Jesus Christ and his Apostles would not fit the exemption”2) to cover “All Food and Drug Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity,”3 despite the fact that many, many such institutions object on various grounds, including scientific, medical, and especially religious, you have trampled on the First Amendment4. A great man once said, “With the first link the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.”5 With this mandate, you have forged a chain that chafes the throats of millions of Americans of every creed, color, and ethnicity, but rest assured that you yourself are not free from its bonds. Freedom of religion is the first precept of the First Amendment because it is the very foundation stone of this Republic. By directly and unabashedly assaulting it, you threaten to topple the entire edifice which allows you the freedom to claim6 that your religion informs everything you do, but more than that you threaten the very foundation of this entire society.
And for what reason? Because you want to ensure unfettered access to contraceptives and abortion “services” so that the very lifeblood of our nation ceases to flow? This is the most short-sighted goal in the history of mankind! It is, in fact, the very opposite of health, and a very egregious human disservice. By forcing the current generation to pay for the sterilization and contraception of its own members and the abortion of the members of the next generation, you provide for only one eventuality: a future that is readily visible in the blatant, economically devastating demographic winter that already plagues Europe. You defy the very founding principles of these United States in order to pursue a course of action that will only lead to the literal death of our society. It is that simple.
Yet there is one more thing that I hope you will consider, not only for the sake of this great nation's future, but for the sake of your future. As a world leader, it behoves you to learn from the mistakes of every generation that has gone before us throughout history, and there is only one constant in that history. As I am sure you are well aware, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan of the Archdiocese of New York, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, has graciously warned you that your unrelenting attack on the pre-societal institution of marriage and the family "precipitate[s] a national conflict between Church and State of enormous proportions and to the detriment of both institutions."6 I assure you that this unconstitutional HHS Mandate constitutes yet another attack in the same conflict. It goes without saying that with this unprecedented attack on the religious liberty of every American you are declaring war on each and every religion represented by the citizens of this great nation, but it shall suffice to focus only on the Catholic Church, notwithstanding the myriad of allies that have already rallied around her.
Search the history books, Mr. President: the Catholic Church is the oldest and largest continually-existing institution of any kind on the entire planet for one very pertinent reason: she has never backed down from a fight, she has never wavered in defence of the freedom and common good of all human persons everywhere, and she has never, ever been defeated. Certainly, there have been moments in history when she lost various battles, when her numbers dwindled and those who remained among her ranks were being constantly burned, hanged, tortured, and otherwise slaughtered wholesale by her adversaries, even to the point that those same adversaries came under the delusion that it was only a matter of time before she was utterly obliterated. Many supposedly great leaders have made this mistake throughout history, but they were always wrong. Like her Bridegroom, the Church's suffering on the cross-beams of history, even to the point of shedding blood as He did, lead only and inevitably to the Resurrection, the eternal conquering of death.7
Do not make the same mistake that so many before you have made. Their power was infinitely more assured than is yours, yet it was defeated by the Rock upon which the Church is built.8 They stood as monarchs with no one to challenge their thrones, as warlords with vast armies assuring their continued reign, as rulers of vast empires whose subjects revered them as gods. And yet their opposition to the Catholic Church ended only in their own demise. The Roman Empire killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of Catholics, only to itself be subsumed into the Catholic Church with the rise of Constantine. The French Revolution thought to have wiped Catholicism clean off the face of the French countryside, yet the Revolution ended and the Catholic Church resurfaced to minister to the embattled people of France. Napoleon vowed to destroy the Church, yet he was himself exiled and the Pope sat placidly on the Chair of Peter. Hitler conquered the whole of Europe, killing priests and Catholics wherever he found them, yet the very Pope who spoke out against him died peacefully on the Chair of Peter while the Reich's ruler cowered in fearful suicide in a bunker-grave of his own making.
All these were men of exceedingly greater power than you now have; your power comes from the American people, and at most you have only 5 years left to wield it. Yet, in striking out against the Catholic Church─that great indefatigable vanquisher of the ages─you have simultaneously struck at the very heart of America. You stand in defiant opposition to the free exercise of religion that this nation's Constitution guarantees to every single one of the very same Americans upon whose votes you depend; indeed millions of them listen to the very same Catholic bishops who are at this very moment speaking out against your wildly unconstitutional mandate.
I pity you, Mr. President, because you have roused not only the sleeping dragon of the American people, but moreover you have roused a sleeping Lion: the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. For your own sake, I hope and pray that you relent and wave the white flag. If you do not, this will only end badly for you, just as it did for Nicanor9. You have already lost one case10 in which you attempted to trample upon the First Amendment; neither the American people, nor the Catholic Church will stand idly by as you try again. You will fail, and it will cost you your Presidency.

Respectfully,
Jackford R. Macarius B. Kolk

1. "Group health plans sponsored by certain religious employers, and group health insurance coverage in connection with such plans, are exempt from the requirement to cover contraceptive services.  A religious employer is one that:  (1) has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit organization under Internal Revenue Code section 6033(a)(1) and section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii)." Women's Preventive Services: Required Health Plan Coverage guidelines. http://www.hrsa.gov/womensguidelines/.  Accessed 3 February 2012.
2. Bishop David A. Zubik, Diocese of Pittsburgh. To Hell with You. http://diopitt.org/bridging-gap/hell-you . Accessed 3 February 2012.
3. Women's Preventive Services: Required Health Plan Coverage guidelines. http://www.hrsa.gov/womensguidelines/.  Accessed 3 February 2012.
4. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redressof grievances." United States Constitution. Amendments to the Constitution, Article I. http://constitutionus.com/ Accessed 3 February, 2012.
5. Stat Trek: The Next Generation, "The Drum Head," Sir Patrick Stewart as Captain Jean-Luc Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Sati.
6. Letter to the President on the Sacredness of Marriage from Archbishop Timothy Dolan. http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/promotion-and-defense-of-marriage/upload/dolan-to-obama-doma-letter-sept-20-2011.pdf. Accessed 3 February 2012.
7. cf. G.K. Chesterton. The Everlasting Man, Book II, Chapter VI.
8. "And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! … And I tell you, you are [Rock], and on this Rock I will build My Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it." Matthew 16:17-18, RSV:CE
9. cf. II Maccabees 14:26-15:39
10. Supreme Court of the United States Syllabus "Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Et Al."  Argued October 5, 2011.  Decided January 11, 2012.