We’ve noted for a while, under the rubric “you will be made to care,” the fact that people of faith no longer have the ability to ignore the culture and live their faith unmolested. This is not an accident. It is a deliberate policy of the Obama administration which has reached back into history to the administration of another socialist president, Franklin Roosevelt, for guidance and substituted “freedom of worship” for “freedom of religion.” This is more than a semantic difference. Worship is generally confined to one’s home or church. Religion is a part of your character and should form you actions and interactions. Wedding photographers, bakers, and bed and breakfast hosts have been among the first to feel the pain inflicted by a regulatory state harnessed to a hostility to religion.
Now from Indiana:
A federal grand jury decided the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend will have to pay out nearly $2 million to a teacher it fired for violating the morals clause of her contract, by using artificial means to get pregnant.
The jury found the diocese guilty of violating the Civil Rights Act as a result of its decision to uphold its Catholic identity by enforcing the morals clause, which applies to all teachers working in diocesan schools.
The jury of five women and seven men deliberated five and a half hours Dec. 19 before announcing that the Indiana diocese unlawfully discriminated against Emily Herx on the basis of her sex, when they declined to renew her contract in June 2011.
Agree or not, there are two salient facts here. First, that the Catholic Church teaches that in vitro fertilization is a grave moral wrong:
2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ “right to become a father and a mother only through each other.”167
2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one …read more