Editor's Note: Wednesday, July 2, 2014
Warren Throckmorton, author of the cited Daily Beast article concerning Mark Driscoll's business relationship with Tyndale House Publishers, provided the following statement via email to The Christian Post:
"My reporting regarding Tyndale House and Resurgence Publishing was based on information disclosed to me by Todd Starowitz, senior public relations manager at Tyndale. I reported it accurately as Mr. Starowitz now confirms. Tyndale House had ample opportunity to provide additional information last week in response to multiple questions from me but did not choose to do so. I hope Tyndale House will now fully accept the responsibility for providing incorrect information. …" more >>
It's been a bad year for the Obama Administration at the U.S. Supreme Court. Just last week the Court released opinions striking down three of the President's recess appointments and nullifying a law that prevented pro-life protests in certain spaces around abortion clinics. On Monday, the Court handed down its long awaited decision in the Hobby Lobby case and ruled in favor of the company, 5-4.
In Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby, Inc., Hobby Lobby and two other closely held for-profit corporations joined in suing the government on the grounds that the contraceptive mandate of the Affordable Care Act required the owners to violate their religious beliefs in providing these products to their employees. Hobby Lobby, et. al, were not seeking an exemption as to all forms of contraception, rather, just four types out of the 20 approved by the FDA. Notably, the government had already provided religion-based exemptions of this exact nature to certain non-profits, but argued that the exemption should not extend to for-profit corporations.
The plaintiff corporations sued under the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA) which required the Court to determine whether or not the government's contraceptive mandate "substantially burdened" an individual's exercise of religion; if so, the mandate could only be allowed to stand if it were shown to be the least restrictive, or narrowest, means to further a "compelling governmental interest." more >>
The pithy, catch-phrase "abortion distortion" is frequently used to describe how rules of law, logic, and common sense go by the wayside whenever abortion is involved. The phenomenon is easily detected.
What invasive, medical procedure – besides an abortion – can a minor obtain without parental consent or knowledge?
What surgical center – besides an abortion clinic – can avoid regulatory standards for surgical centers? more >>
Following the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision to allow Hobby Lobby to not cover certain types of birth control on religious grounds, Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Commission, blasted President Barack Obama's treatment of religious liberty issues.
"This administration has shown a shocking audacity when it comes to restricting religious liberty," Moore told reporters on Monday afternoon.
"Not only in terms of the HHS mandate, but also, remember the Hosanna Tabor decision which was decided 9-0 in the Supreme Court, but in which the administration argued against a ministerial exemption, [which] would have put the government in direct supervision of religious entities when it comes to hiring," he continued. "I think there's a general attitude on the part of the administration that's very troubling when it comes to religious liberties." more >>
In a landmark religious freedom case the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Woods Specialties, stating that corporations can refuse to provide certain drugs that may abort a fetus on the basis of religious objection.
In a five to four decision, the highest court in the land ruled that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to privately owned businesses like Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Woods Specialties.
The decision was narrowed to only the contraceptive mandate and is not necessarily applicable to all insurance mandates, like blood transfusions or vaccinations. more >>
"I'm so glad you are doing this, Jenny. But I cannot write about my experience. It is still too painful."
"This" refers to the Ruth Institute's Kids Divorce Stories initiative. This completely free and open feature gives people a chance to talk about their childhood experiences, going through their parents' divorces. People talk about what it was like for them when they watched their father walk away for the last time. They write about feeling like second-class citizens within the new reconstituted families. They write about having only one or two photos of themselves with both of their parents, or about watching their mom cut all the photos of their dad out of the family photo album.
"The kids will be fine as long as their parents are happy." "Kids are resilient. They will get over it." These cultural lies are designed to console adults who have decided to leave a low-conflict marriage, or to exonerate adults who have decided to leave their spouses for a new love interest. more >>