By JAIRED CROFUT
Contributing Writer
President Obama has illegally expanded the power of the federal government while showing little respect for the United States Constitution. I use the term illegally because he has done this by passing legislation that undermines first amendment rights. In particular, I am referring to the recent legislation passed by the Obama administration that requires health insurance plans provided by Catholic Universities to provide free birth control to women. I believe this legislation is a dangerous threat to our liberty and disregards some of the most basic values that characterize this nation.
The first amendment says that, “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 redress of grievances.” Although today few illegal scholars interpret the first amendment in an absolute literal sense, there are at least four general ways through which it is accepted that limitations on free speech can be made. The exceptions include; national security reasons, inciting violence, infringing upon other rights (such as 6th amendment rights to an impartial jury), and compelled speech. Of particular relevance to the matter at hand is the last exception, compelled speech. There are two Supreme Court cases that are of particular relevance in this instance. The first is Wooley V. Maryland, and the second is Hurley v. Irish-American Gay Group of Boston. However, due to time constraints this article will only address the latter case.
In 1993, a private organization called the South Boston Allied War Veterans Council was given permission by the city of Boston to organize and run the annual St. Patrick’s Day Parade. However, when a Massachusetts State Court mandate ordered the council to include the Irish American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston (GLIB) on account of a state law outlawing public discrimination of sexual orientation in public affairs, the South Boston Allied War Veterans Council made claims that the mandate violated their free speech. Eventually, the case (now referred to as Hurley v. Irish-American Gay Group of Boston) made its way all the way to the Supreme Court where a unanimous court decision held that position that the state mandate was unconstitutional on the basis that the order, “violate[s] the fundamental First Amendment rule that a speaker has the autonomy to choose the content of his own message and, conversely, to decide what not to say.” In other words, no private organization can be compelled or forced to say anything. The fact that the Veterans Council was a private organization protected them from having to comply with a government mandate that would have forced them to allow GLIB to take a place in their parade, thereby altering the content of the message they wished to present.
In light of this case, does the new legislation passed by the Obama administration not sound an awful lot like compelled speech? Keep in mind that health care, with the exception of Medicare and Medicaid, is a private organization. If health insurance plans that are provided by Catholic Universities do not wish to provide free birth control to women, then they have every right not to do so. The official position of the Catholic Church since 1968 has been against providing contraceptives to women on the basis of Human Vitae, a papal encyclical that defined the doctrine of the church. Obama has absolutely no right to force them to do otherwise without infringing upon their first amendment rights. Besides, if congressmen and women are really worried about women’s health, as they claim to be, they are wasting their time with this issue because there are plenty of other organizations that will hand out free birth control. If someone simply does not like the fact that certain insurance plans do not cover something, nobody is forcing him or her to stay with that same insurance provider. Is that not the beauty of the free market system?
In conclusion, this legislation is ipso-facto proof that our government has become too big and intrusive to the rhythm of our lives. Whether you agree with the Catholic Church or not on this issue is irrelevant. What is relevant to this discussion, however, is the unlawful expansion of the federal government. The Obama administration has ignored prior ruling within the Supreme Court that would have prevented this sort of atrocity from happening. It may be Catholic Universities today who are having their rights compromised; tomorrow however, it could be you.
