The Corner

Elizabeth Warren Argues the Extreme Mandate Position

Earlier this week, Elizabeth Warren, formerly of the Obama administration, contended that current conscience protection efforts like the Blunt bill in the Senate are an “all new attack on health care. Any insurance company could leave anyone without health care, just when they need it most.” 

Not so. The Blunt legislation and its Fortenberry companion in the House would simply restore our religious liberty rights pre-Obamacare. The new attack comes from the Obama administration, on the conscience rights of Americans.

She, of course, is running for the Senate seat Scott Brown currently holds. He is a co-sponsor of the Blunt legislation and defends it today in the Boston Herald. He opens:

Republicans and Democrats don’t come together nearly enough these days, and when we do it’s usually because of something we all recognize as clearly out of line. It takes a really bad idea to reveal our shared convictions on issues bigger than politics. That is the case with the new mandate from the Obama administration requiring religious organizations to offer insurance coverage for practices that go against the teachings of their church, violate the tenets of their faith and step on their constitutional protections. 

Like I said earlier, President Obama sure knows how to inadvertently unite.

Senator Brown continues:

Basically the government is saying, “Just do what you’re told, and leave the moral questions to us.” This runs against religious liberty, the Constitution, the consciences of millions of Americans and the independent spirit of Massachusetts. We don’t take well to imperious commands from Washington, and if we meekly submit to this mandate, you can be sure that a lot more will follow. 

I suspect Warren, who calls the bill “extreme” will not be convinced. And like Martha Coakley before her will continue to take issue with Brown’s defense of conscience, as a soldier of faux “women’s health” spin.

Thank Scott Brown for fighting this fight. And make sure your representatives have heard from you — a word of thanks if they are defending our religious liberty, a word of persuasive insistence if not! 

Most Popular


The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More

Billy Graham: Neither Prophet nor Theologian

Asked in 1972 if he believed in miracles, Billy Graham answered: Yes, Jesus performed some and there are many "miracles around us today, including television and airplanes." Graham was no theologian. Neither was he a prophet. Jesus said "a prophet hath no honor in his own country." Prophets take adversarial ... Read More
Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More