RALLY FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM TODAY
March 22nd, 2006 by Peter
The AP already has a story up on our rally, which is set to begin in less than an hour:
Religious conservatives are hoping for more victories in this year’s legislative session, following the death of a bill this week that would have required Catholic hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape victims.
The Family Institute of Connecticut, which fought the “morning after pill” legislation and last year’s civil unions law, is now focused on defeating bills that would recognize same-sex marriages from Massachusetts and expand anti-discrimination protections for transgendered individuals.
They’re banking on lawmakers being politically squeamish about having to vote on socially contentious topics as they face re-election in November.
“I think 2006 is going to be better than 2005 because it’s an election year,” said Peter Wolfgang, director of public policy for the institute.
The article quotes yesterday’s FIC alert about not being lulled into complacency by our victory against the pro-abortion pill bill and then proves our point by quoting proponents of the bill:
“Just because a religion owns a particular hospital doesn’t mean they get to set all the rules,” said state Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven.
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said his office is researching the issue to determine if a new law is even needed to require the hospitals to prescribe Plan B.
“We haven’t reached a conclusion that current law already covers it,” he said. “I think there’s a good argument (with) the involvement of these hospitals in the state insurance program.”
Blumenthal said no state official has yet asked his office to provide a formal opinion on what triggers the Catholic hospitals to be legally obligated to prescribe the pill.
How is it that those who hail legislative outcomes as an expression of democracy when it means the legalization of same-sex unions are the same people who try to do an end-run around the legislature when it kills a pro-abortion attack on religious freedom? Why, the same way those supposed champions of democracy could file a suit asking a court to impose same-sex “marriage” on Connecticut by judicial fiat, of course. The same AG who is researching new ways to attack religious freedom in Connecticut is also responsible for defending the state’s marriage laws in that case. But he is not talking about the most important issue in the case:
The Family Institute of Connecticut, a group that opposes gay marriage, has asked to intervene in the case, claiming the attorney general’s office is not vigorously defending Connecticut’s marriage laws. The state Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether the group can become part of the case.
Family Institute Executive Director Brian Brown, who was in court Tuesday, said his group believes the attorney general’s office should be arguing about the effect of gay marriage on children.
“I’m very worried about how this is going to turn out,” he said.
