Richard Land is President of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.

Note to our readers: Many Christians – both Catholics and evangelicals – have expressed profound concern about the Obama administration’s decision to force employers to include abortifacients in all health care insurance plans (including those who have religious objections to being required to do so). Although the House of Representatives passed a measure to allow for moral exceptions to this requirement, the Blount amendment failed by just a few votes in the Senate this week. Richard Land, President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC, provides a Christian perspective and reflects on First Amendment rights to help our readers grapple with this important issue.

Let’s begin by making one thing crystal clear. The debate generated by the Obama administration’s requirement that virtually all health care insurance plans provide free contraceptives, abortifacients (abortion-causing drugs) and sterilization services is not a debate about contraception or “reproductive services.”

This debate is about coercion, not Catholics; conscience, not contraception; and freedom, not fertility.

We believe as Americans that every human being has a God-given right of freedom of faith and conscience. Due to our forefathers’ persecutions, persistence and insistence, this freedom is acknowledged and recognized in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The “free exercise of religion” goes well beyond the “freedom of worship” concept so often used today by those who fail to understand, or reject, the Constitution’s religious freedom protections. For them freedom of worship is restricted to church and home, to the space between your ears and the space between your shoulders. But free exercise of religion is far more robust and includes the rights to share one’s faith and to live out its implications in the social and economic spheres — in other words, the freedom to exercise or act and the right not to be coerced. We must not stand by and allow our God-given rights to religious freedom, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, to be atrophied, confined and restricted into mere freedom of worship.

The Obama administration’s recent actions, as Cardinal Dolan said in his Feb. 22 letter to his fellow Catholic bishops, “have attempted to reduce this free exercise to a ‘privilege’ arbitrarily granted by the government as a mere exemption from an all-encompassing, extreme form of secularism.” Cardinal Dolan has hit the proverbial nail on the head. This controversy is about conscience, not contraception. In America our First Amendment freedom of religion does not depend on government benevolence or toleration. Typical of the secular mindset dominating the media and the higher precincts of the Obama administration is the misguided declaration of New York Times columnist Nicolas Kristoff who wrote in a recent column (Feb. 22): “The basic principle of American life is that we try to respect religious beliefs, and accommodate them when we can.”

Given this secularist mindset one could argue that the HHS mandate violates not only the First Amendment’s free exercise clause, but the establishment clause as well. When the federal government asserts the right to universally mandate actions, trample religious convictions, and then grant exemptions to those it chooses, the government is behaving perilously like a secular theocracy granting ecclesiastical indulgences to a chosen few.

Our forefathers knew how tenuous, unreliable, and intolerant such government toleration could be. Roger Williams, a 17th-century Baptist minister and the founder of Providence Plantations (later Rhode Island) asserted that, “Man hath no power to make laws to bind conscience,” and went on to say that forcing a person’s conscience was “the rape of the soul.”

Thomas Jefferson, chief drafter of the Declaration of Independence and our nation’s third president, argued in 1779 during the campaign for the Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, that “to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.” Jefferson, in the last year of his presidency (1809), looking back on the accomplishments of the American Revolution, declared, “No provision of our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprise of the civil authority.”

The great 18th-century Baptist leader John Leland, friend and colleague of both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, who help framed the First Amendment free exercise clause, declared “that religion is a matter between God and individuals, religious opinions of men not being the objects of civil government nor in any way under its control” (1791).

Indeed, at the time of the American Revolution, when our forefathers took on the world’s first superpower, the British Empire, the Continental Congress (1775), needing every able-bodied man to fight off a powerful invading force intent on crushing the rebellion, granted exemption from military service to the Moravian and Quaker colonists whose religious convictions included the renunciation of participating in war. Of course this tradition has been continued with the government granting conscientious objector status from a military draft for those with similar religious convictions throughout our history, even when the government was under dire threat. In modern times Pope John Paul II correctly identified religious freedom as the “first freedom” and as “the premise and guarantee of all freedoms that ensure the common good.” In his 1999 papal letter, “Respect for Human Rights” Pope John Paul II explained: “Religion expresses the deepest aspirations of the human person, shapes people’s vision of the world and affects their relationships with others; basically, it offers the answer to question of the true meaning of life, both personal and communal. Religious freedom therefore constitutes the very heart of human rights.”

People of all faiths — and no faith — should rise up and demand that the Obama administration rescind its HHS mandate that insurance-subsidized and free contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization procedures be required of all but churches. Such government coercion of conscience is intolerable.

The president’s supposed “compromise” of having insurance companies pay for these services is an accounting trick, a distinction without a difference. The cost to the insurance companies will be built into the premiums, paid by the religious organization or the individual.

This controversy is about freedom, not fertility. As Cardinal Dolan asks in his letter, “If the government can, for example, tell Catholics that they cannot be in the insurance business today without violating their religious convictions, where does it end?”

Indeed! Let’s all understand what is at stake here. Unless you are a priest or a minister working for a church or you work for a firm with less than 50 employees, here is the dilemma you will face. If the U.S. Supreme Court does not strike down Obamacare’s mandate that all people purchase health insurance upon penalty of a substantial fine, and if Obamacare, unimpeded, takes effect as scheduled Jan. 1, 2014, millions of Americans will be faced with a tortuous choice. If you have religious conscience objections to subsidizing contraception, or abortifacients, or sterilization in your health insurance program, you will face a stark choice. Under Obamacare, all health insurance programs will be required to offer free reproductive services (i.e. contraception, abortifacients, sterilization), which means that many Americans will face the choice of violating their deeply held religious convictions and purchasing health insurance which forces them to financially subsidize that which they find unconscionable (i.e. reproductive services) or pay a substantial fine for declining to purchase health insurance and not having health insurance for their families.

A government imposed fine for following your religious convictions? In America? Say it isn’t so! Our Founding Fathers would be aghast.

Maybe you haven’t seen this video of a young man making this poetic “speech” about being sorry for being a Christian.  He even uses the F word a couple of times in his “poem.”  It makes you wonder why he felt the need to use the F word in a poem, where he was going after Christians and others for all the ills of Christendom that he sees.  You can see his “poem” on this site  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EieFdXy_HwM on youtube.  I warn you now that he has a potty mouth, and he uses the F word.  But, he recites this “poem” to the jeers of the crowd.  They’re especially happy, and you can hear the laughter, when he apologizes right off the bat for being a Christian.

Well, I’m not sorry for being a Christian.  I’m not sorry for calling sin what it is…sin.  I’m not sorry for saying that sin will be judged by God.  Why am I not sorry?  Because a lost man’s sins will be judged by God.  And, the lost crowd needs to hear that.  How can a lost man be saved, until he sees his need of a Savior?  He cant.  So, why would I apologize for calling sin what it is, and for telling people that God is not happy with our sins?  I know that some lost people will call that intolerance, and they’ll think it’s mean and narrow; but it’s the truth.  The truth shall set you free.

Also, I’m sad about the loss of life at the hands of the Crusaders and the Catholic Church.  But, why should I apologize for the Crusades that happened hundreds of years ago.  I wasnt there.  I didn’t do it.  So, why should I apologize for something that happened hundreds of years ago.  Why, it wasn’t even my Church that did this thing.  It wasn’t a Southern Baptist Church.  It wasn’t any Churches that came out of the Reformation.  So, why should I, a 48 year old Believer, apologize  for something that some misguided people did a long time ago?  Why would any Christian feel the need to bring this up and apologize for it?  Why would this make anyone be sorry that they’re a Christian.  I’m not sorry that I’m a Christ Follower, just because of what some knights did back in the dark ages.

BTW, while we should love gay people, I’m certainly not sorry for calling homosexuality what it is.  It is sin.  It is sin that God will judge.  Now,  I know that God will also judge the adulterers and the liars and the thieves and all other sinners.  But, this young man seems to be saying that he’s sorry for calling homosexuality a sin.  Well, young man, it is a sin.  And, those people, who die in this sin, will go to Hell.  They need to be saved, and I do pray that they’ll be saved and go to Heaven.  I love gay people.  I do not hate gay people.  I wish that everyone of them would get saved today.  I certainly hope that I get to spend eternity with all the gay people in this world, because they repented and put their faith in Jesus.  I really do.  But, should I apologize for calling homosexual sex what it is?  A sin.  Never.

Also, I hate that there are homeless people, and I really hate that some men beat their wives.  I wish every homeless person had a home, and I wish that every wife beater would have to spend 30 minutes with CB Scott in a locked room by themselves.  But, you know what?  There will always be homeless people. Jesus said that the poor will always be here. And, some people are homeless because of the bad choices they’ve made in life, and people will continue to make bad choices, and do things like drink alcohol, use drugs, gamble, etc.  And, these choices will cause them and their family to suffer financially, and in many other ways.  Why should I, as a Christ Follower, apologize for the homeless?  I didn’t make them that way, nor can we give them all a home.  Some of them dont even want a home!  Also, why should I apologize and be sorry that I’m a Christian, because of what some drunken, mean man did to his wife?  Christians didn’t make this man into a wife beater.  Christians cant stop men from being wife beaters.  There will always be mean, ornery men out there, who will beat women and children.  That’s just a sad fact of life, and a result of the fall of man.  So, why would this make me be sorry for being a Christian?  I don’t get it.

Also, what Indian tribe was wiped out in the name of the Church?  I thought it was done, because white men wanted the land.  Some of it was done, because white men thought that gold was on the land that the Indians claimed belonged to them.  Why bring the Church into this?  Was General Custer a Christian attacking Indian tribes for some Church?  I mean, really; is some school out there teaching young people that the Church wiped out Indian tribes in America?

As I listened to this video, I was also left wondering if all Christendom should be blamed for the child abuse that has happened in  some Churches?  I was left wondering if preaching the Gospel was something that a Christian should apologize for?  And, did Christians bring in the plague?  Really?  And, maybe he doesn’t know about all the 15 year old girls and others that have been helped by all of the Christian pregnancy centers and Christian counselors that have helped women deal with the awful affects of abortion? Another thing, did Christians start wars between the nations?  Did Christians start WW I; WW II; or the Gulf War?  I don’t recall Dr. R. G. Lee declaring war on Germany.  I don’t recall Dr. A. T. Robertson declaring war on Japan.  Do yall?  What’s this guy talking about in this poem?  Why would anyone say that this poem is something that needed to be heard by all Christ Followers?  What’s the point of this young man’s poem?

This poem reminds me of my college days, where we had some flaky people floating around, who were anti-Church.  You know the types.  They don’t belong to a Church.  They don’t like to commit to anything.  They’d rather show up at a college, Bible study group every now and then; but they don’t get into commitment.  They’re unsound in their doctrine, and they really don’t like for anyone to help them understand the Bible better.  They’d rather complain and whine about all the bad things that they see in their minds about the Church.  Every thing is looked at thru negative glasses concerning the Church and sound doctrine.  I saw many young people on my college campus, back in my college days, who were just flaky and out there, in deep center field, on the fringe, who just saw everything negatively.  Everything was bad, and they were the ones, who could fix it, of course.

Well, I’m glad to be a Christian.  When I look at how most of the hospitals and orphanages in our world were started by Christians, I rejoice.  When I look at all the institutions of higher learning that Christians started, I rejoice.  When I look at all the people who’ve been helped by Churches and Pastors and Christian counselors, then I rejoice.  When I look at all the millions of people, who’ve been saved thru the years, by the witness of Christians and missionaries, I rejoice.  When I look at all the people, who have been ministered to by the prayers of faithful Christian people, I rejoice.  When I look at all the marriages that have been not only helped, but saved, due to the grace of God coming thru a Pastor’s sermons and counsel and prayers and encouragement, then I rejoice that I’m a Christian.  When I look at the people, who were at the brink of suicide, but some Christian helped them find hope in the Lord Jesus, then I rejoice.  When I think of the disaster relief teams that go out in the name of Jesus from SB Churches, and they help people in incredible, heartbreaking disasters, then I rejoice.  When I think about all the people that have been fed, their electric bills paid, their water bills paid, clothes bought, etc. ; paid  by Churches all over the USA and the world, then I rejoice.  And, I’m talking about every week, SB Churches in little towns and big cities all across this land, helping people keep the lights and the heat on; feeding children, etc.; then I rejoice.

I’m not sorry for being a Christian.  I’m thrilled to be a Christ Follower.  I’m excited about being a child of God.  I’m ecstatic about what God is doing thru the Church.  I’m delighted that God uses Christians to do so much good in our world.  Sorry?  Apologize?  Why?  Why should we apologize for being a Christian?  Aren’t you glad to be Christian?

We need to pray for our nation.  We need to pray for God to watch over us.  We need to ask God to give our national leaders some good sense and wisdom.  And, we need to look to God for our strength.  Also, in November, we need to remember who it was that tried to lead our country into socialism and bankruptcy.   At the next Presidential election, we all need to remember who it was that caused our nation to take such a drastic step in the wrong direction.  We need to remember who these people were who wanted our tax dollars to fund abortions.  We need to remember the ones who wanted our country to make this big change in direction towards socialism, and higher taxes, and more government control over our lives.  I will remember.  Will you?

During this time of the year we are reminded of the Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade.  This decision legalized abortion in America and the debate has been zealously argued every since.  I stand firmly that we should not take the life of an unborn child in the womb of his/her mother.  That is a human being in that womb it is not a potential human being.  Abortions in the first trimester vary in techniques.  One common technique is the Suction Aspiration.  In this technique we are told:  “Great care must be taken to prevent the uterus from being punctured during this procedure, which may cause hemorrhage and necessitate further surgery. Also, infection can easily develop if any fetal or placental tissue is left behind in the uterus. This is the most frequent post-abortion complication.” This is one of four various techniques used in the first trimester.  You can read about the others here. This violence to the unborn we have legalized in the first trimester must stop.

In the second and third trimester chemical and surgical procedures are used in combination to extract the baby from his/her mother.  These procedures vary. During the chemical procedure technique the physician would inject a harsh saline solution or/and other chemicals into the amniotic sac thus causing death to the infant and promoting premature birth before the baby has the chance to live.  The surgical procedures range from Partial Birth Abortions (which are exactly what they sound like; see here for a graphic detail) to a Hysteronomy (which is basically a Caesarean Section used after the chemical abortion has failed).  The violence to the unborn we have legalized in the second and third trimester must Stop.

In Kansas there is a case in which a judge has ruled Scott Roeder, the man accused of murdering Dr. George Tiller, will be able to argue his case was an act of voluntary manslaughter.  Voluntary manslaughter is defined in Kansas as one having “an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.”  Roeder, believed that his actions were required in order to put an end to partial birth abortions performed by the Kansas physician he is accused of killing.  My heart breaks for Mr. Roeder if he truly believes his deadly force was justified.  I would like to take our readers to the events that led to this trial.  According to the Associated Press;

The facts of the case are not in dispute: On a balmy Sunday morning, Roeder got up from a pew at Wichita’s Reformation Lutheran Church at the start of services and walked to the foyer, where Tiller and a fellow usher were chatting. Wordlessly, he pressed the barrel of a .22-caliber handgun to Tiller’s forehead and pulled the trigger.

If these are the facts of the case no one has a right to place the barrel of any gun to the head of any living human being, pulling the trigger to end his/her life, especially in church.  It seems that if Mr. Roeder truly believed his actions would prevent further abortions from being performed,after he used deadly force, he would have remained at the church until the police arrived.  Instead he took of running and allegedly pointed his weapon at those chasing him trying to subdue him.  If preachers are silent on the facts of a murder in the vestibule of a church, then we are hypocrites.  We cannot publicly condemn abortion procedures, especially the partial birth procedures, and remain silent when one takes the laws into their own hands to become judge, jury, and executioner.  This is just as much abortion violence as partial birth abortion and it too must Stop.