Slate Calls Catholic Nuns’ Religious Beliefs “Weaseling”

Mark Rienzi, counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor, appeared on The Kelly File last week to discuss the Sisters’ case, as well as comments from the left media.

As Weasel Zippers put it, “Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times and Amanda Marcotte of Slate both take the cake.” Marcotte and Miltzik can barely contain their contempt for the Sisters, and repeat the ridiculous Obama administration claim that the whole thing boils down to a meaningless formality to be solved by an inconsequential signature on a practically imaginary piece of paper that will never have any practical impact on anything at all ever. One would think such tiny, insignificant matters wouldn’t merit the attention of the highest court in the land, wouldn’t one?

Weasel Zippers raises another important point:

Beyond that, if the nuns objection is not just on their refusal to back contraception, but on the Government’s lack of Constitutional right to dictate what is and is not “religious”, then signing anything would amount to a conceding of the Government’s role, which would be conceding the Constitutional point.

A concession such as that would be truly frightening indeed. You can read the rest of Weasel Zippers’ coverage here.

Previously at Right Scoop:
Pirro On Obamacare Contraception Mandate: YOU LIED!

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

WARNING: Our comment section is being blocked by ad blockers. So if you can't see it, then please disable your ad blocker and it should appear.