By Joe Newby
While speaking at the 2015 Women in the World Summit held in the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center, former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton made a shocking statement that has a number of people from both sides of the political aisle concerned.
“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth, and laws don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper,” she said. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will…And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”
Translation: Americans must change their religious beliefs to suit her.
Her comment sparked a flurry of criticism. Writing at The Blaze, Susan Calloway Knowles, a licensed psychotherapist and former practicing family law attorney, said Clinton was clearly taking aim at Christians in America who do not agree with her views on abortion.
“It was perhaps Clinton’s attempt to hammer the final nail into America’s proverbial coffin by lessening Christians’ religious, cultural, and familial beliefs,” she wrote. “If achieved, the result will be that God, the Bible and the U.S. Constitution which was founded upon Christian principles, will take a back seat to other progressive agendas, at least in a Clinton presidency. “
Kirsten Powers, a left-of-center columnist who sometimes appears on Fox News, also took Clinton to the woodshed in a recent USA Today op-ed entitled: “Saint Hillary seeks to save Christians from Christianity.”
“If Clinton is going to complain about cultural codes, perhaps she should dispense with the ‘reproductive health care’ euphemism and just say ‘abortion’ and ‘contraception,’” she said. “Then she should explain why she thinks she, or anyone else, has the right to dictate what religious people believe about either issue.”
Powers hit the nail square on the head. Aside from displaying a stunning bit of hubris, Clinton revealed her true desire – to dictate every aspect of the lives of average Americans, including their religious beliefs.
Powers, however, wasn’t finished. She added:
The intolerance, condescension and ignorance expressed about religious people is troubling enough in itself. But what sends chills up the spine is the barely veiled advocacy for authoritarianism when religious beliefs clash with secular sacred cows. After all, what entity will make religious leaders “take homosexuality off the sin list”? How exactly will Clinton change religious beliefs at odds with her worldview?
How, indeed.
While speaking at the New Jersey chapter of the American Camp Association in March, Clinton said America needs to set up camps that adults can attend – just for fun. But many saw something darker and more sinister in her statement.
At the time, the Daily Caller noted that the word “joycamp” was the Newspeak term for forced labor camps in George Orwell’s “1984.”
“You’ll forgive us if we don’t take a shower,” one Daily Caller reader sarcastically said. “Those who voted for the current Inspiring Leader will rush to the head of the line. A little later, the skeptical among them will be dragged to the fun family facility,” another person said.
Clinton was also hammered on Twitter, with many taking umbrage at her suggestion that Americans must bend their beliefs for her.
“If Hillary Clinton thinks we need to change our religious beliefs, Christians need to wake up,” one person tweeted. “Stand up! Stop being silent! Jesus is Lord!”
Many others weighed in:
Move over God, Hillary is coming to change our beliefs
Hillary Clinton has given us a look at some of the… http://t.co/VRjJbVEyDa
— jlgroce (@jlgroce) May 1, 2015
Hillary Clinton and the radical Left believe that protecting abortion is even more important than your religious… http://t.co/euhcTj9D8x
— Brennan Baker (@bmbaker1988) May 1, 2015
@schlichting1103 : Mrs. Clinton couldn't "change" the religious beliefs of my cold, dead body.👍
— 🌾MyNameMeansLady (@fiteswithheart1) May 1, 2015
https://twitter.com/jeromedalyofs/status/593822186760077312
It would seem that Clinton has been out of law school so long she has forgotten some of the basics. One of those basic principles is the concept that all Americans have the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
That means everyone has the right to express and hold whatever religious beliefs they choose. If someone, for example, wants to worship a bologna sandwich as a god, he or she is free to do so. And no one – not even Hillary Clinton – has the right to demand otherwise. It’s called “freedom.” Maybe she should Google it if she doesn’t have the time to attend a remedial class on the Bill of Rights.
Or better yet, perhaps she should focus on her own issues, some of which go back over 40 years.
“And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”
My cold dead hands are twitching.
I appreciate your perspective on this, Joe, but I really don’t share your worry about our government legislating away our free practice of religion. I don’t think it’s a very contentious statement to say that Clinton (like me) wants legal precedent like the Hobby Lobby case to be changed. Maybe she made a poor choice of words, but that’s all I take away from her “deep-seated cultural codes” line.
Am I understanding your take on this correctly, though: that Clinton wants to pass laws that infringe on our first-amendment rights, and this was a slip-up where she admitted it?
Another sign that the religious right is being persecuted!.
“That means everyone has the right to express and hold whatever
religious beliefs they choose. If someone, for example, wants to worship
a bologna sandwich as a god, he or she is free to do so. And no one –
not even Hillary Clinton – has the right to demand otherwise. It’s
called “freedom.” Maybe she should Google it if she doesn’t have the
time to attend a remedial class on the Bill of Rights.”
It also means people should not continually try to force their beliefs upon everyone else’s life as if they are the mouthpiece of God; indisputably knowing what is best for everyone. If you figure out what is best for you, just do it. Leave everyone else out of the equation.
“Or better yet, perhaps she should focus on her own issues, some of which go back over 40 years.”
What a profound concept for everyone, especially the religious right, to focus on.
Pull the rafter out of our own eyes and stop there. Then the religious right would not feel persecuted and the rights of others would not be constantly invaded. It is absolutely mind boggling when people do not understand that when you push someone, they will push back. This behaviour is not unique.
Unfortunately, none of this pointless pushing back and forth is new. It is just a continuation of a county stuck in what I consider and awkward infantile teenager mode that hopefully will some day soon grow up and join the rest of the adult world.
“Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which
are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the
most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in
hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the
present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every
denomination so far that we should never again see the religious
disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.”
George Washington — letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792
“We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all
religions shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for
honors and power we may expect that improvements will be made in the
human character and the state of society.”
Founding Father John Adams — letter to Dr. Price, April 8, 1785
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.”
James Madison — Letter to Wm. Bradford, April 1, 1774
“History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people
maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of
ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always
avail themselves for their own purposes.”
Thomas Jefferson — in letter to Alexander von Humboldt, December 6, 1813
“When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it
does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so
that its professors are obligated to call for help of the civil power,
it’s a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
Benjamin Franklin — letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780
“What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on
society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual
tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have
been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance
have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who
wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy
convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and
perpetuate it, needs them not.”
James Madison — “A Memorial and Remonstrance”, 1785
I think the quotes above are aptly reflected in Hillary Clinton’s quotes.
In short, go worship whomever and whatever you want “bologna sandwich” just keep it to yourself and leave everyone who doesn’t believe as you alone. To think and do otherwise, as if someone has a divine commission from God is delusional. If God has a problem with someone He or She will take care of it.
So there is this apparent epidemic of women who are being denied “reproductive healthcare” (abortions). Um, since 1973 there have been approx. 56 billion abortions preformed. THAT is the true epidemic. Pity her damned soul.
So, according to this evil incarnate there is an epidemic of women being denied ‘reproductive healthcare” – (abortions), yet since 1973, approx.. 60 million abortions have been perpetrated. Pity this hell-destined soul.
Silky, I read your comment for this post, and then to further understand where you are coming from I checked out some of your other comments on subjects such as race issues, etc.
As a result. I have just one question for you and one piece of advice.
Question: Are your parents siblings?
Advice: If you have something to say, raise your hand and place it over your mouth.
Calling you an idiot would be an insult to all the stupid people.
Much Respect,
Hillary
Hillary….just like a liberal excuse for a carbon based life form. you can not state facts to back up your claims. actually you made no claims. you just insulted some one whose views do not conform into your warped sense of morality and logic. how about you hold your forked tongue because this is a place of logical debate. so crawl back under your rock and leave the discissions to the grownups…ok cupcake.
Hey Hillary, the hospital called and said your records got mixed up, you were suppose to have been aborted….So I guess that means we won’t be seeing you here anymore, orders are orders and you don’t have any say about it.
I was really really hoping you would have a funny retort but what you said I find really really weird coming from someone who views abortion as abominable. (No, I’m not talking about the snowman) Also, is that anyway for a gentleman to speak to a lady? Tell her she’s been aborted.
To hopefully end this jabbering back and forth, which really is a waste of time, I’ll simply tell you to have a great weekend.
Oh come on Hillary, I thought you said you had a sense of humor…I guess it is not so funny to think that you could have easily been aborted….It is never too late for you to prove that is ok to take a life, whether it be in the womb or walking around it makes no difference…You are the one that is spewing it is ok to murder others, as long as you still have the right to live, it is ok.
I know it is a waste of my time trying to get you to see the other side of the story, and that’s fine, you’re free to believe what ever you choose to believe, you’re even free to condemn others who do not believe as you. So my comment is for all those people who would like to know both sides of the story and make an educated decision.
The “genetic definition” of personhood, as developed by the
evangelical Francis Schaeffer and former U.S. Surgeon General C.
Everett Koop, holds that science proves personhood at the moment of conception. Their argument follows that since the whole genetic
code is established when the ovum and sperm is united, and each
code is unique, a unique person is therefore created at the moment of conception.
However, because there is a continuum from conception to death, there is a difference between an actual person and a potential or possible person. A fertilized ovum, or zygote, is a cluster of cells; each of those cells is encoded with a specific DNA. If each of these cells is then to be considered a possible human being, then any time any cell is removed, through surgery for instance, a potential life is destroyed.
The brain itself is composed of approximately 100 billion brain cells
called neurons. These brain neurons do not even exist prior to four
weeks in utero, and the peak period for this brain neuron development is between two to five months in utero. There are also about 100 trillion connections between these neurons, called synaptic connections, by which neurons pass information amongst themselves. A minimum number of neurons must be developed in the cerebral cortex, and the interconnectivity of these neurons is absolutely essential, before states such as sensation, perception, and thought exist. While these synapses start to form at about the third month, the minimum number do not usually develop until about 31 weeks, and most are not formed until after birth.
For a fertilized egg, there is no consciousness and also no history of
consciousness (unless you believe in reincarnation). Even though all the DNA is there, the fact that there’s no higher brain activity means there is no consciousness.
Nor does the later presence of a heartbeat and of primitive neural
activity imply consciousness. What’s needed is higher brain activity and the consequent self-awareness.
Talk about convoluted logic. How is the preform child supposed to develop into a born person with self-awareness if he or she is murdered before they are given the chance to develop?
Tell it to the Muslims Hillbilly!
I would like to see Hillary become president. Aside from that, I am totally against abortion as it is murder of another human being. I don’t believe we will ever be able to vote for someone who agrees with everything we each to. Not possible. I like the things President Obama has done but don’t agree with abortion. You vote for whomever is closest to your beliefs and try not to focus on just one issue. Be that as it may, no president will ever determine what we do with our religion. They may want you to agree with them, may want you to follow God, but they cannot force this on the people of this country. That would be against the law.
This country if without the correct leadership could lead us down a path just like Nazi Germany.. If it happened there. It could happen to us..in any number of ways..That’s what the word tyranny means..The government if and when it goes broke, will cause such a wave of instability and loss of power. and can you please let me know how Hitler was able to do what he did even though I already know, So that others will hear it come from the mouth of the doubters of this country that it’s definitely possible to happen here ..I guess you like to vote for traitors..to this country.. Think what you like.. I’m not going to be able to change your mind.. and I don’t think that is possible..You probably vote Democrat all your life without blinking an eyeball..And I am not fond of RINO’S either they are traitors as well..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_RP-3Jmejs
Man…I always love checking in to the minds of the extremists. And that’s because I KNOW I can find hypocrisy somewhere. With this one it reared its head in a few places but my favorite was, “It’s called “freedom.”
From the Christian perspective that freedom doesn’t apply to abortion. Clinton’s point was that because of religion women are disallowed from having access to their LEGAL RIGHT to an abortion. And they are. She’s absolutely right.
But let’s face it. Articles like this serve one purpose and that’s to appeal to those who are in need of an enemy. The “Us vs. Them” concept LIVES at the center of religion and conservative politics. Want to walk the walk when it comes to “Freedom?” Push to make abortions as safe and accessible as possible. Because YOUR religion should have no more influence over our laws than the person who prays to a rock.
Amen!
A legal right is not a moral right, and it is high time you ignorants learned the difference between the two. Murdering your own offspring is not a moral right. Making something legal does not make it moral unless your god is your government. Championing the lives of the unborn is not hatred, it is love. Liberals: Brave enough to murder their own offspring, but too cowardly to kill the enemies of freedom.
Very cool! Never saw the Atheist/Christian view before. Thanks.
Liberalism is indeed a mental disease and your mad ramblings lend credibility to the claim. No, freedom does not apply to the murdering of unborn humans. As for your ludicrous claim that religion does indeed deny a woman the legal right to an abortion, how exactly does religion do that? Are there priests with guns standing outside abortion clinics? I’d further like you to explain how religion denies women access to safe childbirth. Of all the stupid things in Clinton’s speech, this may have been the dumbest.
The “US vs.Them” concept lives at the center of all politics including the left-wing brand of politics you obviously practice. Your failure to admit that demonstrates more than a little hypocrisy on your part.
Speaking of hypocrisy, if Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann gave a speech in which they said with regard to liberals that “deep-seated cultural codes, beliefs and structural biases had to be changed” to bend to their beliefs, you’d come unglued. Hillary says it and it’s no problem for you.
Liberals are by far the most hypocritical people on the planet. They bitch about the Koch brothers being involved in politics, but give George Soros a free pass. Liberals claim to support women’s rights, but say nothing of the atrocities against women committed by Muslims. The last time I checked, Christians weren’t performing clitectomies on baby girls. Liberals claiming to be feminist took O.J.’s side of the Nicole Simpson case and sided with pervert Bill Clinton over all the women he molested. Back in 2008, the left obsessed with a DUI received by Todd Palin when he was in his early twenties, but did not seem to care at all about the three incidents of drunk driving by Barack Obama Sr. In one he lost his legs, in another he killed someone, in the final accident he killed himself. What did we hear from the left on this? Not a damned thing!
Liberals also give Muslims a free pass when it comes to their treatment of homosexuals. The last time I checked, Christians weren’t stoning homosexuals to death. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on gay rights activists to protest outside of a mosque anytime soon. When blacks turning out to vote for Obama also helped to vote down gay marriage in California, the gays protested outside of the predominantly white churches only, not churches with predominantly black membership. I can’t imagine why TeeJayz, can you? Unless of course democrats historically and hypocritically always give a free pass to their fellow democrats.
Finally, Liberals bitch about global warming while living carbon polluting lifestyles themselves. John Travolta who practically has an airport attached to his house, Harrison Ford who admits to flying down the coast just to eat at his favorite hamburger joint, and Al Gore who owns an energy guzzling mansion are in no position to ask the rest of us to dial our lifestyles back a couple of centuries because of their unsubstantiated anthropogenic global warming beliefs. Green rules are apparently only for the little people.
Is there hypocrisy and intolerance on my side of the political aisle? Of course there is. It exists on your side as well. The difference between us is that I’m capable of admitting it and you are not.
Could not of said it BETTER! In the immortal words of a theist… AMEN
Praise ‘your’ god!
Hey Cun^lery, why don’t you crawl those fat things of your over here and MAKE ME CHANGE MY VIEWS … you’be bring an army be-atch.
TreMENdously mature.
This translation by Joe Newby of Hillary’s statement is about as good as the legendary mistranslation of the Japanese word mokusatsu. https://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/tech_journals/mokusatsu.pdf
and is about as likely to lead to similar culturally symbolic consequences in a war in which the weapons are the machine guns of their tongues as it is a great example and illustration of the willful spewing spin machine of the right which has no other recourse any longer than to use every ill-formed logical fallacy in the book in order to exploit people’s fear and resentment.
You claim to be Christian while making such dramatic slander all the while questioning Hillary’s own Christianity.
Where does science even fit into your faith, one cannot help wondering, as well.
After all it says something, quite a bit, when certain forms of Christianity deny and therefore must a live a daily LIE at every turn in their denial of what science has proven with empirical evidence to be true, in terms of health, the environment, sexuality and an endless list.
Hillary did not say she herself would have to change religion, but was referring to beliefs in general needing to change for reform to happen.
You write as if she is the only thinking person who has made such statements!
You are making her a convenient scapegoat.
Indeed, many philosophers and great thinkers have said such things before Clinton, who have affected the course of where we are in human history and I for one am thankful for these brave men and women.
She just happens to be a woman who is going to run for president.
This is so ridiculous. Americans don’t have to change their religious beliefs so that OTHER people have the right to birth control! If it’s against your religious beliefs, then don’t use it! The author is actually saying “all Americans need to give up their rights in order to suit MY religion.”
Wrong. The left is saying that unborn babies have to give up their right to life so they can shack up with whoever they want without being inconvenienced by the results. The rest of us are standing up for those unborn children, who have the same right to life as you or I do.
It’s very telling that you’re so vehemently “standing up” for unborn children, but I don’t see you or any republicans “standing up” for the children out there that are ALREADY born and living in poverty.
Millions of American children live in poverty. Don’t you think the richest country in the world should maybe take care of it’s children that are already born instead of forcing women to have more children they can’t support?
Or standing up for children raped ‘by’ all religions.
[…] Hillary Clinton: Americans must change religious beliefs to suit me – While speaking at the 2015 Women in the World Summit held in the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center, former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton made a shocking statement that has a number of people from both sides of the political aisle concerned. […]
This ado is ridiculous. I think her point was that abortion should remain legal, as should contraception, regardless of what some religious people may think. That’s pretty much it.
I do understand that if you think abortion is murder, then you probably want it illegal.
END THESE DECEPTIONS -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_RP-3Jmejs
“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth, and laws don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper,” she said. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will…And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”
Since when is “safe childbirth” an expression used to denote abortion? The expression “reproductive healthcare” can refer to a LOT of things besides birth control and abortion….it seems that the expressions are actually COUNTER-intuituve. This article is pretty much a manufactured point of contention where none actually exists.
Regarding the title of the article…all I have to say is that there are a lot of various denominations that believe a lot of different things. Some are very, very backward and believe that the job of the church is to police the bedrooms of those who are not their members as well as interfere in the creation of the laws of society that we live by. We are told in the Bible that we have a DUTY not to antagonize those who are not members of our body, because we cannot convert them if we are speaking out of turn. It is my belief that Ms. Clinton was addressing those churches who cannot seem to stop interfering in affairs that are not described in the Bible as Christian duties.
Here’s a thought for you to consider. Christians don’t care who you screw or how you screw. We care about the results (a baby) who has the same right to life that you currently enjoy, but would deny to that child. It’s amazing that the people who are so quick to deny life to an unborn child, have already been afforded that same right by their own parents. “Freedom for me, but not for thee” seems to be your motto. Since those unborn babies do not yet have the ability to speak for themselves, it is up to those of us who have a voice to speak up for them.