Hillary Wants to Change Your Religion Or Else

The last time we had a candidate who talked about fundamentally changing something and voters didn’t pay attention, we wound up with President Obama and his plans for a Third World America.

So listen up, people, because this is serious.

Hillary Clinton just told attendees at the Women in the World Summit that she is willing to use government authority to change religious beliefs in support of abortion.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Godfather Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Rust Belt Boom Under Trump, Jobs Streaming Back to Ohio, Penn., Mich., Wisc.

That’s my interpretation. Let’s see if you agree with it.

Hillary was railing on about women’s rights, with the mandatory feminist undertone that abortion somehow secures those: “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.”

Reading through the “code,” when Hillary says reproductive health care, she means abortion and possibly birth control. I assume that, but I think it’s a safe assumption because I’ve never heard of anyone opposing pap smears.

When she says women are denied access, she really means that some employers object to being forced to paying for those things in company health plans, causing women to pay for them themselves. Hillary made that plain by zinging Hobby Lobby to a round of estrogen-charged applause. Notice that no one in that case is being denied anything, they’re just not getting it for free.

As for laws not counting unless they’re enforced, and rights having to exist in practice, not on paper, I’m again reading between the lines to detect that she’s referring to the supposed right to kill your unborn child. Funny how Democrats never note the rights actually protected in writing by the piece of paper called the Constitution.

So that’s Hillary’s preamble. In a paraphrase: Women aren’t being allowed to kill their children easily enough, and government should help with that.

Now here’s the real statement of intent:

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. As I have said and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the 21st century, and not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

The laws she’s talking about, of course, are those regarding abortion, though she’d probably extend that umbrella to homosexual marriage, as well.

Now, the key part, those deep-seated codes, beliefs and biases — those are what is known among English speakers as traditional values or morals.

And what does she think of such traditional values? They have to be changed in order to uphold abortion laws. And how does she propose to change traditional religious beliefs? By using resources and political will.

In other words, she just advocated using government resources and power to interfere with your religious beliefs if you don’t support abortion.

I’ve read over her quotes several times, and I don’t think my take is off base. Liberals will say it is, but then liberals say all kinds of stupid things. I’d like to hear the opinions of some reasonable people in the comments section because, frankly, I think Hillary’s words should send chills up the spines and down into the bowels of every God-fearing American.

By the way, the New York Times’ headline on this speech was “Hillary Clinton implores audience to ‘become agents of change,'” and the line about religious beliefs didn’t make it into the story, all of which reinforces my notion that I am correct about Hillary’s meaning and the Times is doing its usual act of covering for a Democrat.

Your take?


Previous ACLU Wants to Force Catholic Charities to Kill Unborn Babies
Next Legal and Illegal Immigration have Negative Impact on America


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.