By now, you may have seen this picture of my friend and former co-worker Michael Hichborn, praying at the Supreme Court while awaiting Monday’s ruling in _Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius_.
It’s apparently made CNN, Time and various other mainstream media outlets.
The woman things she’s being ironic, but the real irony is how she’s demonstrating the absurdity of her position and the slogan.
1. It makes no sense. *Maybe* it makes sense in the context of contraception, but not abortion, as abortion has to do with the uterus, not the ovaries. You would think people so concerned about “women’s health” would have the basic facts.
2. As far as how the slogan is relevant, we have nothing against ovaries. Indeed, we want ovaries to work properly, not be poisoned with chemical contraceptives.
3. Most importantly, and as I noted, what threat do “our rosaries” pose? As this troubled young lady demonstrates, what threat is Michael Hichborn posing her saying his Rosary there in front of SCOTUS? He’s not a speaker. He’s not holding a sign. He’s just kneeling and praying. For all she knows, he’s praying *for* her “side” (he isn’t , but she doesn’t know that). Either way, how does prayer hurt anybody?
a. If one accepts that prayer us ultimately, “Thy will be done,” and they believe they are in accordance with God’s will, shouldn’t they welcome it?
b. If they believe that prayer is ultimately meaningless words to a non-existent deity, then shouldn’t they be happy that people are “wasting time” praying rather than, again, “actively” protesting?
c. Do they really know what they’re doing is wrong and fear God so much that they don’t want to be reminded of it? Do they truly believe prayer is efficacious and fear having to actually change in conformity with God’s grace?