Christian-Owned Auto Dealership Granted Injunction Against Obamacare Abortion Pill Mandate

Car Dealership pdKANSAS CITY — A Christian-owned automotive dealership in Missouri has been granted an injunction against the abortion pill mandate in Obamacare.

Randy Reed Automotive in Kansas City had filed suit in October with the help of local attorney Kevin Smith and the Christian legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom. Reed, a Buick, Chevrolet and Nissan dealer, is a Christian, and therefore opposes paying for drugs that cause abortions.

“Plaintiff Randy Reed … believes that his operation of [his] companies must be guided by ethical social principles and Christian religious and moral teachings,” the legal complaint stated, “that individuals must operate their businesses according to the God-ordained ethics, religious and moral teachings of the Bible, and, that his faith prohibits him to sever his religious beliefs from his daily business practice…”

“Consequently, [Reed] believe[s] that it would be immoral and sinful …. to intentionally participate in, pay for, facilitate, or otherwise support abortifacient drugs, contraception, sterilization, and related education and counseling, as would be required by the mandate, through their inclusion in the health benefits paid for by Plaintiff,” it continued.

Reed currently has 179 employees and provides health care to each. However, when he recently asked his insurance provider, Coventry Insurance Group, to exclude coverage for abortifacients, contraception and sterilization, they were reportedly included anyway.

Upon discovery of their inclusion, Reed requested that the company immediately remove the coverage from the plan, but was informed that Coventry was obligated to comply with the mandates in the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Therefore, he pursued legal action against the Obama administration in an effort to block the requirement before his insurance policy renewed at the beginning of next year.

  • Connect with Christian News

“The mandate constitutes government-imposed coercion on [Reed] to change or violate [his] sincerely held religious beliefs,” the complaint stated. “The mandate exposes [Reed’s company] to draconian fines and other penalties for refusal to change or violate its and its owners’ religious beliefs.”

On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Ortrie D. Smith, nominated by Bill Clinton, granted the requested injunction to Randy Reed Automotive, and stayed the case until the U.S. Supreme Court issues a ruling in two related cases involving the mandate.

As previously reported, the Supreme Court announced last week that it would hear two cases surrounding the Affordable Care Act: Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius.

“The government shouldn’t be able to punish Americans for exercising their fundamental freedoms,” said ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman, who represents Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation. “The administration has no business forcing citizens to choose between making a living and living free. We trust the Supreme Court will agree. A government that forces any citizen to participate in immoral acts—like the use of abortion drugs—under threat of crippling fines is a government everyone should fear.”

ADF likewise applauded Justice Smith on Tuesday for his decision to grant the injunction to Randy Reed Automotive.

“The government has no business forcing citizens to choose between making a living and living free,” said Senior Legal Counsel Dale Schowengerdt. “Today’s order means that this family will be free from that type of coercion while higher courts are considering the administration’s mandate. If the government can force family business owners and job creators like this one to act contrary to their deepest convictions under the threat of fining them out of business, it is a danger to everybody.”

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Striving to bring you the news without compromise and with Christ in focus, we press on despite recent changes in Facebook and Google's algorithms, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational site revenue. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News Network supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Want to thank Randy Reed for standing for his belief. After reading the article I called the dealership he owns and wanted to see if they were closed on Sundays so the Christians at the christian owned store could attend church and grow in there faith. I was told law required them to be closed on Sunday. Then asked about Wednesday night they are open till.8:00 pm which is well past service times @ most all christian churches. Just thought it was odd be so strong on one thing and when it comes to something as important as hearing the Word of God put his business and pursuit of money ahead of his fellow Christians and employees to be able to go and worship the one he so strongly is trying to defend in court of law. Just curious not critical.

  • See above comments

  • Sir Tainly

    You don’t think that Christians all agree as to being anti-abortion do you? Now for a different (mine) perspective

    I do not believe that abortion is murder. Therefore it should remain a deeply personal and private choice for women and/or couples to grapple with and I wish them all peace.
    For whatever it’s worth to you (the argument frustrates many that seek to stop abortion in God’s name though.) Numbers 5: 11-31 is a record where it is recorded that God will give a miscarriage to a woman that has been unfaithful.
    I think that many people sincerely believe that abortion is murder, but they mistakenly seek to take the same option away from women or couples that may find themselves in a similar situation. Their version of purity and ethical integrity does not fit well with many people or their unique situations, but I do not deny them the freedom to not choose abortion either.
    In numbers God Himself aborts fetuses in certain situations, but these do-gooders think that they know it all. Abortion is not murder….unless you think that God is morally inferior to you as well based on Numbers 5
    Not to mention, that by subtly trying to stop abortion through “regulation” makes many of them bald faced liars because they lie as to their true intentions. Certainly not all of them lie without checking their own moral compass!?
    In this case our Supreme Court has made a statement by not hearing the case, amazing thing…that.
    Every Christian has the right to choose for themselves whether or not to have an abortion, so does everyone else in our country. But since according to the laws (both ours and God’s) abortion is not specifically a crime and even something that God himself has done assuming the ancient Jews ever carried out this ritual…..what exactly gives us the right to as employers, limit our employees options? What gives us the right?…..

    You can believe that abortion is murder, you can say that abortion is murder until you are blue in the face, you can get people whipped up into an emotional frenzy by talk about baby murderers, you can really bring in the tithes and offerings by preaching it to be murder……but I do not see where our laws or God’s actions (Nu 5) back you up in the least.
    Abortion is not murder….(Numbers 5)….
    In other words make your case….
    And even if you do manage to pull some kind of commandment, law, or statute out of your hat (I think not) the Lord is still merciful.

    The issue as I see it is that God gave all care and responsibility for a fetus to the mom first and foremost, and of course by association to anyone involved in her life. Care for pregnant women will of course reflect on us as a culture in God’s eyes I believe. But the choice is hers.
    There ARE NO STATUTES banning abortion, and even in this case an abortion (pretty much) is granted by God. And we don’t stone and vilify women publicly anymore since Jesus told the one woman that he did not condemn her either.
    So biblicaly speaking the urge to ban abortions may be ethically and spiritually refuted by any number of answers from “none of your dang business” TO “not only is your law stupid, but it has no resemblance whatsoever to anything God has said….EVER.”

    • Sir Tainly

      Sorry about the mistaken Supreme court reference, but if editing is available here I do not know how to use it. But I still think the point is sound, so I’ll leave the error without worrying too much about it.

      • Bottom line don’t make no difference what we think Hebrews 9:27 ” And as is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement.” Believe in God or don’t believe be a do gooder or not. You will die and you will stand before a holy and righteous God no matter how much you believe or don’t believe in Him.! And you can try to run what you think is right or wrong by Him. Either way God is God and your not.

  • Sir Tainly

    Well Mr. O’Conner

    If you disagree with me so much as to try to impress me with God’s judgment I would have a couple of things to say.

    #1. I am not making up a thing or fabricating a single syllable as to what I see as to what God has stated, unlike all those poor people that have been misled by their histrionic ministers….that abortion is murder.

    #2. Have you not read that judgment BEGINS in the house of God, and it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God?

    • Sir Tainly maybe with your vast understanding of the scriptures you would possibly be kind enough to point out which scripture(s) that actually even implies the accused woman of the tresspass is actually pregnant or has conceived in any form. If you would be so ever gracious to help us who do not posess your great ability to understand scripture.It would be gratefully appreciated. Thank you in advance for your help.

  • Sir Tainly

    Num 5: (NIV)
    26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[c] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse.


    My vast skill and understanding 😛 is based on
    #1. Reading
    #2. Thinking

    Good thing the Lord said to the one adulteress “Neither do I condemn you” because Moses brought the law, but grace and truth have come by Jesus Christ.

    You don’t even have one commandment or statute to base your religious opinion on, you are an empty vessel….in this case. I have in this case a pretty darn obvious example of a situation where God is recorded as being willing to end a pregnancy in a situation where many women MAY choose to do the same if given a choice.

    • Sir Tainly 2Peter 3:16 “As also in all his epistles speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be undedstood , which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” You are still unable to show one acripture that even implies the woman was pregnant. Do you think if she was pregnant that they would need the test to prove her infidelity. It would be oblivious. Thia is called a JEALOUSY OFFERINF. So that if the husband was accuseing out of jealousy she could go before the priest and drink the offering if her thigh rotted and belly swelled it showed she had been unfaithful and she would be as a leper would be an outcast of the camp. In no way shape form or fashion does it ever say she was pregnant and caused a miscarriage. If she had been unfaithful and had relation outside of her marriage this was a way for her thru the drink offering to show she had and she would be put out of the camp. If she had.not she could continue with her husband and be able to have children. Quit trying to bring God and His righteous judgements down to your fleshly carnal man way of thinking. He is HOLY and your not.

  • Sir Tainly

    Wow….just wow.

    All it says is that she would have a miscarriage. How could I have been so silly to think that it has anything to do with her being pregnant!?

    And I have not insulted you in any way, but you have gone out of your way to put me down repeatedly.

    So not only does your point make no sense whatsoever, but you are rude as well.

    I’m glad that this is a public forum….really Mr. Grimes.

  • Sir Tainly

    Crud I meant Mr. O’Conner. I’m so sorry to whoever Mr. Grimes is and wherever he may be. 🙁

    This is how you should apologize to me for being so rude…… 😀 It’s easy, just loose the attitude.

    • Sir Tainly you are absolutely right I do owe you an apology. For if I had known which translation you were using I would have known the reason for the misunderstanding about the miscarriage. And in knowing that I would have not pursued any further conversation on the subject. Please accept my humble apology. And this will be my last response on this subject. 2 Thessalonians 3:15 ” Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.” Ain’t God’s Word Good ! Take care

      • Sir Tainly

        Thanks for the apology Mr. O’Connor, no problem.

        The next post is exactly how I speak to a brother.

  • Sir Tainly

    The NIV is a good translation IMO, but let’s take it as it is in King Jimmy. Where it has been translated as thigh rot.

    Numbers 5:27
    King James Version (KJV)
    27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.


    And let us look at the specific word:

    #5307 נָפַל naphal {naw-fal’}

    a primitive root; TWOT – 1392; v
    —Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)

    1) to fall, lie, be cast down, fail
    1a) (Qal)
    1a1) to fall
    1a2) to fall (of violent death)
    1a3) to fall prostrate, prostrate oneself before
    1a4) to fall upon, attack, desert, fall away to , go away to,
    fall into the hand of
    1a5) to fall short, fail, fall out, turn out, result
    1a6) to settle, waste away, be offered, be inferior to
    1a7) to lie, lie prostrate
    1b) (Hiphil)
    1b1) to cause to fall, fell, throw down, knock out, lay prostrate
    1b2) to overthrow
    1b3) to make the lot fall, assign by lot, apportion by lot
    1b4) to let drop, cause to fail (fig.)
    1b5) to cause to fall
    1c) (Hithpael)
    1c1) to throw or prostrate oneself, throw oneself upon
    1c2) to lie prostrate, prostrate oneself
    1d) (Pilel) to fall
    —Brown-Driver-Briggs (Old Testament Hebrew-English Lexicon)
    A primitive root; to fall, in a great variety of applications (intransitively or causatively, literally or figuratively):—be accepted, cast (down, self, [lots], out), cease, die, divide (by lot), (let) fail, (cause to, let, make, ready to) fall (away, down, -en, -ing), fell (-ing), fugitive, have [inheritamce], inferior, be judged [by mistake for H6419], lay (along), (cause to) lie down, light (down), be (X hast) lost, lying, overthrow, overwhelm, perish, present (-ed, -ing), (make to) rot, slay, smite out, X surely, throw down.


    Where in there do you see this word meaning that she will have a good birth if she was pregnant through adultery?

    Do you think that God in his infinite wisdom didn’t know that the wife might be pregnant from the adultery?, because God would know that might be the case. At which point in the process of thigh rot and becoming a curse do you think she might somehow go to full term? I don’t see it happening.

    Moses was raised as a Prince in Egypt. Do you think that growing up as a Prince that he somehow missed what history shows plainly, that there were ways to end pregnancy?

    Maybe Moses was that stupid, maybe he had the blinders on!?——I DON’T THINK SO. He knew that the Egyptians had ways to end unfortunate pregnancies, he was raised in the Egyptian court as the Prince.

    And even if I am wrong as to reading this verse….you still have no commandment, law, or statute as to abortions. Even if you think that Moses somehow missed being taught what all the rest of the Egyptian Nobility knew, you certainly don’t think that God missed it do you?

    You have not one reason to think from God’s Word, or nature itself IMO, to take the choice away from the one in charge of the pregnancy the woman. And the woman being free, has every right to work it out with her hubby, or whoever she wants. But you have no right to legislate her choices for her.

  • Sir Tainly

    From Wikipedia:
    “Earliest evidence[edit]
    The written evidence of abortion reflects the interests of class and caste. Fines are listed in the Code of Hammurabi, ca. 1760 BCE, for the crime of causing a miscarriage through assault, with the amount varying according to the social rank of the woman.[3][4] The Vedic and smrti laws of India reflect a concern with preserving the male seed of the three upper castes; and the religious courts imposed various penances for the woman or excommunication for a priest who provided an abortion.[5] The only evidence of the death penalty being mandated for abortion in the ancient laws is found in Assyrian Law, in the Code of Assura, c. 1075 BCE;[6] and this is only imposed on a woman who procures an abortion against her husband’s wishes. The first recorded evidence of induced abortion is from the Egyptian Ebers Papyrus in 1550 BCE.[7]”

    From the Bible:
    “Moses was educated in all the learning of the Egyptians, and he was a man of power in words and deeds.
    – New American Standard Version (1995)