No account yet?
Subscription Options
Subscribe via RSS, or
Free Email Alert

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail alert with links to Dallas Blog posts.

New Site Search
Bill DeOre
Click for Larger Image
Dallas Sports Blog
Local Team Sports News
Dallas Blog
TEX Homepage News
Dallas Blog
Stars Recent Headlines
Good News Dallas
Abortion Overreach Print E-mail
by Paul Perry    Sun, Feb 12, 2012, 05:04 PM

The New York Times, a respected spokes-paper of the secular and liberal East Coast establishment, attacked the administration for caving in to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on whether the federal government will mandate that Catholic institutions must include coverage for birth control and even abortions via offering so-called morning after pills for employees.

The White House didn’t cave in to the bishops. Now the cost of birth control and abortion-causing drugs is merely being shifted to the insurance companies that insure the employees of Catholic institutions. In other words, the administration’s response is a circus shell game. This is a purposeful slap in the face to the Catholic conscience and the rest of us who believe that abortion on demand is a national tragedy.

Some Catholic officials indicated that if the administration’s original Obamacare initiative became practice, they would resort to civil disobedience. Out-of-touch East Coast media seemed to have been caught flat-footed by the backlash. All of this should have been no surprise. The Roman Catholic Church has been a vocal and principled opponent of abortion for years.

Conservative Protestants have been part of the backbone of this country since its founding. They are much more accommodative of birth control, but they have been part of the pro-life movement in this country since Roe v. Wade federalized the abortion issue in 1973. In just one recent example, Dr. Richard Land, who is president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said Baptists will not comply with Obamacare mandates requiring religious institutions to cover abortifacient products.

Many secular folks, some who do not regard themselves as conservative, regard the war on the unborn in this country as abominable. Thoughtful folks, concerned with our aging demographics, see our free-for-all abortion environment as bad social policy. They are aware that aging populations (which we are) rarely sustain themselves.

Others question the racial politics of the origins of the pro-abortion movement. Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger subscribed to the racial eugenics movement and sought to limit the population of certain racial and ethnic groups in America through abortion and other means. This was before the Nazis endorsed such views.

Planned Parenthood is still the leading provider of abortions in America, killing 332,278 babies in 2009. It appears at least some in the Obama administration would prefer Catholic hospitals engaged in the same activity. At the very least, they would force them to pay for birth control and abortion services. No one’s tax dollars should ever pay for an abortion, regardless of how one feels about abortion overall.

Birth control is available in this country at private cost; so is abortion, unfortunately. Some in the administration have stated that unplanned children are a threat to family stability. No doubt that unplanned pregnancies are a challenge, but they are not a threat to be disposed of, especially in a family environment.

During the whole national healthcare debate, neither birth control nor abortion coverage in Obamacare was rarely if ever mentioned by those who helped pass the law in both the administration and the then-Democrat Party-controlled Congress. Their real agenda is now apparent. They are attacking head-on those who wish to follow their religious beliefs. More importantly, they want to exploit the lives of the unborn to make a point.

Former Democrat speaker Nancy Pelosi said in 2009 that we have to pass the healthcare bill to see what is in it. With all the discretion that the 2009 Democrat Congress left in the bill to this administration, which has no value for unborn life or religious liberty, we now know.

How long will it be before the ghouls who promote this kind of abomination with your tax money will want to pick which sick or elderly person is denied care?

Ultimately, we must replace our own population, or someone outside our borders will – perhaps by force. No doubt our own demographic collapse will assist. Americans of all races, blends and beliefs are increasingly a melting pot. That is a good thing as long as we reestablish a culture of life and respect in this country. All innocent human life, of all races, should be celebrated and protected, not extinguished – whether paid for by government insurance or not.

This article was originally published in the Waxahachie Daily Light


Share This Story on Facebook
Comments (10)add comment
written by Penny , February 13, 2012

The Catholic Leadership is out of touch.

1) 58% of all Catholics agree employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception.

2) 61% of religiously unaffiliated Americans say employer plans should cover contraception.

3) 50% of white mainline Protestants want the coverage.

4) Women are significantly more likely than men to agree that employers should be required to provide health care plans that cover contraception (62% vs. 47% respectively).

written by ElHombre , February 16, 2012

The same folks howling over the fact that women want help controlling their own damn bodies are the same folks who have no problem demanding help with their Viagra perscriptions. They also never consieder the fact that if women didn't get pregnant in the in first place, they wouldn't have to get abortions. And why is it the biggest howling about abortions always comes from men?

written by MisplacedTexan , February 18, 2012

The issue isn't if Catholics are correct that birth control and abortion are immoral. The issue is whether we are willing to let the government force religious institutions to provide pills that go against their system of belief. People will argue and argue over the moral implications, and I think they are extremely important. However, in this case, it gums up the works because it gets everyone angry rather than looking at the situation and realizing that this is a matter of religious liberty.

Does the federal government have the right to force Catholics to provide birth control when doing so violates one of their key religious beliefs? No. The issue is not how offended you are that the Catholic position is against birth control, and the issue isn't that you may think that the Catholic leadership is out of touch.

Does the federal government have this right? No, it does not. This is a religious belief.

((And as for the argument that poor people can't afford BC on their own and Catholics are ignoring that issue, here's a tip... The government will already pay for their BC through the arguably unconstitutional practices already in place. Also, if they're not quite poor enough to get a government handout for BC, Walgreens etc. has a prescription plan so that you can get hormonal BC (generic brand) for 12 bucks.))

written by Jimmie Simmons, Waxahachie , February 18, 2012

"Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness"; I wonder why the founders used those words about who we were, and why they lead off with "life"? Must be about something this present generation cannot get its mind around...

written by henry4440 , February 19, 2012

It definitely is a matter of religious liberty and the government violating the "free exercise" clause of the First Amendment. Where is their Constitutional authority to order a private industry to provide anything for free?

What is also disturbing is the mainstream media's portrayal of this only as a matter of contraception when an equally big part was abortion, the shibboleth of the left. While many people have no problem with birth control and the pill, lots of those same people also believe abortion is murder. It's one thing to prevent pregnancy and yet another to kill the baby.

It's amazing that at one time America was a people who believed in life and in two decades it has become a society of death.

written by Paul Perry , February 19, 2012

My eldest son pointed out that Sanger may have opposed abortion for birth control reasons, at least earlier in her life. Some of her statements at other times seem less clear to me indicating she considered some abortion "justifiable", but I haven't seen specific wording as to what was justifiable in her mind.

written by Dan Davis , February 20, 2012

At 65 years of age, I never thought I would see the day when the people of the United States would be oppressed by an all powerful central government. Unfortunately I have lived long enough to see it. At what point will we wake up and realize that it has already happened. Our Freedom has been taken away and it is only a question of whether we are willing to take it back or not. I hope the American People wake up before November 2, 2012 of this year.

written by Duff Hale , February 21, 2012

Unfortunately the Left has abandoned the inspirational foundings of this nation and the philosophy of those men who created it. What we have here is forcing someone to accept something in which they do not believe. Thomas Jefferson said, "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." That's exactly what is happening and it's antithetical to liberty.

written by ElHombre , February 22, 2012

"The issue is whether we are willing to let the government force religious institutions to provide pills that go against their system of belief."

Let's see. Do we want a religion to be able to force its own views against the will and laws of the nation? Nope.

Do we want to be preached at by a bunch of hypocritical folks whose interest in children ends at birth? Nope.

Do we want to hear from a bunch of conservative morons who have yet again managed to take the wrong side in yet another American social debate? Nope.

Do we need to hear any more about Duff Hale's 'reverence' for the founders given his long-stated longing for the Confederacy to have won. No.

The Founders were a lot smarter than conservatives. This isn't saying much as conservatives couldn't find their butts with both hands in their back pockets. Kindly keep yourselves from demanding that the gov't enforce your personal religious beliefs (which most Catholics ignore anyway) on the half of the populationn which depends on a greater level of health care than the portion which is only concerned with their next Viagra dosage. Your problem isn't with the gov't. It's with the fact that y'all demand everyone adhere to a set of beliefs set forth to a time when the Earth was the center of the universe.

written by Ian Perry , March 02, 2012

"Do we want to be preached at by a bunch of hypocritical folks whose interest in children ends at birth? Nope."

I don't think opposing murdering babies in the womb means you don't care for them afterward--nor does supporting private charity or local governments rather than the federal government mean that.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

< Prev   Next >