Home   Site Map

Protection of Conscience Project
Media Commentary: July - September, 2002

Traduire à français         Tradurre all'italiano         Traduzca al español         Traduza a português            Übersetzen Sie zu Deutsch     Oversett til Norsk

A Doctor's Choice
The column first appeared in the Washington Times on 25 September, 2002.
Reproduced with permission.



 

 


Related Links
Abortion Non-Discrimination Act

Wardle Testimony

Vosburgh Testimony

The Unfree

ACLU misrepresentation

No More Pro-Choice Movement

Letter of Anthony Cardinal Bevilacqua

Introduction
Dick Armey was the Majority Leader (Republican)  in the U.S. House of Representatives when the following opinion column was written.  Mr. Armey successfully argued for the passage of the

Dick Armey

The vast majority of all hospitals - public and private - do not get involved in abortion. In fact, 86 percent of all hospitals did not perform a single abortion last year.

There is a reason for that. Most health care providers are interested in protecting and saving human life, not taking it. Government shouldn't force them to take part in actions - such as performing abortions - against their beliefs, morals or religion.

In 1996, Congress enacted legislation ending state and federal discrimination against health care providers that do not perform abortions.  In a series of court opinions and rulings, activist judges are flouting the will of Congress and ordering hospitals, not to promote life, but to end it.  They are telling doctors and nurses to suspend their most strongly held
beliefs and perform a practice so heinous that even progressive hospitals have rejected.

So today, the House of Representatives will consider the  Abortion Non-Discrimination Act (ANDA)  and right the wrong perpetrated by liberal courts.  The bill signals Congress' intent in one simple yet powerful message - no health care provider should ever be forced to do something that violates their moral, ethical, or religious beliefs.

While there is deep disagreement in America about whether abortion should be legal, nearly all Americans would agree that no one should be forced to have an abortion or to perform an abortion if they don't want to. That, however, hasn't stopped some on the extreme fringe of this issue from trying to force hospitals to provide abortions anyway.

Valley Hospital in Palmer, Alaska, is one such example. Located about 50 miles east of Anchorage, the hospital's board implemented a policy in 1990 barring abortion procedures except in cases of rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother.  The hospital was sued, and a judge arbitrarily ruled that because Valley Hospital received some government money, it was a "quasi-government entity" and had to provide abortions. The hospital appealed the case to the Alaska Supreme Court, citing a state law that protected its right of conscience.  The Supreme Court ruled against the hospital and, in one fell swoop, threw out the state's conscience law.

Congress' conscience guarantees were also overturned in New Jersey. When Rancocas Hospital in Willingboro, N.J., was purchased by Our Lady of Lourdes Healthcare Services, a new policy was instituted against performing abortions. Our Lady of Lourdes, as the name suggests, is a Catholic agency, and the Catholic church believes abortion is wrong.  The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey sued. It argued that if Our Lady of Lourdes didn't want to allow abortions in its hospital, it should provide a separate building on the hospital's campus for that purpose. This, obviously, made no sense to the hospital. The ACLU also argued that the hospital was duty-bound to provide abortions because its original mission
statement called for "comprehensive" health care services. The ACLU conveniently forgot that when the mission statement was written in 1961, abortion was a felony.

So much is at stake in this bill. Without its passage, the viability and integrity of our country's health care system are in jeopardy. In this age of managed care and skyrocketing health care costs, hospitals are merging in order to survive. If courts demand that pro-abortion policies be a condition of merging - as a number already have - there will be fewer of these cost-saving partnerships.

Many of these alliances involve denominational hospitals - hospitals principally organized to serve the poor and needy. They have been and will continue to be the first victims of court-imposed abortion mandates, for in many cases they cannot practice medicine at all under these conditions.  The poor and vulnerable will be the ultimate casualties when these facilities
have to close.
 

 

 

Tough Pill Bill to Swallow
National Catholic Register Commentary & Opinion
August 25 - 31, 2002
Reproduced with permission



 


Michael J. O'Dea
Executive Director, Christus Medicus Foundation

Regarding "N.Y. 'Pill Bill' Puts Church in Tough Spot" (July 28-Aug. 3):

Passage of New York's Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage (EPICC) bill forces New York's fully insured health plans to subsidize all FDA-approved contraceptive pills and devices. In addition to violating religious liberty and an individual's right of conscience, this law undermines parents by expanding government control of American children's sexual and reproductive health. How dare Ms. (Assemblywoman Deborah) Glick get away with her comments in this article. The bill is not about religious freedom, she says, but about individual choice and health care.

This bill is not about individual choice nor health care. It is about state and federal control of our children and what we finance in health care. This is a totalitarian agenda, proposed by Planned Parenthood and the Alan Guttmacher Institute. How does the Church get out of cooperating with a state law that interferes with parents' right to shape the conscience of their children? The Catholic Church still does have options of setting up self insured plans that are regulated by ERISSA, the federal law that frees self-insured health plans from state contraceptive mandates. However, if Sen. Kennedy and Congressman Bonior get their way with S 104 and HR 1111, those options will quickly vanish. President Bush could be forced to use his veto power - or every private and public health insurance plan that has prescription coverage will force employers and individuals, through taxes and insurance premiums, to confidentially fund unhealthy and morally objectionable contraceptive chemicals and devices for children, without parental consent or knowledge.

In addition to challenging this insidious N.Y. EPICC legislation in the court and teaching the intrinsic evil of contraception, Catholics must unite to establish, administrate and control financing in their own self-insured Catholic health plan. Catholics must also unite with other faith-based organizations and defeat EPICC. If EPICC is not defeated, what will employers and individuals be forced to pay for next - euthanasia, artificial insemination, invitro-fertilization, cloning, and coverage for unmarried and same-sex partners? America prides itself on assuring parents the opportunity to raise children without government intrusion and interference. A nation with the greatest political freedom is being undermined by a few powerful political interest groups. At this critical time, when the health and welfare of the American family, our nation's future and our political freedom are all at stake, it is time for all Christians, particularly those in positions of leadership, to take charge of what we pay for in health care and "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is Gods."
 

Media Oct- Dec
2002
Apr-June
2002