Skip to content

Health Care and Abortion

March 24, 2010

Isn’t it odd that many of those who are most vocal against universal health care are the very people who are most strident about the evil of abortion?

I believe abortion should be a last resort, but that sometimes it is the lesser of two evils, as in the case of the abortion recently of a thirteen year old girl who was raped by her step-father.

But I believe that, in the wealthiest country in the world, it is far more immoral to let millions of children who managed to get born then die because they are too poor to get access to a doctor.

Who are the real “Child Killers” in America today?

Advertisements
20 Comments leave one →
  1. March 25, 2010 5:03 am

    I suppose it comes down to what one’s view of rights are—whether they are negative or positive. To be fair to those opposed to this particular health care bill but also opposed to abortion, the argument about health care is over means, not ends. I think that’s something that many on both sides have forgotten about in this entirely too heated debate, which has seen too much moral posturing from all kinds of people (but not from you, lest anyone read into my comments incorrectly). And as someone who is opposed not only to this bill but to a single-payer system, I was embarrassed by the lame attempts of the supposed proponents of the free market at making their case. As much as I’m disappointed, they had no right to expect the majority to be convinced by their caterwauling, because it did not demonstrate why the free market solution is the right solution. All they did was scream that the sky is falling, and no one is going to believe that.

    Nor was there much creative thinking going on, at least that I saw. For instance, what about a system that has insurance for catastrophic situations—accidents, surgeries, major illnesses—but not for routine doctor visits? I didn’t hear a word on this the whole time. The Democrats took up the idea of a government solution, and the Republicans, in effect, stood up for the status quo. (Could this be because they too like to be collectivists, at least when they’re in charge?)

    Of course, those who were in favor of a government overhaul of healthcare but opposed to abortion funding were playing with fire, and they should have seen what was coming with the final negotiations between the administration and Rep. Stupak, et al. I have to admit that I chuckled to myself when their one-trick pony didn’t work. Maybe certain pro-life personages would have done themselves a favor by arguing for more voluntary charity. After all, private property rights and the right to life might well be more closely related than it may seem at first blush.

    Finally, I just don’t understand why so many people are happy with this bill. I’m neither a Democrat nor a modern Liberal, but to the best of my ability to imagine, if I were a young Obama voter in 2008, this wouldn’t be what I had in mind—a law that forces people to buy insurance or pay a fine. This affects the very people who fall through the crack that runs between those who qualify for Medicaid and those who can afford their own plan. This law also has loopholes concerning some of the benefits that are supposed to apply to the under 30 crowd, which is the demographic most likely to be uninsured. It seems to me that this is the same old stuff that America has been doing for generations: an old-fashioned racket under the guise of all that nice stuff written on the Statue of Liberty:-) I don’t understand how this makes for progress.

  2. March 25, 2010 1:56 pm

    Father,

    I was going to make a long, somewhat philosophical reply, but Michael, above, has done a good job of that. The rector of my parish preached Sunday that, basically, Christians must support the Democratic plan. I am perhaps the last Republican left in the Episcopal Church, but I think that Christians can be of two minds on this issue. My concern is, among other issues, the cost of said bill. Some of us still believe that a free market solution does the most good for the most people, including children. So, I am a pro-life, anti-healthcare plan Episcopalian, and perhaps the last of my kind.

    DWL

  3. Russell Fuhrman permalink
    March 25, 2010 5:44 pm

    Correcting the tax inequities would have solved the healthcare problem in an impeccably moral way that would have been fair to all as, I believe, John McCain campaigned. To wit: employers receive a $250 billion dollar subsidy as their compensation cost in the form of health insurance is tax deductible. Such is “laundered” through the insurance companies with them taking a 15% cut, and the employee getting a substantial portion of their compensation then tax-free. If such compensation were taxed there would have been enough revenue to cover everyone and eliminated the distortions for those buying their own insurance.

    P.S. I don’t know which institution is dying the fastest, the Episcopal Church or the Republican Party. I suspect the Republican Party will comeback soon, if for no other reason than it is the default party, but the Episcopal Church looks hopeless, a mere feather on the leftwing of the Democrat Party.

  4. John Reilly permalink
    March 25, 2010 7:25 pm

    Good heavens, Father. Opponents of the Democratic health-care law are “the real child killers?” What a grotesque caricature.

    So much for Anglican live-and-let-live tolerance of others’ opinions.

    • March 26, 2010 2:33 pm

      Live and let live doesn’t mean anything goes. The American model, in which the uninsured infirm are simply shit out of luck, is not compatible with any honest reading of Scripture.

  5. March 25, 2010 8:06 pm

    Congressman Neugebauer called Representative Stupak a “Baby Killer” for changing his vote in favor of the health-care bill. I was simply saying that more children would die if millions of parents could not afford medical care, than babies who are aborted. Hence, the insult would rebound on Neugebauer and his like.

    As a Brit, I know there is plenty wrong with the UK’s National Health Service (mainly waste), but the national compulsory health insurance which makes it free at the point of service seems to be a great way to cover the whole population’s medical needs. Especially since it is comparatively inexpensive to have private health insurance also in Britain and to go privately to both GPs and private hospitals.

  6. March 25, 2010 9:05 pm

    No one is too poor to get access to a physician in America. This is a “straw man.”

    I don’t think it is so odd that those who are most vocal about preserving our freedoms and avoiding national bankruptcy are also those most strident about stopping the murder of children.

    • March 25, 2010 9:08 pm

      I don’t know where your parish is, but it must be on the moon.

    • March 26, 2010 2:36 pm

      I’m intrigued by your comment, as I’m not American, but up here at least the understanding has been that in the United States that is precisely the problem with the system: without a single-payer system, those who cannot afford or qualify for private insurance or pay out of pocket are indeed “too poor to access a physician” and simply have to sell their houses, or what have you, when a family member happens to fall ill.

  7. J.P. White permalink
    March 26, 2010 2:20 pm

    I love how so many “Anglo-Catholics” adhere to such conservative economic policies.

    “You cannot claim to worship Jesus in the Tabernacle if you do not pity Jesus in the slum.”
    -Frank Weston, Bishop of Zanzibar (1923)

  8. Donald Lambert permalink
    March 26, 2010 5:07 pm

    This idea that those of us who adhere to conservative economic models are not concerned about the poor is nonsense. As Michael stated very well above there is a disagreement as to means but not to ends. What’s best for those in the slums is a vibrant economy, not an economy saddled with a health care plan we can’t afford. Socialism has failed, and so has Keynsianism. I realize that Anglo-Catholicism was at one time tied to socialism, but it is time to leave those failed ideologies behind and do what really helps the poor.

  9. March 26, 2010 5:46 pm

    It is an unfortunate side effect of the immorality of abortion that has been codified in our law for thirty-five years that we have to even be having a discussion that pits unborn children against poor children. What a sad state of affairs.

    As an Obama voter in 2008, I agree with what Michael Lawrence said in terms of being disappointed with what has been passed. It does not go nearly far enough, and in the end a half-fix may be less valuable than no fix. But I’m hopeful, because at least this new law will reign in some of the abuses of the insurance industry and help to grant more people coverage, reducing the overall strain on the system in the process. Personally, I think that when the public option was cut out, so was the heart of what the president said he’d wanted to do, but even without it this is still a monumental victory for the poor and the sick in our society, which is something that as a Christian I cannot help but want to support.

    I do, however, respect the opinions of my Christian brothers and sisters who sincerely believe that this is the wrong approach and that government should not be a moral agent. I share their skepticism of a large and unwieldy government’s ability to manage what it has created. It’s a fair criticism. But I don’t understand why someone who is skeptical of big government isn’t equally skeptical of big business. It’s hard for me to fathom how a system run on the profit motive can ever produce human oriented results. Government may be extremely flawed at executing these sorts of plans, but at least within a democratic system we have some sort of vehicle for redressing grievances. In the marketplace, whatever sells wins, and the idea that this gives us any sort of free choice strikes me as unabashedly naive.

    I have been concerned about how the final law would affect spending on abortion. I don’t know that I’m totally pleased with the compromise that was reached, but I tend to think that all of this wrangling over the details of how these plans affect public financing of abortion is a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. Until we have a viable and realistic way of actually convincing our society that the life of a baby in utero is as valuable as the life of anyone else, we’ll never escape from these political contests in which abortion is used as a rallying cry without anyone having any real intention of changing anything. And frankly, I don’t see how a person with a libertarian view of how government should approach economic policy can simultaneously believe that government can outlaw abortion. Either government is a moral agent or it isn’t.

  10. March 27, 2010 12:19 am

    The unborn child has a right to life irrespective of how it was conceived. Once it is conceived it exists. Why should it be sentenced to death? IT has committed no crime. Certainly the rape of a young girl is a monstrous crime. However to kill the child in the womb is to perpetrate a second wrong. The fifth commandment states thou shall not kill no ifs no buts. Taxpayer funded abortion is a crime against humanity. Many more children will be aborted because of this healthcare act. Incidentally we have sanitised language used to disguise the barbarism of abortion. The use of the term pro choice is a case in point. How can a woman have the choice to kill her own child? The fact that abortion is legal does not make it moral. It is time to call a spade a spade. Infanticide was one of the reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire.
    You state that: “It is far more immoral to let millions of children who managed to get born then die because they are too poor to get access to a doctor”. This is a red herring. This cannot be used as a justification for the KILLING of the unborn. Each person conceived has a right to life-given by God. It is time to consider God in any discussion on abortion. The abortion clinics are the new concentration camps where the unborn are tortured to death. The innocent child is torn asunder. This is the reality of any abortion.

    Remember Congressman Henry Hyde’s words

    “When the time comes, as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I’ve often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God — and a terror will rip your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there’ll be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world — and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, ‘Spare him, because he loved us!'”

    • March 27, 2010 2:14 am

      “Thou shalt not kill, no ifs, no buts” – so no soldier can kill in war? no one can be executed by the state? I may not kill a ganman about to shoot a playground full of children?

      • March 27, 2010 4:50 pm

        This was my previous post:
        The unborn child has a right to life irrespective of how it was conceived. Once it is conceived it exists. Why should it be sentenced to death? IT has committed no crime. Certainly the rape of a young girl is a monstrous crime. However to kill the child in the womb is to perpetrate a second wrong. The fifth commandment states thou shall not kill no ifs no buts. Taxpayer funded abortion is a crime against humanity. Many more children will be aborted because of this healthcare act. Incidentally we have sanitised language used to disguise the barbarism of abortion. The use of the term pro choice is a case in point. How can a woman have the choice to kill her own child? The fact that abortion is legal does not make it moral. It is time to call a spade a spade. Infanticide was one of the reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire.
        You state that: “It is far more immoral to let millions of children who managed to get born then die because they are too poor to get access to a doctor”. This is a red herring. This cannot be used as a justification for the KILLING of the unborn. Each person conceived has a right to life-given by God. It is time to consider God in any discussion on abortion. The abortion clinics are the new concentration camps where the unborn are tortured to death. The innocent child is torn asunder. This is the reality of any abortion.

        Remember Congressman Henry Hyde’s words

        “When the time comes, as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I’ve often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God — and a terror will rip your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there’ll be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world — and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, ‘Spare him, because he loved us!’”
        ——————————————————————————————————-
        You are now attempting to muddy the waters.If you read CAREFULLY my previous post (above) you will see that I was speaking about abortion ONLY. Killing MAY be allowed in self defence in CERTAIN circumstances and only as a last resort. Similarly a country may go to war if all other prospects are exhausted but only as a last resort. When I used the expression “Thou shalt not kill, no ifs, no buts” I was speaking ENTIRELY in the context of abortion. Surely you do not regard the unborn child as a threat. Of course there is a war going on at present. It is a war being waged by godless politicians-some of them so called Roman Catholics- against the innocent unborn child. The unborn child irrespective of how it was conceived has the right to life. It exists. Why should it be tortured to death on account of its origins? Why should taxpayers fund the slaughter of the innocents? Obama the most pro abortion president of all time and the Democratic Party are behaving as if God does not exist.
        See Biblical Case for Pro Life Position

  11. David O'Rourke permalink
    March 27, 2010 12:28 am

    “But I believe that, in the wealthiest country in the world, it is far more immoral to let millions of children who managed to get born then die because they are too poor to get access to a doctor”.

    Oh come on, Father! The only way you can come up with that statistic of millions of babies dying is if you count the unborn who, in fact, are slaughtered.

    You can come up with all the stories you want about young girls being raped and becoming pregnan but I doubt you are calling for capital punishment for the rapist. On the contrary you prefer to execute the unquestionably innocent baby.

    Does it never occur to you that in advocating the disposal of an innocent unborn human being for what you feel to be a worthwhile reason you are advocating the dispossal of any one of us for what someone else takes to be a worth while reason.

    Where one is in danger, none are safe.

    • March 27, 2010 2:16 am

      OK, maybe millions is too many, but thousands will do. And I have no problem at all with executing rapists.

  12. David O'Rourke permalink
    March 27, 2010 12:45 am

    By the way. I am a strong defender of universal publkicly finded healthcare.

  13. fathergregory permalink
    March 27, 2010 2:01 pm

    Thank you Father Gordon!

    Right there with you.

    Oh – the person who didn’t know anyone too poor to have access to a physician? If you’ve read this, you just met one.

    Fr. Gregory Wassen

  14. David O'Rourke permalink
    March 27, 2010 4:00 pm

    Well then maybe you should use this site to start calling for the execution of rapists and lay off the unborn children who are not guilty of anything and whose execution you defend (for utilitarian reasons).

    BTW the number of children murdered by abortionists does indeed number in the millions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: