Saturday, February 28, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Hospitals will be forced to close
Abortion Foes Warn Of Hospital Closures
CBSNews.com Reports: Catholic Churches Are Pushing Parishioners To Pressure Congress Not To Pass "Radical" Abortion Bill
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/27/politics/main4757890.shtml
(CBS) This story was written by CBSNews.com political reporter Brian Montopoli.
On the past two Sundays, parishioners at the Holy Family Church in Nutley, New Jersey, have received a stark warning: If the Obama administration and Democratic Congress have their way, Catholic hospitals around the country will be forced to close. The reason? A piece of legislation known as the Freedom Of Choice Act, or FOCA, that opponents believe will force hospitals and doctors to perform abortions even if they have moral opposition to doing so. Since doctors at Catholic hospitals won't perform an abortion, the logic goes, the hospitals would have no choice but to shut their doors under FOCA rules. Abortion rights advocates dismiss the claim, saying it is an effort to distract the public from the real abortion-related issues likely to be taken up by Congress.
But Catholic groups are now making a push to drum up opposition to FOCA, with millions of postcards being distributed in English and Spanish in churches across the country, according to Deirdre McQuade, an assistant director for policy and communications at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Catholic leaders are asking parishioners to sign three copies of the postcard - one for each senator and one for their representative - and then leave them with their church, which will mail the cards to Washington. "The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), the most radical and divisive pro-abortion bill ever introduced in Congress, would create a 'fundamental right' to abortion that government could not limit but would have to support," the postcard reads in part. (See the full postcard here.)
Church leaders say FOCA would end requirements for parental consent, legalize partial-birth abortion and overturn so-called "conscience" protections that allow hospitals and health care providers that receive public funds to decline to perform an abortion. (The Bush administration tried to strengthen conscience protections shortly before leaving office, though President Obama ordered a halt to implementing the new guidelines until further review.) "The [FOCA] law as it currently exists is taking that entire conscience clause away," said James Goodness, spokesman for Archdiocese of Newark. "And Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions. And if they are told they have to, hospitals are going to have to figure out what they can do."
Debate rages among legal scholars over whether FOCA, if instituted, would really overturn "conscience" protections and thus potentially mean the closures of Catholic hospitals, which make up about a third of all hospitals in the country. According to Ted Miller, the communications director at NARAL Pro-Choice America, Maryland is among the states that have adopted FOCA-like legislation in an effort to codify abortion protections, "and you don't see Catholic hospitals closing in Maryland."
But as Melinda Henneberger notes, Sen. Barbara Boxer, who introduced FOCA in the Senate, said in a statement that the legislation "supersedes any law, regulation or local ordinance that impinges on a woman's right to choose" - which could be taken as a sign that it would invalidate prior "conscience" clauses. NARAL's Miller says FOCA isn't really the issue: It is instead "a distraction from issues around birth control and sex education for teens that could actually be considered in this Congress."
FOCA won't see passage anytime soon, he says, because according to NARAL's calculations, there are only 40 truly "pro-choice" senators in the 111th Congress and 146 "pro-choice" representatives in the 111th Congress - not nearly enough to pass the legislation. Still, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who introduced FOCA legislation in the House in 2007, plans to reintroduce it in the new Congress, according to his office. (An aide declined to provide a timetable, but predicted the introduction would come "sooner rather than later.") Boxer also plans to reintroduce the legislation, the 2007 version of which is here. Her office says there is not yet a timeline on when she will do so. Mr. Obama has vowed to immediately sign the legislation if it crosses his desk.
(AP)The push by Catholic leaders around FOCA and abortion issues comes as abortion rights opponents have grown worried that they will lose ground under a Democratic Congress and president. Some Catholic leaders were harshly critical of Mr. Obama even before he was elected, dubbing him "the abortion president" and warning that he is committed to pushing an abortion rights agenda. "The pro-abortion agenda is strong, and it has momentum now because of the pro-choice majority in Congress and also the pro-choice president," said McQuade of the U.S. Conference on Catholic Bishops. "There's a lot of momentum now seeking to roll back incremental gains that have been made over the last 36 years." Last Thursday, on the 36th anniversary of the Roe V. Wade decision, tens of thousands of abortion rights opponents marched on Washington. One marcher told the Associated Press she was praying that Mr. Obama would "surprise" her on abortion. On that very day, the president released a statement reiterating his support for abortion rights. The next day he quietly signed an executive order ending the so-called global gag rule banning federal funding for international groups that promote or perform abortions.
Polls suggest that slightly more than half the country believes that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. In the presidential election, Mr. Obama won by nine points among Catholics. "The anti-choice side lost the election, and they lost control of Congress," said NARAL's Miller. "That means they no longer control the debate."
No longer control the debate? So it's about control and not choice Miller? I thought you would want debate so women could make informed choices...oh wait if she chooses life then you make no money off her so really women are only good to you if she brings you money by allowing you to kill her child? What a sadistic country we live in.
CBSNews.com Reports: Catholic Churches Are Pushing Parishioners To Pressure Congress Not To Pass "Radical" Abortion Bill
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/27/politics/main4757890.shtml
(CBS) This story was written by CBSNews.com political reporter Brian Montopoli.
On the past two Sundays, parishioners at the Holy Family Church in Nutley, New Jersey, have received a stark warning: If the Obama administration and Democratic Congress have their way, Catholic hospitals around the country will be forced to close. The reason? A piece of legislation known as the Freedom Of Choice Act, or FOCA, that opponents believe will force hospitals and doctors to perform abortions even if they have moral opposition to doing so. Since doctors at Catholic hospitals won't perform an abortion, the logic goes, the hospitals would have no choice but to shut their doors under FOCA rules. Abortion rights advocates dismiss the claim, saying it is an effort to distract the public from the real abortion-related issues likely to be taken up by Congress.
But Catholic groups are now making a push to drum up opposition to FOCA, with millions of postcards being distributed in English and Spanish in churches across the country, according to Deirdre McQuade, an assistant director for policy and communications at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Catholic leaders are asking parishioners to sign three copies of the postcard - one for each senator and one for their representative - and then leave them with their church, which will mail the cards to Washington. "The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), the most radical and divisive pro-abortion bill ever introduced in Congress, would create a 'fundamental right' to abortion that government could not limit but would have to support," the postcard reads in part. (See the full postcard here.)
Church leaders say FOCA would end requirements for parental consent, legalize partial-birth abortion and overturn so-called "conscience" protections that allow hospitals and health care providers that receive public funds to decline to perform an abortion. (The Bush administration tried to strengthen conscience protections shortly before leaving office, though President Obama ordered a halt to implementing the new guidelines until further review.) "The [FOCA] law as it currently exists is taking that entire conscience clause away," said James Goodness, spokesman for Archdiocese of Newark. "And Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions. And if they are told they have to, hospitals are going to have to figure out what they can do."
Debate rages among legal scholars over whether FOCA, if instituted, would really overturn "conscience" protections and thus potentially mean the closures of Catholic hospitals, which make up about a third of all hospitals in the country. According to Ted Miller, the communications director at NARAL Pro-Choice America, Maryland is among the states that have adopted FOCA-like legislation in an effort to codify abortion protections, "and you don't see Catholic hospitals closing in Maryland."
But as Melinda Henneberger notes, Sen. Barbara Boxer, who introduced FOCA in the Senate, said in a statement that the legislation "supersedes any law, regulation or local ordinance that impinges on a woman's right to choose" - which could be taken as a sign that it would invalidate prior "conscience" clauses. NARAL's Miller says FOCA isn't really the issue: It is instead "a distraction from issues around birth control and sex education for teens that could actually be considered in this Congress."
FOCA won't see passage anytime soon, he says, because according to NARAL's calculations, there are only 40 truly "pro-choice" senators in the 111th Congress and 146 "pro-choice" representatives in the 111th Congress - not nearly enough to pass the legislation. Still, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who introduced FOCA legislation in the House in 2007, plans to reintroduce it in the new Congress, according to his office. (An aide declined to provide a timetable, but predicted the introduction would come "sooner rather than later.") Boxer also plans to reintroduce the legislation, the 2007 version of which is here. Her office says there is not yet a timeline on when she will do so. Mr. Obama has vowed to immediately sign the legislation if it crosses his desk.
(AP)The push by Catholic leaders around FOCA and abortion issues comes as abortion rights opponents have grown worried that they will lose ground under a Democratic Congress and president. Some Catholic leaders were harshly critical of Mr. Obama even before he was elected, dubbing him "the abortion president" and warning that he is committed to pushing an abortion rights agenda. "The pro-abortion agenda is strong, and it has momentum now because of the pro-choice majority in Congress and also the pro-choice president," said McQuade of the U.S. Conference on Catholic Bishops. "There's a lot of momentum now seeking to roll back incremental gains that have been made over the last 36 years." Last Thursday, on the 36th anniversary of the Roe V. Wade decision, tens of thousands of abortion rights opponents marched on Washington. One marcher told the Associated Press she was praying that Mr. Obama would "surprise" her on abortion. On that very day, the president released a statement reiterating his support for abortion rights. The next day he quietly signed an executive order ending the so-called global gag rule banning federal funding for international groups that promote or perform abortions.
Polls suggest that slightly more than half the country believes that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. In the presidential election, Mr. Obama won by nine points among Catholics. "The anti-choice side lost the election, and they lost control of Congress," said NARAL's Miller. "That means they no longer control the debate."
No longer control the debate? So it's about control and not choice Miller? I thought you would want debate so women could make informed choices...oh wait if she chooses life then you make no money off her so really women are only good to you if she brings you money by allowing you to kill her child? What a sadistic country we live in.
Monday, January 26, 2009
"I won. I'm the President" B. Obama
Excuse me but this isn't the middle school play ground. ‘Nanner nanner boo boo’ isn’t going to fix this country. So for the newly elected President to declare "I won. I'm the President" in response to criticism of his new policies isn’t just juvenile it’s down right scary. Where are the bipartisan workings? Where is the compromise, the hope? Am I really the only person who saw through Obama’s “charisma” and “character”?
Does Obama really think he can tell people who to listen to and who not to listen to? It was bad enough that in less than one week he overturned legislation that banned Federal money (i.e. my money and your money) to support international charities that give information and even perform abortions now he wants to tell me I cant listen to Rush Limbaugh and “get things done.” Who is he? Does he really think he is Emperor of the free world?
Obama-
You ARE old politics. You are promising to hear MY voice through my republican representatives and yet you are ramming a bill through without MY input. Reach out to me through my senators and representatives. Because when you slight them, you slight ME and I am not quick to forget.
Don’t forget Mr. Obama that this is a government FOR the people and BY the people and if you aren’t careful, you don’t have to be in power any more. Reach across your political aisle and sow seeds of compromise and not discord. I refuse to be politically bullied all for the sake of your fake promise of change.
Get out of your ivory tower and come play with the rest of us. This isn’t your playground- you aren’t going to bully me out of my lunch money or tell me who I can and cannot play with. End the juvenile “I won. You lost” mentality and come back to reality- we’re waiting but we wont wait long.
Only 207 week left....
Does Obama really think he can tell people who to listen to and who not to listen to? It was bad enough that in less than one week he overturned legislation that banned Federal money (i.e. my money and your money) to support international charities that give information and even perform abortions now he wants to tell me I cant listen to Rush Limbaugh and “get things done.” Who is he? Does he really think he is Emperor of the free world?
Obama-
You ARE old politics. You are promising to hear MY voice through my republican representatives and yet you are ramming a bill through without MY input. Reach out to me through my senators and representatives. Because when you slight them, you slight ME and I am not quick to forget.
Don’t forget Mr. Obama that this is a government FOR the people and BY the people and if you aren’t careful, you don’t have to be in power any more. Reach across your political aisle and sow seeds of compromise and not discord. I refuse to be politically bullied all for the sake of your fake promise of change.
Get out of your ivory tower and come play with the rest of us. This isn’t your playground- you aren’t going to bully me out of my lunch money or tell me who I can and cannot play with. End the juvenile “I won. You lost” mentality and come back to reality- we’re waiting but we wont wait long.
Only 207 week left....
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Help is needed
http://www.fightfoca.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0__ctD48nfQ
Please educate yourselves on this issue and help fight for these children.
This is a crucial bill that just cannot be allowed to be signed by President Obama. The most appalling idea is the repealing of the Partial Birth Abortion ban. It is one of the most inhumane procedures humankind has thought in their most devious of minds. It is unfathomable to me how any man or woman could agree to kill a child especially in such an egregious manner. Additionally, the possibility of this act repealing the Hyde Amendment would also enrage me. I do not support abortion and feel I should not have my federal money spent on securing them.
Is it any wonder we do not have a cure for AIDS or cancer? Perhaps our cure was a child who was “unwanted” and killed for convenience. Perhaps the reason social security is failing is the smaller workforce due to all the aborted children since 1973. These children could be productive members of society putting money in the system. How is it we support such a hideous act when Norma McCorvey (Roe) no longer does and admits the case was based on a lie? How long are we going to cling to this lie?
“We are all guilty of the good we did not do”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0__ctD48nfQ
Please educate yourselves on this issue and help fight for these children.
This is a crucial bill that just cannot be allowed to be signed by President Obama. The most appalling idea is the repealing of the Partial Birth Abortion ban. It is one of the most inhumane procedures humankind has thought in their most devious of minds. It is unfathomable to me how any man or woman could agree to kill a child especially in such an egregious manner. Additionally, the possibility of this act repealing the Hyde Amendment would also enrage me. I do not support abortion and feel I should not have my federal money spent on securing them.
Is it any wonder we do not have a cure for AIDS or cancer? Perhaps our cure was a child who was “unwanted” and killed for convenience. Perhaps the reason social security is failing is the smaller workforce due to all the aborted children since 1973. These children could be productive members of society putting money in the system. How is it we support such a hideous act when Norma McCorvey (Roe) no longer does and admits the case was based on a lie? How long are we going to cling to this lie?
“We are all guilty of the good we did not do”.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Palin and Biden
PULL THE HAIR PLUG ON THIS GUY
October 8, 2008
If Sarah Palin had made just one of the wildly inaccurate statements smugly uttered by Sen. Joe Biden in last week's vice presidential debate, there would have been 3-inch headlines in newspapers across America. (I can almost hear Katie Couric asking me, "Which newspapers?")
These weren't insignificant errors, such as when Biden said, "Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie's restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time, and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years."
It turns out that Katie's restaurant, where Biden gets his feel for the average American, closed 20 years ago. The only evidence that he spends any time in Home Depot is that it appears that a pipe wrench fell on his head one too many times.
Palin would surely have been forced to withdraw from the ticket had she said something like that, but most of Biden's errors were not trifling mistakes like these. They were lengthy Lyndon LaRouche-like disquisitions that were pure fantasy from beginning to end.
For example, Biden said about Hezbollah: "When we kicked -- along with France -- we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon." Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebanon.
He continued: "I said and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.'" This is madness -- Lebanon is not a NATO country, nor had any NATO country been attacked by Lebanon.
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of foreign policy.
Biden also stoutly denied that Obama ever said he would sit down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Liberals find it hilarious that McCain can't use a computer keyboard on account of his war injuries, but Biden is apparently unaware of the Internet, because there are clips all over the Internet of Obama saying exactly that during the CNN/YouTube debate last year.
Biden might have remembered that debate since: (1) He was there, and (2) he later attacked Obama's answer, telling the National Press Club in August 2007: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely, positively, no."
And that's still not all! Obama's own Web site says: "Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions."
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to remember well-known facts.
Biden also gave a long speech at the debate on vice president Dick Cheney's "dangerous" belief that "he's part of the legislative branch." The great constitutional scholar Biden cited Article I of the Constitution as proof that Cheney "works in the executive branch" and has "no authority relative to the Congress." Biden huffily added: "He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."
Palin would have had to deny that Alaska is a state in the union in order to say something comparably stupid.
Article II, not I, describes the executive branch. Someone tell Biden, who is supposed to be a lawyer. Apart from getting the Articles of the Constitution mixed up, what on earth does Biden mean when he says that the vice president "has no authority relative to Congress," apart from breaking ties?
The Constitution makes him president of the senate every day of the week. I realize that Biden may not be able to count to two, but Article I says the vice president is president of one of the two houses of Congress -- the one Biden is in, for crying out loud -- which is what you might call "authority relative to Congress."
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of the Constitution.
In one especially hallucinatory answer, Biden authoritatively stated: "With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen. ... We spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country."
According to the Congressional Research Service, since 9/11, we've spent $172 billion in Afghanistan and $653 billion in Iraq. The most money spent in Iraq came in 2008, when we have been spending less than $3 billion a week. So by Biden's calculations, we've spent only about $9 billion "on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country." There isn't even a "9" in $172 billion.
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of math.
In the same answer, Biden went on to claim that "John McCain voted against a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty that every Republican has supported."
The last nuclear test ban treaty the Senate voted on was the one Clinton signed in the '90s. As The New York Times editorialized on the Senate vote a few years later: "Last week, Senate Republicans thundered 'no' to the nuclear test ban treaty, handing the White House its biggest defeat since health care in 1994." Forty-nine Republicans voted against the treaty; only four liberal Republicans voted for it. That's the treaty Biden says "every Republican has supported."
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to function as vice president.
COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111
October 8, 2008
If Sarah Palin had made just one of the wildly inaccurate statements smugly uttered by Sen. Joe Biden in last week's vice presidential debate, there would have been 3-inch headlines in newspapers across America. (I can almost hear Katie Couric asking me, "Which newspapers?")
These weren't insignificant errors, such as when Biden said, "Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie's restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time, and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years."
It turns out that Katie's restaurant, where Biden gets his feel for the average American, closed 20 years ago. The only evidence that he spends any time in Home Depot is that it appears that a pipe wrench fell on his head one too many times.
Palin would surely have been forced to withdraw from the ticket had she said something like that, but most of Biden's errors were not trifling mistakes like these. They were lengthy Lyndon LaRouche-like disquisitions that were pure fantasy from beginning to end.
For example, Biden said about Hezbollah: "When we kicked -- along with France -- we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon." Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebanon.
He continued: "I said and Barack said, 'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't, Hezbollah will control it.'" This is madness -- Lebanon is not a NATO country, nor had any NATO country been attacked by Lebanon.
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of foreign policy.
Biden also stoutly denied that Obama ever said he would sit down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Liberals find it hilarious that McCain can't use a computer keyboard on account of his war injuries, but Biden is apparently unaware of the Internet, because there are clips all over the Internet of Obama saying exactly that during the CNN/YouTube debate last year.
Biden might have remembered that debate since: (1) He was there, and (2) he later attacked Obama's answer, telling the National Press Club in August 2007: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely, positively, no."
And that's still not all! Obama's own Web site says: "Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions."
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to remember well-known facts.
Biden also gave a long speech at the debate on vice president Dick Cheney's "dangerous" belief that "he's part of the legislative branch." The great constitutional scholar Biden cited Article I of the Constitution as proof that Cheney "works in the executive branch" and has "no authority relative to the Congress." Biden huffily added: "He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."
Palin would have had to deny that Alaska is a state in the union in order to say something comparably stupid.
Article II, not I, describes the executive branch. Someone tell Biden, who is supposed to be a lawyer. Apart from getting the Articles of the Constitution mixed up, what on earth does Biden mean when he says that the vice president "has no authority relative to Congress," apart from breaking ties?
The Constitution makes him president of the senate every day of the week. I realize that Biden may not be able to count to two, but Article I says the vice president is president of one of the two houses of Congress -- the one Biden is in, for crying out loud -- which is what you might call "authority relative to Congress."
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of the Constitution.
In one especially hallucinatory answer, Biden authoritatively stated: "With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen. ... We spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country."
According to the Congressional Research Service, since 9/11, we've spent $172 billion in Afghanistan and $653 billion in Iraq. The most money spent in Iraq came in 2008, when we have been spending less than $3 billion a week. So by Biden's calculations, we've spent only about $9 billion "on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country." There isn't even a "9" in $172 billion.
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of math.
In the same answer, Biden went on to claim that "John McCain voted against a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty that every Republican has supported."
The last nuclear test ban treaty the Senate voted on was the one Clinton signed in the '90s. As The New York Times editorialized on the Senate vote a few years later: "Last week, Senate Republicans thundered 'no' to the nuclear test ban treaty, handing the White House its biggest defeat since health care in 1994." Forty-nine Republicans voted against the treaty; only four liberal Republicans voted for it. That's the treaty Biden says "every Republican has supported."
Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn't picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to function as vice president.
COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
