Rumors aside, FOCA legislation no threat to Catholic health care
Anti-FOCA groups spread misinformation about what the so-far-nonexistent legislation would do
By Nancy Frazier O'Brien
Catholic News Service
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- Internet rumors to the contrary, no Catholic hospital in the United States is in danger of closing because of the Freedom of Choice Act.
As a matter of fact, the Freedom of Choice Act died with the 110th Congress and, a week after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, has not been reintroduced.
But that hasn't kept misleading e-mails from flying around the Internet, warning of the dire consequences if Obama signs FOCA into law and promoting a "FOCA novena" in the days leading up to Inauguration Day.
The Catholic Health Association "is strongly committed to opposing FOCA and (the board) is unanimous that we would do all we could to oppose it," said Bishop Robert N. Lynch of St. Petersburg, Fla., an elected member of the CHA board of trustees since June 2006."But there is no plan to shut down any hospital if it passes," he added in a Jan. 26 telephone interview.
"There's no sense of ominous danger threatening health care institutions."Sister Carol Keehan, a Daughter of Charity who is CHA president and CEO, was equally sure that FOCA poses no threat to Catholic hospitals or to the conscience rights of those who work there."I don't believe that FOCA will pass, although we will continue to monitor all proposed regulations for their potential to help people in this country and for any negative assault on the life issues," she said.
As introduced in previous congresses, the legislation "has never contained anything that would force Catholic hospitals or Catholic personnel to do abortions or to participate in them," she added....
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900402.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Worse than FOCA: Prevention First Act
This act, introduced three weeks ago, is more dangerous than FOCA because it is already in Congress. Prevention First Act (PFA) will:
Make Title X (family planning) a permanent program and fund it at $700 million or more.
Mandate that health insurance programs that cover prescriptions must cover abortifacient contraceptives.
Create a government program to push abortifacient "Emergency Contraception."
Take all federal money away from any hospital that refuses to administer the abortifacient Emergency Contraception to victims of rape.
Create additional massive government funding for Planned Parenthood style sex education programs (abstinence-only programs are specifically excluded from funding).
Permanently include family planning services as part of the Medicaid program.
"All of these programs will result in more babies being killed and more taxpayer money going to the largest abortion chain in the nation - Planned Parenthood."
American Life League has a comprehensive overview of what this bill will bring about should it pass. LifeNews also covered this story. They recommend contacting members of the U.S. Senate.
This act, introduced three weeks ago, is more dangerous than FOCA because it is already in Congress.
Thank you for the admission that Phony FOCA is not even a bill before Congress.
Bishop Lynch is a nut!
The Obama administration, completing its first full week, wasted no time getting priorities in order. First, issue formal apologies to the world, and then begin advancing massive, intrusive government at home.
The president chose Arab television, Al Arabiya, to give his first sit-down interview. He took the opportunity to confirm the long held Arab view that the real problem is America and President Obama apologized on our behalf.
Maybe you better talk to these people.
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/16236/
The Audacity of FOCA
BY The Editors
October 19-25, 2008 Issue | Posted 10/14/08 at 10:00 AM
As the election quickly approaches, the U.S. bishops are shining a harsh spotlight on one bill: the Freedom of Choice Act, commonly called FOCA. FOCA is again before Congress; its chief sponsor in the Senate is Barbara Boxer and one of its co-sponsors is presidential candidate Barack Obama.
In July 2007, Obama told a Planned Parenthood audience: “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” Search YouTube.com for the words “Obama” and “FOCA” to hear it for yourself. Since Obama has said that signing FOCA into law would be his first priority as a new president, summarizing the bill answers the question: For what change does Barack Obama have the audacity to hope?
kurt said
Thank you for the admission that Phony FOCA is not even a bill before Congress.
a rose by any other name kurt
Amen, Arianna. And Phony FOCA is an artifical flower!!!!
Maybe you better talk to these people.
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/16236/
The Audacity of FOCA
BY The Editors
October 19-25, 2008 Issue | Posted 10/14/08 at 10:00 AM
As the election quickly approaches, the U.S. bishops are shining a harsh spotlight on one bill: the Freedom of Choice Act, commonly called FOCA. FOCA is again before Congress; its chief sponsor in the Senate is Barbara Boxer and one of its co-sponsors is presidential candidate Barack Obama.
You got it right, Bill. Look at the dates on your post. Th eboxer bill was in the 110th Congress. The bill died without any cognressional action. It didn't even get part way through the process. We are now in the 111th Congress and there is no FOCA.
Nor will there likely ever be a FOCA.
But one question I had to ask is would Obama sign FOCA if it came to his desk. He said it would be one of the first things he'd do.
He's either a liar or a radical pro abortionist.
Don't understand how good people of faith could have supported either one.
I don't think the President is a liar. Yes, he is pro-choice and pro-FOCA. Since FOCA, as we both agree, will never come to the point where he would be able to sign or veto it, that factor eliminates the practical problems with his mistaken view. It doesn't make me totally comfortable, but I've never known a politican I have been totally comfortable with.
I guess what I don't understand is how one can support someone who is pro FOCA.
Even if we both know in practical terms that the legislation is likely to never pass Congress, what kind of person could be pro FOCA?
Don't you think how someone feels in their heart about something as important as this issue says a whole lot about what kind of man they are?
I couldn't support someone who was pro slavery even if they were right on every other issue and we both know that slavery is not going to come back.
But someone who could be for something as bad as slavery is a person who is not worthy of my support.
Why then are you for someone who thinks partial birth abortion should be legal?
Brian --
People of good will can be in error. Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Talley, Douglas, Bishop John Carroll and the Maryland Jesuits supported slavery. I disgree with all of them and I hope with more than just the hindsight of history. (BTW, a while ago there were efforts to remove the names of those mentioned above from publci schools, streets, etc. I thought it was a silly idea).
You and I agree FOCA is bad legislation. Where we differ is that I think people of good will can be gravely mistaken on this issue.
"Due to the sluggish economy, declining revenues, Global Warming, and the rising cost of energy and utilities, we have been forced to turn off the light at the end of the tunnel. We regret any inconvenience this may cause."
--The GreenPeace Committee
February 19, 2009
FOCA’s Friends
Amy Sullivan, a writer for Time magazine who shills for the Democrats, posted a piece today saying that the Catholic Church’s campaign against the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)—the most radical piece of pro-abortion legislation in history—is much ado about nothing. Following the talking points of her pro-abortion friends in the Catholic community who insist they are against abortion, she says “no such bill has been introduced.”
The fact is that Rep. Jerry Nadler and Sen. Barbara Boxer previously introduced FOCA, but they got nowhere. The fact is that they have publicly pledged to reintroduce the same bill this term. The fact is that the reason they haven’t done so yet is due to pro-life Catholics who are honestly pro-life.
What it comes down to is this: pro-abortion Catholics are angry that pro-life Catholics have succeeded so far in intimidating FOCA supporters from going forward.
Kurt you idiot, there is a difference between people of good will and fucking democrats. what an asshole!
Post a Comment