Posts Tagged ‘abortion’

Back in November my favorite atheistic liberal feminist blogger Violet Socks at the Reclusive leftist wrote this:

On your blog, in your comments, everywhere. That’s how memes start. Coakley’s got the courage and the convictions. She’s raising her head above the parapet, right now, when it matters. Just as she did last year when she endorsed Hillary Clinton. Just as she did when she refused to surrender that vote at the convention.

Martha Coakley for President.

As you might guess by my description of her Violet and I have a serious disagreement on Abortion. Yesterday she quoted a post at a blog called Confluence:

There were a multitude of permutations that would have succeeded in covering poor and sick people but the Democrats picked the one that is most likely to piss off their own constituents in the highest numbers. Congratulations, guys.

But this abortion thing? I gotta wonder why it wasn’t sufficient to stick the knife into health care reform without adding the agonizing poison. You should have never even entertained Stupak and Nelson no matter how much they howled and screamed. That’s going to come back to bite you. And no matter how much theater comes up on the floor of the Senate during debate in the next couple of days to try to remove the amendments and compromises, taking them out is not going to make this bill smell any sweeter. The jig is up. We see through the distraction.

The actual post is interesting philosophically but bottom line is the abortion language makes the bill unacceptable.

Today the Boston Globe has this story about Martha the righteous:

“Let’s be clear on what’s principled here,’’ she said at the time of her opponent, US Representative Michael Capuano. “If it comes down to this in the Senate, and it’s the health care bill or violating women’s rights, where does he stand?’’

Obviously feeling the pressure, Capuano pivoted a few days later and said that while he voted yes in the House, he would vote no on final passage if the abortion restrictions did not change.

Coakley used her stark position on abortion rights to appeal to supporters for donations; in an e-mail, she declared her decision to make her position “a defining moment’’ in her campaign.

Asked last week whether she would vote against a bill that went beyond current law in restricting abortion coverage, Coakley said, “Yes, that’s right.’’

In a statement to the Globe yesterday, Coakley said that although she was disappointed that the Senate bill “gives states additional options regarding the funding mechanisms for women’s reproductive health services,’’ she would reluctantly support it because it would provide coverage for millions of uninsured people and reduce costs.

As Newsbusters put it:

Coakley is such a self-serving hypocritical flip-flopper than not even the Boston Globe could spin this story to make her look good. In almost any other state, Coakley would have very little chance in the general election but, hey, this is Massachusetts we are talking about here. Democrat candidates for senator aren’t so much elected as automatically coronated.

I have thoughts concerning Ms. Coakley, they are similar to my thoughts about Scott Harshbarger. Neither are printable so I didn’t say a thing at the time of the first post. As I want to keep my sense of decorum I’ll continue to restrain myself.

But I can’t wait to read Violet’s follow up post on this subject once she reads the Globe’s story. I’ll wager it is going to be an interesting but not work safe read.

…who went through the Catholic school system and are culturally catholic but actually don’t know and don’t believe the tenants of the church who do the most to help people justify and ignore sins.

What he doesn’t know or more likely won’t acknowledge is that unlike people in a parish who might privately not agree with one or more tenants of the church, Pat Kennedy has publicly proclaimed his opposition to church teaching on a subject of intrinsic evil. For it is written:

Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe (in me) to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea”.    Mark 9:42

Yet O’Donnell proclaims the Bishop who actually bothers to do what he SHOULD do for the sake of both Kennedy’s Soul and his own (since as a Bishop it would be a dereliction of duty to not address it.) he is marked as a “political hack” on both TV and radio.

Now if you want to argue that there is a political aspect to what the Bishop says fine, to call him a hack and say he is misrepresenting Catholic belief, only a person who doesn’t actually believe can say that with a straight face. I suspect he will continue to make these proclamations and keep his regular spot on Morning Joe and MSNBC while Bishop Tobin continues to do what he thinks is right for the soul.

Eventually the day will come when they both find out who is right and who is burnt. I presume O’Donnell doesn’t worry about and/or believe this is an issue. That is his privilege for the rest of his days.

After that he’s on his own.

You know lets do a quick three prayers for O’Donnell, an Our Father, a Hail Mary and a Glory Be. He may be a pain in the neck but you know what, his soul is just as worth saving as mine and I’d like to see both of us arguing politics some day when we are both done here. Maybe he can send an e-mail to Almightly Answers.

…because if you don’t you get egg on your face.

“Money from our loyal donors should not be used for this purpose,” Chairman Michael Steele said in a statement. “I don’t know why this policy existed in the past, but it will not exist under my administration. Consider this issue settled.”

Steele has told the committee’s director of administration to opt out of coverage for elective abortion in the policy it uses from Cigna.

Federal Election Commission Records show the RNC purchases its insurance from Cigna, and two sales agents for the company said that the RNC’s policy covers elective abortion.

The Left is rightly having a field day with it.

Ironically I’ll wager that any person who wanted an abortion at the RNC likely didn’t know it was there. This is why you always read the stuff you get. I’m sure this will be changed as conservative reaction is rightly negative, but there is a very interesting post at Macsmind:

First, I sell insurance for Cigna. It’s not true. There is NO opt out if you don’t want “elective abortion coverage”, the plan is what it is and contains what it contains. It’s a “universal coverage”. The issue is whether or not you would use it.

We know that only liberals do.

Secondly those anonymous employees – who could be fired for even discussing the specifics of any plan, and I will find out who they are, don’t know what they are talking about.

Most insurance plans have some type of “elective abortion” coverage when the mother’s life is in danger, except for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida – which covers NO abortions for any reason. By the way it’s the plan most Democrats carry in South Florida.

One could not expect the RNC to offer no insurance at all, and having such insurance isn’t any indication of disqualification of position on abortion. I’m against breast implants but my plans pays for one.

Now that’s a question of fact, is there a rider you can get to exclude this coverage or not? He actually works for the company selling insurance so I presume he would know. That needs to be discovered. I’ll have to keep an eye on his blog.

If I’m Michael Steele I say that this demonstrates what happens if you don’t “read the bill”. Joe Scarborough just said he is dying to interview Steele, when asked if I was Steele I’d say the following:

“Well Joe that’s right and there is egg on our face for not reading the policy. It’s a great example of what happens when you don’t read a legal document carefully. Imagine how many times that is going to repeated if a health care bill passes that nobody has actually read? How many Americans are going to expect one thing but not find another because their elective representatives didn’t decide to read a 1000 plus page bill that they passed.”

Lemonade baby, Lemonade!

…is running scared from his Bishop decided not to meet with him today:

Kennedy said he was “not going to dignify with an answer” Tobin’s assertions that he could not be a good Catholic and support abortion rights, adding that he found it “very disconcerting” that Tobin won’t agree to keep discussions of his faith private, the Providence Journal reported Wednesday.

The Bishop however is not at a loss for words:

What makes Kennedy think he’s Catholic? “Your baptism as an infant? Your family ties? Your cultural heritage?”

Being Catholic involves much more, he said, including acceptance of essential church teachings on matters of faith and morals, belonging to a parish community, weekly attendance at Mass and regular reception of the sacraments.

And support for abortion rights is not in the same category of those who struggle with sins of anger, pride, greed, impurity or dishonesty and then fail, the bishop declared.

“Your rejection of the Church’s teaching on abortion falls into a different category — it’s a deliberate and obstinate act of the will, a conscious decision that you’ve reaffirmed on many occasions.

“Sorry, you can’t chalk it up to ‘an imperfect humanity.’ Your position is unacceptable to the Church and scandalous to many of our members. It absolutely diminishes your communion with the church….

“I write these words not to embarrass you or to judge the state of your conscience or soul. That’s ultimately between you and God.

“But your description of your relationship with the Church is now a matter of public record and it needs to be challenged. I invite you, as your bishop and brother in Christ, to enter into a sincere process of discernment, conversion and repentance. It’s not too late to repair your relationship with the church, redeem your public image and emerge as an authentic ‘profile in courage,’ especially by defending the sanctity of human life for all people, including unborn children.”

The full letter is here.

Kennedy might not recognize it but he is much luckier than Ted. He has a bishop who is willing to call him out publicly in an attempt to save his soul. The Bishop knows that he will be be pilloried nationally because of it, yet the soul of this man was a prize worth fighting for. Tobin his a profile in courage. It looks like we can’t say the same about Kennedy.

If Kennedy wants to profess himself as a Catholic Pol then he needs to get himself right with the church. If he doesn’t want to I’m sure the media will celebrate him as they did Ted and he will be respected by them for the rest of his life…

…after that he’s on his own.