![]() | ||||||
| Blogs | Articles | Organizations | Biography | Jack's Book | Contact Information | Links |
|
| ||||||
|
Jack Sisson's The Beginning of Human Life Blog | |
|
Many people believe human life begins at conception. Others acknowledge life at conception, but differ about when that life becomes human (versus an indistinguishable mass of cells). We hope to both start and then further dialogue regarding the beginning of human life. We have been preparing for this discussion since 1986. |
Saturday, November 21, 2009Democrats Secure Votes to Advance Healthcare Bill
Washington Post
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) appeared Saturday to secure the 60 votes needed to move an $848 billion health-care reform bill to the Senate floor for debate, as the last two holdouts in his Democratic caucus said they will not join in a Republican filibuster. After days of indecision, Sens. Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and Mary Landrieu (La.) declared that they will vote to advance the bill despite reservations. Reid now expects all 60 members of his caucus to vote yes at 8 p.m. Saturday, clearing the way for amendment deliberations to begin after the Thanksgiving recess. Reid is aiming for final passage before Christmas. The House has already passed its version of the bill. In announcing her support for bringing the bill to the Senate floor, Lincoln told her colleagues: "The truth is this issue is very complex. There is no easy fix and it's imperative that we build on what's already working in health care in America." Labels: Abortion, abortion rights, Catholic Church, healthcare reform More Media Coverage on Catholic Church's Stand-off with Senate
The New York Times
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, fresh off their abortion victory on health care legislation in the House, has joined the battle in the Senate and called for the same amendment that it pushed through the House. In a letter Friday (PDF) to senators, the bishops said that the language in the current bill put forth by Democratic leaders violates the principle that federal funds should not be used for abortions. If it is not amended, they said, the bill should be opposed. The letter appears to be the opening salvo in what is expected to be a major battle over abortion in the Senate in the coming weeks.Continue reading. The Christian Post President Obama in a rare interview appearance on Fox News this week said language used in the pro-life Stupak amendment in the House health care bill is not balanced. Fox correspondent Major Garrett asked Obama during an interview that aired Wednesday night if he would sign a health care bill that included the Stupak language. Obama initially gave a long-winded response saying, “I think there is a balance to be achieved that is consistent with the Hyde amendment – what existed before we reformed health care." “I believe in the basic idea that federal dollars shouldn’t pay for abortions,” he continued. “But I also think we shouldn’t restrict women’s choices, so, I think there’s some negotiations going on, not just on the Democratic side, but I think among people of good will on both sides, to see if we can arrive at something that meets that criteria and I’m confident we can do that.” Garrett then pressed Obama for a yes or no answer on if he thought the Stupak language “strike that balance.” “Not yet,” Obama said. Provisions that don't include a ban on federal funding aren't acceptable to anti-abortion lawmakers, Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Menominee, said Thursday, adding the fight will likely have to be resolved in a House-Senate conference committee. "The leaders of the Congress should listen to the American people. The American people want health care reform, but they want it without federal funding of abortions," said Stupak, whose last-minute amendment to the House bill two weeks ago set off a firestorm of criticism and pressure on the Senate to follow suit. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's bill would permit abortions in a government-run plan if the Health and Human Services secretary could ensure that no federal money is used, and anyone receiving federal subsidies would have to pay for an abortion with her own money. A woman receiving federal subsidies could buy a private plan that covers abortions, but would have to use her own money to pay for such a procedure. Labels: Abortion, abortion rights, Catholic Church, healthcare reform Catholic Church Intensifies Lobbying as Senate Readies to Cast 1st Vote on Healthcare Reform
The Catholic Church's heavy-handed lobbying to remove abortion coverage from any major health care reform is still center stage as the Senate readies to take its first vote on the issue. Here's a sampling from newspapers around the country:
The PressDemocrat (Santa Rosa, CA.) From parish pews to the halls of Congress, Catholics are caught up in a debate that challenges their core beliefs on two central tenets: health care for all and protecting the unborn. The internal tensions are being met with equal amounts of public scrutiny over the church’s efforts to influence health care legislation, bringing harsh criticism from some who accuse church leaders of overstepping their authority. The church’s official position, advocated by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, is that federal insurance subsidies contained in any health care legislation be prohibited from funding elective abortion. The New York Post President Obama’s effort to reform the health-care system could blow up in a holy war with the nation’s Catholic bishops over the historically hot-button issue of abortion. The Catholic Church claims the Senate bill introduced by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would permit insurance coverage for certain abortions. By comparison, the church applauds a measure passed by the House of Representatives that calls for a blanket ban on abortion for health plans that receive federal subsidies. The Senate measure — which has gained the support of the White House — would allow a new government health-insurance plan to cover abortions and let private insurers that receive federal subsidies offer plans that include abortion coverage. But women seeking abortions would have to foot the bill from their premiums — and not use federal dollars. Continuing reading. The Washington Post At a time of fractious debate within the Catholic Church in the United States, the head of the national bishops group said this week that Catholic universities, media outlets and other affiliated organizations that insist on independence from the church hierarchy are "less than fully Catholic." In an address that opened the semiannual meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Francis George, archbishop of Chicago, implored 300 fellow bishops to "look for ways to strengthen church unity." "Since everything and everyone in Catholic communion is truly interrelated," George said, ". . . an insistence on complete independence from the bishop renders a person or institution sectarian, less than fully Catholic." A top Obama administration official is praising the new Senate health bill's attempt to find a compromise on abortion coverage — even as an official of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says Sen. Harry Reid's bill is the worst he's seen so far on the divisive issue. The bishops were instrumental in getting tough anti-abortion language adopted by the House, forcing Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to accept restrictions that outraged liberals as the price for passing the Democratic health care bill. Reid, D-Nev., now faces a similar choice: Ultimately, he will need the votes of a handful of Democratic senators who oppose abortion to get his bill through. Republicans hoping to block the health bill in the Senate are relishing the Democrats' predicament. Representative Louise Slaughter has a consistent record advocating abortion rights. So the New York Democrat was stunned recently to receive, for the first time, a letter from a Catholic diocese in western New York, demanding that she explain her vote this month against a health care amendment prohibiting insurance companies from paying for abortions. “I’m not Catholic. But they [asked] me to explain myself,’’ said Slaughter, who has not answered the request. Labels: Abortion, abortion rights, Catholic Church, healthcare reform Wednesday, December 19, 2007Mitt Romney Stutters His Way Into Incoherent Mire of Double Talk
LifeNews.com, by Steven Ertelt, Editor, December 17, 2007 -- Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Mitt Romney participated in a weekend interview with Tim Russert of the NBC program "Meet the Press" and he restated, as he has countless times before, why he changed his position on abortion. Romney also reiterated his position allowing researchers to destroy human embryos from fertility clinics for scientific studies...
...Romney said he now believes that life begins at the point of conception. "I do. I believe, I believe from a, from a, a political perspective that life begins at conception. I, I don't, I don't pretend to know, if you will, from a theological standpoint when life begins," he explained. The former Massachusetts governor also restated his position that his supports a human life amendment and overturning Roe v. Wade but doesn't think Americans are ready for the amendment yet... ...He said that abortion bans would not punish women but hold abortion practitioners accountable in the same way the partial-birth abortion ban does with fines, loss of medical license and prison terms.------------- On the issue of stem cell research, Romney again said he opposes the purposeful creation and destruction of human life. However, he also would allow the destruction of human life by letting scientists destroy human embryos from fertility clinics for experiments. Russert followed up on that point."But to be clear, the embryos that are so-called surplus in vitro clinics are destroyed for research, and you support that?" the MSNBC host asked. "The term support is perhaps not the exact word I'd choose," Romney replied. "I would not outlaw it. I would allow, I would allow private laboratories and private institutions--as we currently do, and as the president does as well--to use these so-called surplus or embryos to be discarded." Labels: abortion rights, embryonic stem cell, in vitro, Roe v. Wade Thursday, August 30, 2007The Onion on Abortion-Rights Extremism You probably know of the satirical "publication" The Onion, one of my favorite sites. If so, you probably think of its point of view -- understandably -- as leftist, for the most part. (Among the featured headlines for this week: "Heartbroken Bush Runs After Departing Rove's Car.")But to its credit, The Onion isn't reluctant to poke fun at extremists on the other side of the aisle. This week's edition contains one such article, reducting ad absurdum a certain fringe belief of abortion-rights subscribers: the belief that pregnancies (and babies) are obstacles to a woman's happiness. Headlined "Woman Overjoyed by Giant Uterine Parasite," the article's tone is one of head-scratching disbelief that the (fictitious) mother-to-be profiled might actually be happy with her future. Excerpts: "I'm so happy!" Crowley said of the golf ball–sized, nutrient-sapping organism embedded deep in the wall of her uterus. "I was beginning to think this would never happen to me."(Read the whole thing, if you'd like.) For the record, other stories in this issue also bear (albeit less directly) on the importance of human life:
Labels: Abortion, abortion rights, human life, The Onion |
LinksBrain PillsRoe v. Wade Stem Cells Stem Cell Fight! Bearing Right Moral Monkey? Op-ed Dave's site Stem Stall Screamers Bush the hypocrite ArchivesJune 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 December 2005 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 March 2009 November 2009 April 2010 |