Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Closing Catholic Hospitals?
The Bulletin ^ | 10/31/2008 | Joseph John Vennari

Posted on 11/01/2008 7:15:57 PM PDT by murphE

On Oct. 7, 2007, Sen. Barack Obama spoke to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund and promised, "The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing I'll do."

What is the Freedom of Choice Act? It is the most sweeping pro-abortion legislation ever proposed in the United States.

In a letter dated Sept. 19 to members of Congress, Philadelphia's Justin Cardinal Rigali rightly warned:

"Despite its deceptive title, FOCA would deprive the American people in all 50 states of the freedom they now have to enact modest restraints and regulations on the abortion industry. FOCA would coerce all Americans into subsidizing and promoting abortion with their tax dollars. And FOCA would counteract any and all sincere efforts by government to reduce abortions in our country.

"The operative language of FOCA is twofold. First it creates a 'fundamental right' to abortion throughout the nine months of pregnancy, including a right to abort a fully developed child in the final weeks for undefined "health" reasons. No government body at any level would be able to "deny or interfere with" this newly created federal right. Second, it forbids government at all levels to "discriminate" against the exercise of this right "in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information." For the first time, abortion on demand would be a national entitlement that government must condone and promote in all public programs affecting pregnant women," said the cardinal.

It is clear the FOCA raises abortion to what it calls a "fundamental right." Yet it is not clear if Catholics realize the threat that Mr. Obama poses to the unborn, to believing Catholics in the medical profession, and to Catholic hospitals across the nation.

Michael Moses, legal analyst of the United States Council of Catholic Bishops called it a "radical measure" that will "go way beyond Roe [vs. Wade]." The language is so sweeping that it will wipe out any state's "conscience" clause, which is the law that allows hospitals, doctors and nurses to abstain from taking part in abortion for reasons of conscience. If abortion is a "fundamental right", according to FOCA, then every hospital must provide it.

The net result, as one writer noted, is "President Obama and his congressional supermajority would force every Christian hospital, doctor or nurse to abandon their faith or go out of business." Under FOCA, believing Christians could be banned from the hospital industry (and apostolate) by federal law.

John Vennari is editor of the monthly Catholic Family News. He can be reached at cfnjjv@gmail.com


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; abortion; catholic; catholichospitals; catholicvote; digg; foca; obama; obamaisevil; prolife

1 posted on 11/01/2008 7:15:58 PM PDT by murphE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: murphE

I suggest he draft Romney for that effort; Romney has experience in telling Catholic hospitals to shove it.


2 posted on 11/01/2008 7:16:43 PM PDT by manapua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Yeah Clinton signed some big partial birth abortion thing as his first act in office. These guys are SICK freaks.


3 posted on 11/01/2008 7:16:55 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys--Reagan and Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE
Hope the Nat. Staff Nurses Union can handle the reduction in membership, after all they did support nObie.

Something about make your bed, sleep in it?

4 posted on 11/01/2008 7:18:24 PM PDT by IllumiNaughtyByNature (If You Have A BRAIN - You'll Vote For MCCAIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Salvation; cpforlife.org

ping


5 posted on 11/01/2008 7:18:40 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Shouldn’t a doctor decide if an abortion is needed, and not the patient? Why is it a patient can demand an abortion, but not other types of surgery? Also this whole health of the mother issue is far to broad, as every pregnancy carries a risk an you really do not know who will be at risk until it happens.


6 posted on 11/01/2008 7:19:59 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE
God willing, even if That One wins, maybe he won't get a filibuster-proof Senate and we can avoid this mess.

25% of the hospital beds in the US are in Catholic hospitals. If FOCA is enacted, the bishops should begin shutting them down, fast enough to make things difficult. When NYC tried this garbage, that's what the Abp. did there, and they had to back down.

And meanwhile, start the legal action. If a "right to an abortion" is protected by some stupid constitutional "penumbra," the right to practice medicine without endorsing abortion ought to be protected as well.

7 posted on 11/01/2008 7:21:06 PM PDT by Campion (Vote for Obama and Get Nuclear War for Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Both Cardinal George of Chicago and Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver threatened to close all of the Catholic hospitals in their respective states when their legislatures tried to pass the same thing as a state law.

Both legislatures backed down immediately.


8 posted on 11/01/2008 7:22:53 PM PDT by BlessedBeGod (I guess I'm a redneck clinging to God & guns, 3 generations from small towns in W. Pa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IllumiNaughtyByNature
My priest gave a really good sermon about this today. He never mentioned Obama by name, just as, “the young man running for president, I refuse to speak his name in this holy place.”
9 posted on 11/01/2008 7:23:29 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IllumiNaughtyByNature

People have had the ability to fight against abortion for 35 years. It’s never really been put on the front burner as an issue that was more important than, say, taxes or gas prices.

Result: 50 millions dead.

Does anyone think this slipped God’s attention?

Maybe if the nation doesn’t care enough when there is a clear choice on these matters—when it clearly votes FOR abortion and FOR gay rights—then He will let the nation have its way.

And after that, he’ll start grading the exam...


10 posted on 11/01/2008 7:23:29 PM PDT by CondorFlight (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Real Christians don’t vote for genocide. Real Christians do not vote pro-choice!


11 posted on 11/01/2008 7:24:28 PM PDT by GailA ( Valor Quilts for our wounded Troops....I'm a quilt-aholic!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
They're not sick, they're evil.

They worship death; dead babies are their "sacrament".

The Democrat Party has become the demoncRat Party ... and it is dead to me.

I may not always vote for the Republican in a give election (I voted for and am actively campaigning for McCain/Palin) but I will never again vote for a demoncRat.

12 posted on 11/01/2008 7:25:01 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Sick, evil and inhuman. That’s all I can say and stay within the bounds of civility.


13 posted on 11/01/2008 7:25:51 PM PDT by darkangel82 (If you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. (Say no to RINOs))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight
Exactly. And those who stand on God's side will face persecution, yet we should rejoice in it.

Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven.

14 posted on 11/01/2008 7:28:03 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: murphE
This dovetails nicely with Obama’s very frightening, very revealing 2001 interview, bemoaning the “limitations” of the CONSTITUTION! :

“But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”

Perhaps the Messiah's ‘Civilian National Security Force’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
will go door to door, collecting and destroying this limited, constraining document.

Can you say “Josef Stalin”?

15 posted on 11/01/2008 7:31:09 PM PDT by Chairman of the Bard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeL
Abortion is never necessary in the 2nd or 3rd trimester...that is what C-Sections are for...to save the life of the mom and baby.
16 posted on 11/01/2008 7:31:25 PM PDT by GailA ( Valor Quilts for our wounded Troops....I'm a quilt-aholic!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: manapua
As with all of DemonRATs newly discovered “rights”, this is another thinly disguised usurpation of freedoms. Under the guise of ensuring the rights of those seeking abortion, they trample on the rights of those who oppose the practice. If enacted, such legislation will in short order make it impossible for Catholic hospitals to refuse to perform abortions, or they will lose the ability to bill medicare and Medicaid. Shortly after-wards, it will become a hate crime to criticize pro abortion policies. Welcome to the left wing of the DemocRAT party, champion of all that is vile, corrupt, and despicable in human behavior.
17 posted on 11/01/2008 7:36:51 PM PDT by bitterohiogunclinger (Never argue with an idiot, they always wear you down and beat you with experience)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chairman of the Bard
Can you say “Josef Stalin”?

Well said, but I would have asked: can you say "George Orwell"?
18 posted on 11/01/2008 7:37:13 PM PDT by Apparatchik ("Hope" is not a course of action. "Change" is a not a policy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
DIGG IT
19 posted on 11/01/2008 7:38:44 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GailA

I know that and doctors know that. The problem is that doctors are willing to listen to patients desires instead of what is in their best interest, which is why we have 1,000s of people walking around disfigured from multiple plastic surgeries, and people dying from getting unneeded abortions.


20 posted on 11/01/2008 7:39:57 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Apparatchik; Chairman of the Bard
Can you say “Josef Stalin”?

Well said, but I would have asked: can you say "George Orwell"?

Can you say evil incarnate?

21 posted on 11/01/2008 7:40:39 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cgk; narses; MHGinTN

ping 4 life


22 posted on 11/01/2008 7:45:22 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; little jeremiah

ping


23 posted on 11/01/2008 7:47:34 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Apparatchik
Yes, point well taken. One of my personal tenets of liberalism is the “liberal law of inversion”. Understand that, that which liberals ‘cry foul’ the loudest and most strenuosly about is that which they are most guilty of.

Two examples:

The 2000 election - by watching liberals melt down over their accusations that Bush stole the election, you see that, in fact, THEIR attempt to steal the election failed. They finally succeeded in Washington State in 2004, when ACORN and Christine Gregoire were able to rip off Dino Rossi. They are deploying every dirty trick in their bag on a national level today.

Bush is abrogating our civil liberties - in fact, Obama plans the most Orwellian administration in our history.

24 posted on 11/01/2008 7:53:12 PM PDT by Chairman of the Bard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: murphE
Tammy Bruce described him as a “ Malignant Narcissist” this evening.

A quick google search revealed:

http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/narcissism/malignant_narcissism.html

and

http://behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/narcissisticpd.htm

Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

(3) believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

(4) requires excessive admiration

(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

25 posted on 11/01/2008 8:03:38 PM PDT by Chairman of the Bard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

Like all other procedures, of you are a paying customer, you can always find a doctor willing to do the procedure, whether they feel its risky or not. They aren’t the ones going under the knife, they tell the patient the risks and get a signature saying so, and they’re good to go.


26 posted on 11/01/2008 8:23:07 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: murphE

I was disappointed tonight at the vigil mass the deacon doing the homily did not mention this issue at all. I’m sorry now I did not write to the archbishop’s office and urge them to do so before.

During the prayer of the faithful though one of the petitions was for the voters to make the right decision and vote for justice, freedom, and “respect for life.” To which I replied loudly “Lord hear our prayer!” I hope He will.


27 posted on 11/01/2008 8:40:08 PM PDT by TNCMAXQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: murphE
and i know some Irish democrat catholic nuns who run hospitals and will vote Demoncrap for obama. they were so excited last yr. when the prospects of a woman president were possible.
28 posted on 11/01/2008 8:46:21 PM PDT by Coleus (Abortion and Physician-assisted Murder (aka-Euthanasia), Don't Democrats just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; Canticle_of_Deborah; vox_freedom

meant to ping you guys


29 posted on 11/01/2008 8:47:21 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

30 posted on 11/01/2008 8:48:47 PM PDT by narses (http://www.theobamadisaster.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; Salvation; ELS; NYer; firebrand

ping


31 posted on 11/01/2008 8:50:37 PM PDT by nutmeg (Sarah Palin/Joe the Plumber 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE

S.1173
Title: A bill to protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] (introduced 4/19/2007)      Cosponsors (19)
Related Bills: H.R.1964
Latest Major Action: 4/19/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.


Jump to: Summary, Major Actions, All Actions, Titles, Cosponsors, Committees, Related Bill Details, Amendments

SUMMARY AS OF:
4/19/2007--Introduced.

Freedom of Choice Act - Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.

Prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from: (1) denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or (2) discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively.

Authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action.


MAJOR ACTIONS:

    ***NONE***


ALL ACTIONS:
4/19/2007:
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

TITLE(S):  (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)

  • SHORT TITLE(S) AS INTRODUCED:
    Freedom of Choice Act

  • OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
    A bill to protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.

COSPONSORS(19), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]:     (Sort: by date)


COMMITTEE(S):
RELATED BILL DETAILS:  (additional related bills may be indentified in Status)

    Bill: Relationship:
    H.R.1964 Related bill identified by CRS

AMENDMENT(S):

***NONE***

The actual contents of the bill are as follows:

S 1173 IS

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1173

To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

April 19, 2007

Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mrs. MURRAY, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. CLINTON, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. BAUCUS, and Ms. CANTWELL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


A BILL

To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Freedom of Choice Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:

      (1) The United States was founded on core principles, such as liberty, personal privacy, and equality, which ensure that individuals are free to make their most intimate decisions without governmental interference and discrimination.

      (2) One of the most private and difficult decisions an individual makes is whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy. Those reproductive health decisions are best made by women, in consultation with their loved ones and health care providers.

      (3) In 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479), and in 1973, in Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113) and Doe v. Bolton (410 U.S. 179), the Supreme Court recognized that the right to privacy protected by the Constitution encompasses the right of every woman to weigh the personal, moral, and religious considerations involved in deciding whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy.

      (4) The Roe v. Wade decision carefully balances the rights of women to make important reproductive decisions with the State's interest in potential life. Under Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the right to privacy protects a woman's decision to choose to terminate her pregnancy prior to fetal viability, with the State permitted to ban abortion after fetal viability except when necessary to protect a woman's life or health.

      (5) These decisions have protected the health and lives of women in the United States. Prior to the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, an estimated 1,200,000 women each year were forced to resort to illegal abortions, despite the risk of unsanitary conditions, incompetent treatment, infection, hemorrhage, disfiguration, and death. Before Roe, it is estimated that thousands of women died annually in the United States as a result of illegal abortions.

      (6) In countries in which abortion remains illegal, the risk of maternal mortality is high. According to the World Health Organization, of the approximately 600,000 pregnancy-related deaths occurring annually around the world, 80,000 are associated with unsafe abortions.

      (7) The Roe v. Wade decision also expanded the opportunities for women to participate equally in society. In 1992, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (505 U.S. 833), the Supreme Court observed that, `[t]he ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.'.

      (8) Even though the Roe v. Wade decision has stood for more than 34 years, there are increasing threats to reproductive health and freedom emerging from all branches and levels of government. In 2006, South Dakota became the first State in more than 15 years to enact a ban on abortion in nearly all circumstances. Supporters of this ban have admitted it is an attempt to directly challenge Roe in the courts. Other States are considering similar bans.

      (9) Further threatening Roe, the Supreme Court recently upheld the first-ever Federal ban on an abortion procedure, which has no exception to protect a woman's health. The majority decision in Gonzales v. Carhart (05-380, slip op. April 18, 2007) and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America fails to protect a woman's health, a core tenet of Roe v. Wade. Dissenting in that case, Justice Ginsburg called the majority's opinion `alarming', and stated that, `[f]or the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman's health'. Further, she said, the Federal ban `and the Court's defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court'.

      (10) Legal and practical barriers to the full range of reproductive services endanger women's health and lives. Incremental restrictions on the right to choose imposed by Congress and State legislatures have made access to reproductive care extremely difficult, if not impossible, for many women across the country. Currently, 87 percent of the counties in the United States have no abortion provider.

      (11) While abortion should remain safe and legal, women should also have more meaningful access to family planning services that prevent unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.

      (12) To guarantee the protections of Roe v. Wade, Federal legislation is necessary.

      (13) Although Congress may not create constitutional rights without amending the Constitution, Congress may, where authorized by its enumerated powers and not prohibited by the Constitution, enact legislation to create and secure statutory rights in areas of legitimate national concern.

      (14) Congress has the affirmative power under section 8 of article I of the Constitution and section 5 of the 14th amendment to the Constitution to enact legislation to facilitate interstate commerce and to prevent State interference with interstate commerce, liberty, or equal protection of the laws.

      (15) Federal protection of a woman's right to choose to prevent or terminate a pregnancy falls within this affirmative power of Congress, in part, because--

        (A) many women cross State lines to obtain abortions and many more would be forced to do so absent a constitutional right or Federal protection;

        (B) reproductive health clinics are commercial actors that regularly purchase medicine, medical equipment, and other necessary supplies from out-of-State suppliers; and

        (C) reproductive health clinics employ doctors, nurses, and other personnel who travel across State lines in order to provide reproductive health services to patients.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:

      (1) GOVERNMENT- The term `government' includes a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, or official (or other individual acting under color of law) of the United States, a State, or a subdivision of a State.

      (2) STATE- The term `State' means each of the States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory or possession of the United States.

      (3) VIABILITY- The term `viability' means that stage of pregnancy when, in the best medical judgment of the attending physician based on the particular medical facts of the case before the physician, there is a reasonable likelihood of the sustained survival of the fetus outside of the woman.

SEC. 4. INTERFERENCE WITH REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH PROHIBITED.

    (a) Statement of Policy- It is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman.

    (b) Prohibition of Interference- A government may not--

      (1) deny or interfere with a woman's right to choose--

        (A) to bear a child;

        (B) to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability; or

        (C) to terminate a pregnancy after viability where termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or

      (2) discriminate against the exercise of the rights set forth in paragraph (1) in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.

    (c) Civil Action- An individual aggrieved by a violation of this section may obtain appropriate relief (including relief against a government) in a civil action.

SEC. 5. SEVERABILITY.

    If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which the provision is held to be unconstitutional, shall not be affected thereby.

SEC. 6. RETROACTIVE EFFECT.

    This Act applies to every Federal, State, and local statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act.

ENDn


32 posted on 11/01/2008 8:58:05 PM PDT by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I was hoping you’d ping your list.


33 posted on 11/01/2008 9:05:24 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...

.


34 posted on 11/01/2008 9:47:12 PM PDT by Coleus (Abortion and Physician-assisted Murder (aka-Euthanasia), Don't Democrats just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

Am I the only one who thinks Obama is possibly the Antichrist?


35 posted on 11/01/2008 9:48:49 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine ("Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Chairman of the Bard

Tammy has That One nailed.


36 posted on 11/01/2008 9:50:43 PM PDT by Emperor Palpatine ("Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Emperor Palpatine
I believe he is, beyond any shadow of a doubt, an antichrist.

Beyond that ... I find him to be in the same league as all of the XX Century's bloody-handed, bloody-minded, socialist totalitarians.

Sure, he hasn't really done anything yet.

And there was a time when

Hitler was just an antisemitic rabblerouser carrying on in a beer-hall.

Lenin was just a "parlour pink".

Khomeini was just an exiled troublemaker.

...

37 posted on 11/01/2008 9:55:46 PM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: All; murphE; Coleus

“What is the Practical Impact of FOCA?

In elevating abortion to a fundamental right, FOCA poses an undeniable and irreparable danger to common-sense laws supported by a majority of Americans. Among the federal and state laws that FOCA would nullify are:

* Informed consent laws
* Waiting periods
* Parental consent and notification laws
* Health and safety regulations for abortion clinics
* Requirements that licensed physicians perform abortions
* Bans on partial-birth abortion
* Bans on abortion after viability. FOCA’s apparent attempt to limit post-viability abortions is illusory. Under FOCA, post-viability abortions are expressly permitted to protect the woman’s “health.” Within the context of abortion, “health” has been interpreted so broadly that FOCA would not actually proscribe any abortion before or after viability.
* Limits on public funding for elective abortions (thus, making American taxpayers fund a procedure that many find morally objectionable)
* Limits on the use of public facilities (such has public hospitals and medical schools at state universities) for abortions
* Legal protections for individual healthcare providers who decline to participate in abortions
* Legal protections for Catholic and other religiously-affiliated hospitals who, while providing care to millions of poor and uninsured Americans, refuse to allow abortions within their facilities

Notably, pro-abortion groups do not deny FOCA’s draconian impact. For example, Planned Parenthood has explained, “FOCA will supersede anti-choice laws that restrict the right to choose, including laws that prohibit the public funding of abortions for poor women or counseling and referrals for abortions. Additionally, FOCA will prohibit onerous restrictions on a woman’s right to choose, such as mandated delays and targeted and medically unnecessary regulations.”

Thus, under FOCA (as introduced and supported by Senator Obama and other pro-abortion members of Congress), a 12-year old girl could have a late-term abortion performed on her by an under-qualified non-physician without her parents’ knowledge. The parents would have no opportunity to speak with the abortion provider about their daughter’s medical history, and they would have no opportunity to make arrangements for her follow-up care.”

excerpt http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/1615/26/

From the link: “* REQUIREMENTS that licensed physicians perform abortions” Of course Catholic hospital would have to close down.


38 posted on 11/01/2008 10:06:36 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE

This thing is asinine.

I don’t see it passing a filibuster in the senate though, even if the Dems reach 60 seats. There are enough red state Dems that would not vote for cloture on this monstrosity. Likewise, it would have trouble in the house for similar reasons.


39 posted on 11/01/2008 10:09:34 PM PDT by St. Louis Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: St. Louis Conservative

It does show how evil Obama is.


40 posted on 11/01/2008 10:10:42 PM PDT by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

IIRC, his first act was doing away with the Mexico City rule via executive order.


41 posted on 11/01/2008 10:31:56 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (*******It's not conservative to accept an inept Commander-in-Chief in a time of war. Back Mac.******)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Chairman of the Bard

Well, not quite, but obviously Obama has a very “French” nation of the separation of Church and state.


42 posted on 11/01/2008 10:56:28 PM PDT by RobbyS (ECCE homo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

There will be bishops who vote for Obama.


43 posted on 11/01/2008 10:59:08 PM PDT by RobbyS (ECCE homo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Praise God for the Catholic Church! says this Southern Baptist...


44 posted on 11/02/2008 6:41:58 AM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Lord please bless our nation with John McCain as President and Sarah Palin as Vice President! Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE
Pinged from Terri Dailies


45 posted on 11/02/2008 9:30:59 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

If Obama caused the closing of Catholic hospitals, he’d see, right quick, just how the poor were taken care of in this country, because most wouldn’t be, any longer.


46 posted on 11/02/2008 10:13:29 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
and i know some Irish democrat catholic nuns who run hospitals and will vote Demoncrap for obama.

What IS it with those Irish nuns, and many Northeastern Catholics? They swallowed Cardinal Bernadin's Seamless Garment idea hook, line and sinker. It's SO infuriating!

47 posted on 11/02/2008 10:20:33 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: taraytarah

PING


48 posted on 11/02/2008 10:55:35 AM PST by kingattax (99 % of liberals give the rest a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson