When did America’s decline begin? Surely long before child killing was made legal, right? Still, I wonder. When we devalue the life of the unborn, referring to life inside the mother as “fetus” or “clump of cells or tissue”, where do we draw the line? Some believe a baby isn’t worthy of protection until viable outside the womb. But given the wonders of neonatal technology, babies can survive much earlier than previously thought. Here’s some good news for pro-life advocates:
Congress made it a little easier for hospitals, insurers and others to refuse to provide or cover abortions. A provision in a $388 billion spending bill passed by the House and Senate on Saturday would block any of the measure’s money from going to federal, state or local agencies that act against health care providers and insurers because they don’t provide abortions, make abortion referrals or cover them.“This policy simply states that health care entities should not be forced to provide elective abortions, a practice to which a majority of health care providers object and which they will not perform as a matter of conscience,” said Rep. David Weldon, R-Fla., a doctor who sponsored the language. (Source)
Republicans are trying to make sure that doctors who don’t want to be child killers (remember the Hippocratic oath?) won’t be hassled and pressured by the government. This is what a Republican Congress is for! Forget about the mid-term elections and do what needs to be done now.
Check out the New York Times’ lead and how they frame the story:
House and Senate negotiators have tucked a potentially far-reaching anti-abortion provision into a $388 billion must-pass spending bill, complicating plans for Congress to wrap up its business and adjourn for the year.The provision may be an early indication of the growing political muscle of social conservatives who provided crucial support for Republican candidates, including President Bush, in the election….
Far-reaching. Anti-abortion. Complicating plans. Political muscle of social conservatives. All compliments, in my opinion. More from the NYT:
The provision could affect millions of American women [and save millions of babies, according to Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, who warned Friday that she would use procedural tactics to slow Senate business to a crawl if the language was not altered. [My emphasis]
Damn those conservatives and their obsession with the “unborn!”
Update: Polipundit provides a twist on the “Roe Effect.” More from Captain Ed, Opinion Times and Life News.
Why people fail to see the difference between child killing and capital punishment really irritates me. Let me explain once again. Abortion is the taking of an innocent human life. Capital punishment is the taking of a guilty human life. Please understand the distinction. There must be punishment for the guilty in proportion to the crime.
Whether you think biblically about this issue or not, the consistent position is to oppose abortion and support capital punishment because both place value on protecting the victim. Favoring abortion and opposing capital punishment is not only inconsistent, but it’s a consequence of moral relativism and backward thinking. (Thanks for noticing the typo, commenter!)
*By the way, if you call me a hypocrite or imply that I’m interested in people’s sex lives, your comment will not be approved.
Update II: The Bible and Capital Punishment
Update III: In response to Nancy Pelosi’s rant about how Republicans are “gutting” Roe v. Wade, David Limbaugh writes: “Roe v. Wade had nothing to do with forcing health care providers to perform abortions. It had to do with the state’s right to regulate abortions. It is definitionally impossible that the provision in this bill barring government from forcing providers to perform abortions or provide referrals violates Roe v. Wade.”
