Currently Being Moderated
8

Talking Health Care & Abortion

Posted by Jim_Daly on Aug 5, 2009 9:00:33 AM

There are two things that will drive a debate to the point of a decision: Pain and partisan politics, though not necessarily in that order.

 

The legislative wrangling regarding health care reform is raging red hot these days. Admittedly, it's a complex issue. For some, there is a genuine and sincere appeal to its passage, centered on a desire to help those families least able to help themselves. Few would fail to acknowledge the real pain of those most in need; those who are unable to access necessary Doctor Care for Elderly.jpghealth care for themselves and their loved ones.

 

As the head of an organization devoted to helping families thrive, I'm keenly aware of the challenges befalling moms and dads all around the country. As we have been since our inception in 1977, we're fully committed to advocating for the health and well-being of America's citizens.

 

But sometimes you can actually do more harm trying to help if you're going about it the wrong way.

 

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language," former President Ronald Reagan once said, "are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" He was likely echoing the sentiments of Thomas Paine, one of our Founding Fathers. "That government is best which governs least" he famously said.

 

We would be wise to heed their words.

 

It appears that very few people are fully aware of what's included in the various versions and drafts of the proposed health care reform legislation, which in effect, would dramatically and detrimentally increase the role of government in America's health care delivery system. There are numerous aspects of the issue that fall far outside of my scope of expertise. Regardless of where you stand on the need or wisdom of the overall reform, I do believe one aspect of this legislation is more troubling than any other.

 

As currently drafted, taxpayers would be forced to pay for abortions—and doctors and hospitals that refuse to perform abortions may be forced to close their doors rather than violate their religious beliefs or moral convictions. This would include some of the finest facilities throughout the union.

 

What a travesty and outrage to think that those within the medical community who have committed their lives to the preservation of the sanctity of life will be silenced. My heart aches at the thought of precious viable babies being slain—with the use of our tax dollars! What a terrible step backward; how could this be allowed to happen in the United States of America?

 

President Obama has suggested he wants to make abortion rare in America. That's a great place to start the conversation, but I can tell you one thing: Requiring taxpayers to cover the cost of abortion-on-demand will not result in a reduction of abortion. It'll have the reverse effect.

 

If President Obama is truly serious about making abortion rare, he shouldn't be forcing Americans to subsidize it as part of his health care reform package. Even many abortion proponents don't support that extreme position, and it does make his statements disingenuous toward saving lives.

 

What should President Obama do?Infant holding hands.jpg

 

At a minimum, the President should promote policies ensuring a woman's informed consent before she receives an abortion, including the opportunity to view an ultrasound image of her child. Our research indicates that of those women still at risk for abortion after counseling, 65% expressed their intent to carry their baby to term after viewing the ultrasound image.

 

Women deserve the full picture before making a decision as painful and irreversible as having an abortion—and an ultrasound provides it to them.

 

In her recent Wall Street Journal column, Peggy Noonan wrote the following: "putting abortion in the mix takes the Christian out of Christian Democrat. It breaks and jangles the coalition, telling those who believe abortion is evil that they not only have to accept its legality but now have to pay for it in a brand new plan, for which they'll be more highly taxed. This is taking a knife to your own supporters."

 

I hope you'll consider visiting our CitizenLink website to read more about this and other issues of great relevance to the family. You might also enjoy an extended discussion we had on the health care debate on last week's Focus on the Family broadcast. To listen, CLICK HERE.

 

Fortunately, there's good news on the horizon. The traditional six-week Congressional August recess is coming. Let's pray the break will allow for further discussion and examination of this legislation.

10,928 Views Twitter Facebook Tags: current-events, abortion, healthcare


Add a comment Leave a comment on this blog post.
Aug 7, 2009 10:41 AM Guest Bertha A.  says:
I am stunned at a proposal that would lump abortion in with healthcare reform needed for thousands of people who are ill and have no insurance.  Isn't this an elective surgery - one made by choice?   I by no means stand in the way of anyone's right to choose.  They have to live with whatever that choice is.  I do however find it hard to understand how so many who are denied life saving treatments because of insurance are going to be taxed to cover life taking treatments.  Dear God.
Aug 12, 2009 1:25 PM Guest Robby Z  says:

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language," former President Ronald Reagan once said, "are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" He was likely echoing the sentiments of Thomas Paine, one of our Founding Fathers. "That government is best which governs least" he famously said.

 

The problem with Paine's quote is that his wing of the colonial revolt led us to the Articles of Confederation, rooted in this "anti-government" sentiment. It proved unworkable, leading to the writing of a new Constitution in 1787 with government taking a more active role.

 

Also, I've also found it odd that Conservative Christians would like the government to use its power to make abortion illegal while serving up a "less government" philosophy. A more moderating view is that of the President: Abortion should not be a legal issue at all. It is better to work at reducing abortions through education about birth-control and what it means to be human from a non-religious perspective. Religious people have no right in this country to impose their theology on all; that is a "de facto" establishment of religion in the public sphere. And that is something Tom Paine would have endorsed fully: he was a devout  non-believer, after all.

 

Thanks for your time.

Aug 12, 2009 1:27 PM Guest Patrick S  says:

Jim,

 

I appreciate your patient and well manered article on this tricky subject. However, your regular readers and I would appreciate a little more accuracy in regards to if/how the current legislation would fund abortions. The current situation is more nuanced than your description, with multiple options private & public that may or may not cover abortions; especially with the most debated sections still being crafted and completely settled yet. The overall idea of federal funding is true, but oversimplified and readers deserve to be better informed than this.

 

As for things Obama can do to make abortion rare? How about provisions for regular checkups for mothers and their babies? How about programs for teaching mothers how to best keep their babies healthy, or providing better childcare for single mothers (one of the most likely scenarios when an abortion is prevented). Life begins at conception, but our attention and care for mothers should not stop at birth.

Aug 12, 2009 1:23 PM Guest Tom S  says:

Dear Focus on the Family

 

Ronald Reagan said about government "The nine most terrifying words in the English language, are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

 

St Paul said about government "Pay, then, what you owe them; pay them your personal and property taxes, and show respect and honour for them all". (Romans 13:7)

 

Who do you believe?

 

Tom S.

Aug 14, 2009 11:59 AM TessaFOTF TessaFOTF    says:

Just wanted to mention that there is more information on what Jim shared over on CitizenLink’s DriveThru blog (look for the logo under the news section at http://www.citizenlink.org).  You might also check out other material on healthcare by typing in the term “healthcare” in the CitizenLink search box.

 

Tessa

FOTF Forum Moderator

Aug 16, 2009 4:26 PM Guest Ryan D  says:

Jim,

      Thank you for writing this article.  Government funded abortion is a HOLOCAUST!!!  It's the same as the government funded Nazi party slaughtering millions of Jews during WWII.  When my mother was pregnant with me, two VERY well respected doctors told her to abort me because of the many complications of her pregnancy.  She refused, and by the grace of God I'm here to write this response.  I'm in the U.S. Navy, and I'm appalled that my Commander-In-Chief would allow such an atrocity to be committed in passing a bill that calls for government funded holocaust.  I fight for the preservation of  human life, not to support the unjust taking of innocent life.  Thank you for your time.

Aug 27, 2009 8:11 AM Guest Brian B  says in response to Robby Z:

I find it interesting that you could even create an argument about not making abortion illegal since it was deemed illegal by natural and moral law "such as murder". The Govt. overstepped it's bounds by making it legal to appease their conscience about individual rights, with absolutely no regard to the rights of the unborn. Religious people have every right to express their feeling just as athiests do. Since our Govt, laws of standards were mostly comprised of biblical and moral standards, where do you seem to get the idea that we shouldn't legislate morality?

Jan 14, 2010 9:14 PM Guest michael p.  says:
It is my understanding that the Hyde ammendment forbids any federal money being spent for abortions  and the various proposed bills do nothing to overrule Hyde.  What is at stake are the many children and adults whose lives are threatened by not being able to obtain medical care because of a lack of insurance.  Leaving the " for profit only"
health insurance companies as the sole decisionmakers in who lives and who dies seems to me to be immoral and quite frankly against my Christian beliefs.

Actions