Pro-life leaders continue to question Obama’s health care reform

WASHINGTON, D.C. (CNA) - Following an address by President Barack Obama to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night, both the president of the Family Research Council and the president of Concerned Women of America emphasized that despite Obama’s words that the reform won’t include tax-payer funding abortions, federal dollars will pay for the procedure.

During his speech, Obama said addressed abortion saying: “And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up — under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”

President of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins took Obama to task for misleading Americans by “dismissing the concerns” of those with “moral objections to their tax dollars paying for abortions.”

"It's surprising the President continues to claim that 'no federal dollars' will fund abortion,” said Perkins adding that the opposite was proven weeks ago by FactCheck.org, and in articles by the AP, Time magazine and the Washington Post.

He continued, “The President also knows very well that pro-abortion House and Senate Committees rejected every single amendment to keep abortion funding out of the health care overhaul. Instead, the House Energy and Commerce Committee adopted the Capps Amendment, which allows abortion coverage in the public health plan, and subsidizes health plans that cover abortion."

Wendy Wright, the president of Concerned Women for American demanded that Obama clarify what the reform will and will not do.

“If it won't use taxpayer funds for abortion - put it in writing in the bill. If it will protect doctors from violating their conscience by forcing them to commit abortions, put it in clear, no- nonsense language in the bill,” Wright said.

She continued, “If it allows people to keep the plan they have, then let it allow people to choose the plan they want. If it requires every person to pay for government- approved insurance, be honest with Americans that they will be punished if they choose a different plan for themselves and their families.”

Wright also cited a poll released by the Associated Press-GfK showing that the public disapproval of Obama’s “handling of health care” is at a high of 52 %, and that 49% of Americans “disapprove of how he is handling his job as president

two things: one, the myth about tax dollars providing abortions is misleading. consider- if money goes to provide a med school students's traning, and that student became a doctor went on to provide abortions, then technically federal dollars that went to pay for college perhaps for this future doctor would be considered federal payment for abortions. well unless the opposition wants to play sixdegres of tax dollar seperation, than comments promoting thismyth should be ceased. second,it is not in writing because such legislation can be abused and used to deny care to patients based on considerations of medical ethics that interfere with patient rights.

matt jones | 9/23/2009

If the president insists conscience will be protected should his attorney general and his department of Justice be hot on the heels of the EEOC which is telling a Catholic College it is discrimminating by not providing what the president has stated as "essential reproductive care" including abortion in health insurance? He says if there is legitimate concern to call him out-well I call him out. Mr. President, what do you think of the new law in Wisconsin that requires private health insurance to provide reproductive care? Do you think it is unconstitutional to require private catholic schools and hospitals to provide this? Mr. President, is this a good model for the federal standards of basic health care? Mr. President, what is "fertility reduction" and will this be included in federal requirements for private or public insurance in any way? Mr. President, would you oppose, that on cultural or religious grounds, the withholding of so-called abortion rights under "health care" initiatives would be a viable option the next time your people meet at the United Nations to discuss this topic? Will the agreements made there be binding on the US?

Maybe like investigating tort reform the President can get his secretary of health and human services to come up with the specific definitions that they will be using in the future to cover a multitude of medical procedures dealing with "sexual and reproductive health care"

Will all medical records go into a federal data base? Were they not battling in the courts to keep this from happening? Will I have complete and full access to my minor's records on these things or will the government act in loco parentis? Will the government determine at what age my child should make decisions about "sexual and reproductive rights" Will I be considered not capable of that because certain possibly biased studies will show that parents are out of the loop and government knows better than me?

these are concerns that are legitimate to me and as of yet neither the legislators nor the president has adressed any of them in a crystal clear fashion.

Unfortunately, I do not have enough information provided to me to give my informed consent to a bill with possibities of creating such sweeping and unchecked change- To ask the American people to support this bill without fully informed consent is the equivalant of malpractice in my opinion.

Any legislator who has pushed this on the people without knowing all the facts, including the president should be replaced.

Will we become a tyrant state that denies the right to life for all and assumes the inalienable parental duties for itself.

The American people may be going into Dr Obama's operating room thinking they are getting a tonsillectomy and come out of anesthesia only to look down at themselves to discover that the government has performed one giant "fertility reduction" cutting us off from the true seeds of freedom which do not come from any government.

Sara | 9/11/2009

Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, antisocial behavior such as "spamming" and "trolling," or other inappropriate comments or material will not be posted on Catholic Online. Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our terms of service. While Catholic Online invites robust discussion, we maintain the right to not print material that is patently false in its claims concerning the teaching of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, overtly anti-Catholic or which, in the opinion of the moderator, are intended to mislead readers as to what the Catholic Church teaches. Comments DO NOT necessarily reflect the opinion or views of Catholic Online.

| Politics