Skip to comments.Radical NY abortion bill could close Catholic hospitals, Church warns
Posted on 02/17/2013 2:51:26 PM PST by NYer
ALBANY, NY, February 15, 2013, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The state of New York could soon shut down Catholic and other health care providers for not offering or referring for abortions, according to the New York Catholic Conference. The group has been monitoring Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s abortion expansion bill with concern.
Among other actions, the act would declare that New York “shall not discriminate against the exercise of [abortion] rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services or information.”
According to the Conference, this “no discrimination of abortion rights” provision could “permit state regulators to require support for abortion from any agency or institution licensed or funded by the state.”
Since the state grants medical licenses, New York could deny licenses to — and ultimately shut down —institutions like Catholic or other hospitals and clinics that refuse to support abortion.
New York could also deny these institutions Medicaid payments and other funding, which many depend on for financial solvency.
The bill would also lift restrictions on third-trimester abortions, allow non-doctors to perform abortions, and prohibit any restrictions like parental notification.
Conference spokeswoman Kathleen Gallagher told LifeSiteNews.com that she believed Governor Cuomo’s bill was out of step with the majority of New Yorkers. She said her group has successfully rebranded the measure as the “abortion expansion bill” and that it’s rapidly losing support. “When you talk to most New Yorkers,” Gallagher said, “they think abortion is accessible enough already.”
Her group worked with Ciaroscuro Foundation to poll New York voters about their views on abortion. Their study found that an overwhelming majority of New Yorkers support sensible restrictions on abortions:
79 percent believe there is already sufficient access to abortion in New York State;
75 percent oppose changing the law so that someone other than a doctor can perform surgical abortions;
89 percent oppose abortions for reducing twins or triplets to a single child;
92 percent oppose late-term abortions for sex selection;
87 percent favor providing pregnant mothers information about options before they make a decision;
78 percent approve of a 24-hour waiting period;
76 percent approve of parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion;
68 percent approve of providing free medical care to mothers carrying their pregnancy to term; and
86 percent favor regulating abortion clinics as strictly as other medical facilities.
“This survey tells us that women want and deserve more choices, not more abortion,” added Meg McDonnell, a spokeswoman for the Chiaroscuro Foundation. “New York's elected officials should take a close look at this data and work on making abortions rarer, not more commonplace and more dangerous.”
“Governor Cuomo's proposed changes in New York's abortion laws are clearly out of the political mainstream," said Chiaroscuro Foundation president Greg Pfundstein. "Some of them, like allowing non-physicians to perform abortions, seem bound to make New York less safe for women.”
“It is imperative for Governor Cuomo to listen to what pro-choice and pro-life New Yorkers actually think before he acts in haste on this radical legislative proposal,” he said.
I’m not a New Yorker, but I think Governer Cuomo should go. He’s been an embarassment in more than one case.
Someone ought to photo-shop him as Obama's Mini-Me and then have Bloomberg and even Mini-er-Me on Andrew the Incompetents lap...
Importantly, I see this as a multi-front attack by the Democrats against the Catholic church, in that not too long ago, Illinois tried to require them to provide adoptive children to homosexuals. Then Obama came out with his birth control mandate. And now this.
There should be some way in which the church can take the federal government to court, in effect stating that this represents across the board religious persecution against the Catholic church, and ask the court to enjoin the government against such actions.
It is legally comparable to the federal government systematically persecuting black people because of the color of their skin.
What an image!!! Love it : - )
Everything godly and moral is under attack from the left.
You are correct the Marxists are in constant attack mode, always probing for weaknesses, they have taken the initiative on many fronts and we are on continual defense.
This is the typical progression of progressivism. What was once clearly unthinkable becomes marginal, then acceptable, and ultimately, mandatory.
The government wants the Catholic Church OUT of the hospital business. The government hates competition.
What they WANT the Church to do is just give up. The State will levy huge fines against the Church for refusing to perform abortions, then they will seize and take over the Church's property and all its contracts with physicians and nurses, to pay the fines.
They will get the physical plant and all the doctors for free.
And our geldings in the RNC have no testicular foritude to fight and mount an offense....
Cuomo is as disgusting and despicable as his sleezy father was. He has done nothing to help New York except drive up taxes even more, engage in Obama’s class warfare and push local municipalities to the verge of bankruptcy. He and Sheldon Silver are the most vile liberals there are. And the New York republican party allows him to do what he wants.
They want to start over with a blank slate and are going to destroy everything that is already in place in order to be able to do so.
There will be blood.
The number of abortions performed in NY will rapidly drop,
sadly what you say is true.
When they start forcing the church to perform gay marriages, I guess they will be forced to close the church too.
Let’s face it, they want the Catholic Church OUT OF BUSINESS period.
Here in Texas, we’re told, not only by the Archbishop last week, in the appeal for money video but this week by the visiting priest, that Latinos are what are keeping the Church afloat.
THe “gringos” were laughed at, he used the word “gringos” in the sermon in order to mock.
It makes no difference that the Latino vote went to Obama, sealing abortion, nor that those who built the churches here in theUS have enwured its being afloat.
The future of the Church lies in the authentic Catholic remnant.
The panderers can put the legal and illegals up on a pedestal until this whole region adores them and speaks their language. They won’t be the ones contributing to the Church or fighting against abortion.
But this state will be blue and what’ll be left?
The Church will never close, it will go underground as it has done in the past if necessary.
The NYT atttacked Cruz today.
OB attacks the Church.
Neither attacks Graham nor McCain.
WE are known by our enemies and if they aren’t attacking, we aren’t doing it correctly.
Grahm and McCain are our enemies.
McCain refers to the Embassy staff as “four Americans”.
As if, when he was a POW, he was an “American”. As if he had been touring on a bike, or even a journalist.
He was shot down and taken prisoner because he was over there representing our country.
The Embassy Staff is there representing our government.
When are people going to start refusing to refer to them as “four Americans”.
Tehy were working for ourState Dept. they were killed for that very reason. They were there under the understanding that our Stated Dept gave them protection, the sam due any congressman, military member or other State dept rep.
McCain is working the other side (Hillary’s ) side on this.
But let’s see him for what he is, as you say.
If the Church simply provides a Sacrament of Matrimony, the couple will be married in the Church, according to Church teachings, and it's not the Church's business whether or not the couple is married according to the laws of the State. So the Church can limit those who are receiving the Sacrament to those she deems are actually practicing Catholics, which would NOT include practicing homosexuals.
What's interesting about this situation is that an older couple could marry in the Church, but still be considered unmarried, legally, so they could keep their pensions, Social Security, etc, all separate, and wouldn't have to file tax returns jointly. ;o)
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.