Cardinal, congressmen urge action by Obama on conscience protection

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The president of the U.S. bishops' conference and two members of Congress have called on President Barack Obama to make good on something he said in his May 17 speech to University of Notre Dame graduates, namely that he wished to "honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion."

In a May 22 statement, Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago said he was grateful for Obama's promise to support conscience clauses.

At a May 19 press conference in Washington and in a letter sent that day to the president, Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Chris Smith, R-N.J., urged Obama to forgo rescinding the Bush administration's conscience-protection regulation. They also asked Obama to "commit to defending conscience protections in future rule-making."

In his statement, Cardinal George said health care professionals and institutions "should know that their deeply held religious or moral convictions will be respected as they exercise their right to serve patients in need." He noted that since 1973 federal laws have protected the conscience rights of health care providers.

Protecting conscience rights "will strengthen our health care system and enhance many patients' access to necessary life-affirming care," the cardinal said.

He said he welcomed working with the administration and other policymakers to advance goals Obama has set out for reducing abortions.

"A government that wants to reduce the tragic number of abortions in our society will also work to ensure that no one is forced to support or participate in abortion," Cardinal George's statement said, "whether through directly providing or referring for abortions or being forced to subsidize them with their tax dollars."

Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services proposed rescinding the conscience clause that gives federal protection to the conscience rights of health care providers.

The rule, which took effect two days before Obama took office, codifies three longtime federal statutes prohibiting discrimination against health professionals who decline to participate in abortions or other medical procedures because of their religious or moral objections.

The letter from Sensenbrenner and Smith to Obama stressed that the president should use all the tools at his disposal "to keep conscience protections in place and reduce the number of abortions in the United States."

"The religious and moral views of health care workers should be respected," Sensenbrenner said during the press conference. "Workers should have the right to refuse to participate in an abortion procedure without the fear of losing their job or being discriminated against."

In his speech at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, Obama called on people with differing views on abortion to find common ground.

"Let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term," he said.

"Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women," he added.

Smith noted that he and Sensenbrenner were simply asking the president to make sure "that his deeds match his words."

He said the president could act on the words of his commencement speech by stopping the efforts of his administration to rescind current conscience regulations. "Protecting conscience is the truly pro-choice position and respects the diversity of opinion in our society as well as the sanctity of life," he added.

Dr. David Stevens, president of the Christian Medical Association, said in a May 18 statement that if Obama is "truly concerned about finding common ground, he should meet with doctors and patients who would be affected" by the lack of a conscience-protection clause.

He said the regulation was needed to protect doctors, nurses and other health care professionals from discrimination based on their religious beliefs.

It wasn’t that long ago when the beloved late Cardinal O’Conner told the NY governor that he would close down all catholic hospital should they be forced to perform abortion. He meant business, that’s real action and promise, not just a veiled threat. Not just lip service that we are so used to and sick of.

I don’t believe any of the currently serving US bishops have the balls to do that. Shame.

Good thought.

A better alternative would be a whole bunch of faithful catholics letting the bishop know they are stopping contribution to the collection plate until HE gets off his butt and do the same, or more.

You see, I do believe it’s time the faithful starting to the whip the bishops, for the right reasons. The need to earn their keep.

Pray, pay, and obey (the bishops’ lip service) just don’t work for this catholic anymore.

Look at this sentence:

““Let’s honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health-care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women.’”

He’s parsing the “conscience of those who disagree” making sure that “ALL... policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science.”

“Respect for the equality of women” is also a red flag.

He has no intention of putting a Bush-type conscience clause in there. What ever he comes up with, you can be sure it will cause no end of headaches.

His admin is probably watching the Louisiana case carefully. That one will probably wind up in the SCOTUS eventually.

Obama is cunning, not brilliant. He has not said he would allow those of conscience to observe their rights.

*Look at what he does, not what he says. What he’s done thus far is completely anti-life.

That factored into the discussion last night on The World Over Live. Obama is all about words which draw people into his circle of admirers. What those folks fail to do is review his actions. Are they so lazy? Words are cheap and oftentimes meaningless.

He even shamed the Clintons and Gores at his own funeral. What a remarkable man!

I don’t believe any of the currently serving US bishops have the balls to do that.

I disagree. 80 bishops spoke out against Fr. Jenkins' invite to Obama. It was a watershed moment. Those bishops have recognized the impending conflict with the forces of secularist society. From their ranks will rise the future leaders of the Catholic Church in the US. Archbishop Chaput is right up there at the top.

Ah, we would simply agree to disagree on this point.

You see, there are much less drastic real actions the bishops could do to send a message to ND but they didn't do it.

Reference: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2255615/posts, in part it reads Let's take the local bishop, Bishop D’Arcy, as an example. He's been very outspoken in his opposition to Obama speaking at Notre Dame; so, you may ask, why isn't the PP praising him? Because it's just another example of the Bishops' Disease: a lot of talk but no action.

It's way past time for bishops to talk. We need actions. Anything less is, as BlackElk says, waste of oxygen.

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.