Ron, we need you!!!! On second thought, you are in a much better place right now. God bless you for being with us when you did. ES
Posted on 10/26/2011 7:30:02 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Former Massachusetts Governor, and GOP presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney has found himself on the defensive regarding his health care reform law in the Bay State. Most of the criticism has focused on the fact that the Massachusetts reform, like President Obama’s reform, included an individual mandate, requiring that all citizens purchase health insurance or pay a fine.
But, for Catholics and other pro-life voters, Romneycare holds a different problem. It explicitly provided government funding of abortion. The Massachusetts health care reform established a government funded program, Commonwealth Care, that includes coverage of abortion. Commonwealth Care was made available for free to everyone in the Bay State who was below the poverty line and subsidized participation was made available to those above the poverty line.
In 2010, during the debate on President Obama’s health care effort, abortion funding was the last issue standing. Some pro-life groups declined to endorse the proposal because, under certain worst case scenarios, it might provide government funding for abortion coverage. Others, including the Catholic Health Association, argued that the restrictions on abortion funding contained in the Obama bill were sufficient and the president signed an executive order further strengthening those restrictions.
During the 2010 debate, when asked about the fact that Gov. Romney’s reforms covered abortion, a spokesman for Romney, Eric Fehrnstorm, told CBS, “Court rulings in Massachusetts require state-subsidized health plans to offer abortion services. It's not something that Governor Romney agrees with, but it’s longstanding court precedent that predates his administration.” But, it is difficult to believe that this answer would have satisfied the standard set by pro-life groups opposed to Obama’s bill. The Romney campaign did not respond to repeated calls and emails asking for a comment.
Why is this issue so important? Does it really matter if 100,000 people in Massachusetts now have health insurance that covers abortion with state monies? After all, when we pay our taxes, we are paying for many things with which we disagree: Whether you supported the Iraq War or opposed it, you paid for it. Move on. The reason it matters is that those of us in the pro-life movement cannot abide the idea that abortion is like other types of health care. The medical profession tries to cure diseases and to heal wounds. Abortion takes the life of an unborn child. Which of these three things - disease, wound, and baby – is not like the others? To list abortion alongside other forms of medicine perpetuates the lie that keeps our cultural incapable of righting the horrible wrong that is abortion. I am open to many policy approaches to defeating this scourge, but holding the line against lies is a must.
Additionally, the Massachusetts health care reform law requires that one of the members on a newly created “MassHealth payment policy advisory board” be appointed by Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts. The relevant section of the law reads: “SECTION 3. Chapter 6A of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 16I the following 6 sections: . . . Section 16M. (a) There shall be a MassHealth payment policy advisory board. The board shall consist of the secretary of health and human services or his designee, who shall serve as chair, the commissioner of health care financing and policy, and 12 other members: … 1 member appointed by Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts …”
Romneycare is not the only area in which the former Governor showed himself unalert to the concerns of Catholics. In 2005, he originally vetoed a law requiring all hospitals to administer emergency contraception for rape victims. But, by the end of the year he had flip flopped on the issue. According to the Boston Herald:
“Gov. Mitt Romney abruptly ordered his administration to reverse course yesterday and require Catholic hospitals to provide emergency contraception medication to rape victims.
In a turnaround that foes derided as politically motivated, Romney directed his Department of Public Health to scrap rules that exempted the Catholic institutions from a new law governing the medicine. Known as Plan B, the drug can prevent women from becoming pregnant if taken within five days of intercourse.
“My personal view in my heart of hearts is that people who are subject to rape should have the option of having emergency contraceptives or emergency contraceptive information,” Romney said.
Actually, the Catholic Church agrees that a woman who has been raped is permitteds to use emergency contraception to protect herself, provided the contraception is not an abortifacient, a distinction not made in the Massachusetts law.
This issue of an opt-out for Catholic hospitals is slightly different from the current debate regarding conscience exemptions for Catholic institutions regarding a new HHS mandate that insurance plans cover contraceptive services and sterilization. The current debate focuses on insurance policies offered by Catholic institutions to their employees and, in the case of colleges and universities, to students. The debate in Massachusetts was an even more direct assault on religious liberty, focused specifically on forcing Catholic hospitals to dispense abortifacients, not to have to pay an insurance premium that covers them.
Mr. Romney, of course, was once pro-choice but has said that in 2004, in the course of a conversation about embryonic stem cell research, he came to see the error of his ways and converted to the pro-life cause. I shall take him at his word. But, the decision to extend abortion coverage as part of his health care reform law, his inclusion of a state board member designated by Planned Parenthood, and his flip-flop on the issue of forcing Catholic hospitals to dispense emergency contraception all occurred after his conversion to the pro-life cause.
During the 2008 campaign, some pro-life Republicans charged that Obama was “the most pro-abortion candidate” in history and they have repeated the charge now that he is in the White House. But, there is no comparison between the way Obama handled abortion coverage in his health care reform and the way Romney handled it in his. A judge in Ohio ruled this year that Obama’s reform does not include federal funding of abortion. Judge Timothy Black held that the “express language of the PPACA [Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare] does not provide for tax-payer funding of abortion. That is a fact, and it is clear on its face.” On its face, Romneycare does provide for taxpayer funding of abortion. So, will GOP pro-lifers admit that Romney has now succeeded to the title of “most pro-abortion candidate” in history?
Voters have only two things to consider about a candidate: their record and their promises. Mr. Romney insists that he is pro-life now and that, if elected, he promises to govern as a pro-life president. But, his record belies that promise. As Ronald Reagan used to say, “Trust, but verify.” In Romney’s case, the promises and the record are not in sync and it will be up to the voters to decide the worth of the promises when his record on pro-life issues is so abysmal.
I heard that Romney wrte a book where he touted RomneyCare for the whole country.
I wouldn’t doubt it.
The whole mess is based solely on people’s absolute refusal to understand the jurisdictional limitations of the 14th amendment. As a result, the Feds presume it’s application literally without limit. At least the Titanic hit the iceberg in the dark while everyone is asleep. America is hitting the iceberg in broad daylight while the passengers watch the approach, confident in their safety because they caucused and voted that the iceberg is actually a cloud.
Ron, we need you!!!! On second thought, you are in a much better place right now. God bless you for being with us when you did. ES
I don't give a Rat's A_s if it's on a state or national level. NO government in the USA can force an American, or legal permanent resident alien, to Purchase A Product - period, end.
Call it health insurance, call it 'health care', call it an Orange, or call it a Widget. It makes no difference If 'they' can make you buy one thing they can make you buy 'any' thing.
Yes Mr Jones 'we' know you like Toyota cars but 'we' don't want you to buy one, so 'we' made a new law. 'We' say you now have to buy a Chevy. Oh, and we notice that you have refused to buy a new phone with GPS. Well that just wont do Mr Jones. 'We' need to be able to track you - for your own good of course. So 'we' say you now have to spend $200.00 on a new cell phone with GPS.Note, Auto Insurance is a STOO-PID™ canard as if you don't drive or own a car you don't 'have to' buy auto insurance.
It’s freakin’ socialist welfare.
“...NO government in the USA can force an American, or legal permanent resident alien, to Purchase A Product - period, end...”
You are completely spot-on that’s its Un-American.
But - They already DID, brother.
They passed it into LAW - with the full threat of the coercive use of FORCE to compel you to obey.
Refuse the law, they will fine you. Refuse the fine, they will come to jail you. Refuse to be jailed, they will come and kill you.
Every single utterance, every “suggestion”, every “request” out of the mouth of “government” and it’s agents and agencies is backed up, ultimately, by masked, hooded men in body armor and ninja suits and Little German Machine Guns who will not hesitate to kill you, your entire family, your goldfish and your pet rock with complete impunity and immunity, and then plant kiddie porn on your computer and drugs in your house and use their media friends to make it look like you were maddog Public Enemy Number One and had to be put down “for the public good”.
It’s what they do. It’s their reason to be.
They don’t “give a rat’s *ss” that it’s Un-American. A whole mess of people IN government, since about 1913 or so, have been and continue to be Un-American. They consider themselves “Citizens of the World” and they look at people like you, me, 2ndDivisionVet, and all of us out here on Free Republic as Obstacles to their world view.
They’ve been in a perpetual state of war with everything that IS American for decades.
That fact is what made ROmneycare and Obamacare possible in the first place; ignorant voters, feel-good and white feel-guilty liberal morons that are too stupid to take the time to study history gave us both.
“...If ‘they’ can make you buy one thing they can make you buy ‘any’ thing..”
Yes, they will.
But remember one thing: NO ONE can force you to do ANYTHING. You have to be willing to take the consequences to refusing them.
No one has power over you unless you give it to them. So in the end it comes down to what are you willing to do when the time comes?
So there IS choice in the matter; you already know what the result of your choice, either way, is going to be.
We can’t depend on the courts or the idiots in COngress to do anything - other than be exactly what they are; willing participants in our enslavement.
Ultimately, WE and only we, are the arbiters of our own freedom - not them. We all die eventually; it’s whether or not we choose to SUBMIT while we’re alive that makes the difference. And then again, it’s the level of compliance that we choose to do as well.
“They” like to believe that everyone is terrified of them. They operate under the dangerously false assumption that people will just meekly and quietly submit to every ignorant, arrogant, and humiliating demand they place on us; and in truth, a large amount of folks will do just that.
But not all. There’s a hardcore of folks, who still consider themselves “AMERICAN” and who intimately and completely understand what that appellation entails with the duty, obligation, and responsibility incumbent upon them AS Americans, that absolutely terrifies “Them”. To my mind, that is why we’re not completely communist by now.
I’m pinging a few FRiends out here to comment as well...
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
“...Handgun Against An Army”
One of my favorite all-time posts.
I’ll ask this question: How many MP40, Kar98K, and other German weapons were retrieved by the skillful wielding of single-shot .45 Liberator pistols in the hands of determined Patriots throughout Europe?
Answer: Many.
Any gun WILL get you a better gun. It’s the man behind the weapon - always has been, always will be.
” There’s a hardcore of folks, who still consider themselves “AMERICAN” and who intimately and completely understand what that appellation entails with the duty, obligation, and responsibility incumbent upon them AS Americans, that absolutely terrifies “Them”. To my mind, that is why we’re not completely communist by now.”
600,000,000 guns, and 2,500,000 rounds of ammo in private hands.
Yes I know. I am prepared for all of that. But they better bring a lunch when they *try* the last part.
*** So in the end it comes down to what are you willing to do when the time comes? ... So there IS choice in the matter; you already know what the result of your choice, either way, is going to be. ***
You are absolutely correct.That being said, I'm 63 now, my family is grown and my grandkids are old enough they'll remember me. I had a good and productive career at a job I loved. I have a wonderful wife and we've been married 36 years now. So .... what now will be, will be. And as I now keep telling my wife and kids: "I have one last 'good fight' left in me. But it looks like that day is coming sooner than I thought."
*** "They” like to believe that everyone is terrified of them. They operate under the dangerously false assumption that people will just meekly and quietly submit to every ignorant, arrogant, and humiliating demand they place on us.... ***
True again, "they" do. But "they" also never read or studied Sun Tzu's, 'The Art Of War'. While "they" read Alinsky and studied Marx, others read and studied tactics. Sun Tzu's basic tenet in war is: 'If you know your enemy and you know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.' He was correct when he wrote that 2500 years ago and is correct today. In wars before and from our Revolution to D-Day and Vietnam, the 'winner' followed Sun Tzu, most not even knowing it.
'We' abandoned Sun Tzu's teachings during Vietnam which is 'odd' as it's taught at West Point and every War College. However, 'Charlie' followed Sun Tzu to a tee. EXCEPT for the Tet Offensive and that loss *should have* finished them. Prolly would have too if not for traitor 'Uncle Walter' saying 'all is lost'(1).
But I digress (sorry, bad habit) :-)
There will be others who 'resist'. And those pretty yellow Don't Tread On Me Flags will be flying all over. We may even have to borrow a motto from some of Our Finest as a reminder for 'why': De oppresso liber . But I don't think they will mind.
Sorry for the day late -- It's that 'work' thing -- and long reply. Which, btw, I have to get going now.
Have a good one.
Lock and load and smoke 'em if ya got 'em.
(1) The NVA was against General Giáp's Tet Offensive. They knew it was FUBAR but Giáp got his way and he got lucky after the slaughter of most of the VC, all thanks to loudmouth liar Cronkite
“...600,000,000 guns, and 2,500,000 rounds of ammo in private hands...”
Yeah, and that’s just in MY house alone...!!!! :)
An honor to be on the same side with you, brother.
LFOD
Note to self......do not got to NF Hales house without an invite....
Got as many as I need, but not as many as I want!!!
If I had some spare $$$$ there’s some vintage WWI stuff I’d love to own someday. Like the late 19th/early 20th century stuff; very innovative time for firearms. Lever guns, bolt actions, early semi-auto stuff...it was an amazing time.
Not a collector myself, but I have a couple of friends who have amazing collections.
All it takes is money...which is severely limited for me these days.
I would love to get an 1898-vintage Borchardt pistol; it was what eventually became the Luger P-08. An odd-looking thing, but the lines are unmistakable Georg Luger. Neat toy.
Luger-Ruger.....both great guns.
My old man brought a long-barreled P08 Luger back from the war, but gave it to one of my uncles when I was a kid. I touched base with some of my cousins to see if they still had it, but it sort of vanished into the Ether over the years.
Shame, too, because they’re the ones that are worth some big $$$$ deneiros. Had a wooden should stock with it and all. I remember it from when I was really young, 6, maybe 7. Thought it was the coolest thing I’d ever seen.
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.