Cardinal Rigali: You Can't Claim to be "Reducing Abortions" but Publicly Funding them in D.C.

Lifesitenews.com ^ | July 1, 2009

[Pope Pius XII]

WASHINGTON, July 1, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, chair of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, wrote to members of the House Appropriations Committee yesterday urging them not to fund abortions in the District of Columbia. Last week the House subcommittee that is considering the Financial Services appropriations bill for 2010 voted to permit direct public funding of abortion in the nation's capital.

Cardinal Rigali said that the subcommittee's action "effectively nullifies the Dornan amendment," which for a total of 18 years has prevented public funding of elective abortions in the District. He said this move, "presumably the first step in a broader effort to restore such funding throughout the federal government," is misguided for three reasons.

[Salvation]

**misguided for three reasons.**

First, he said, "public funding of abortion is rejected by the American people, as numerous surveys of public opinion have shown."

 

Second, no lawmaker or Administration can support such a policy change and still claim to support 'reducing abortions.'....the availability of public funds for abortion greatly increases abortions."

 

"Third, this action takes place as Congress is working to win broad support for a much-needed major reform of our health care system," ...."This is the worst of all possible times to be injecting the divisive issue of public abortion funding into the debate on government health policy."

[Jeff Chandler]

"Third, this action takes place as Congress is working to win broad support for a much-needed major reform of our health care system," ...."This is the worst of all possible times to be injecting the divisive issue of public abortion funding into the debate on government health policy."

So the bishops want the government to take over the health care system, but they object to one of the natural consequences of socialized medicine?

Isn't that kind of like willingly stepping in dog poop while objecting to the smell?