Replies

You make several good points regarding being "100% pure". None of us know for sure if the companies we do business with donate to pro-abortion organizations or not. We are unwittingly contributing to the murder of innocent humans.

The Confiteur Catholics recite at Mass asks that we be forgiven for "What we have done and what we have failed to do", with the unspoken caveat that when we have sinned by action or inaction, that we knew we were committing a sin.

If we don't know that an action we take indirectly is sinful (for example, buying a burger at a fast food joint if we don't know they are giving part of our money to baby killers) isn't a personal sin, but contributing to Planned Parenthood if we KNOW the money will be used for abortions, or have a good idea it will be, IS a personal sin.

My point is, IF you claim to be pro-life and you KNOW that your money is in part procuring abortions, then you must to everything to stop this sin. If Frist really doesn't know that HCA takes part in abortions ... and even performs late-term abortions as I sited above ... then when he is made know of this, he should divest from the company all his holdings. If he knows and DOESN'T do it, then I don't think any pro-life Senator should support him.

I hope that makes sense. Sometimes I get caught up in these issues and don't explain myself clearly. God bless.

Dear Gophack,

You've done marvelous research, so I hesitate to ask you something that might require more.

The websites that you show say that HCA is a supporter of abortion. What does this mean?

Does it mean that HCA routinely permits, even encourages, that abortions be performed in their facilities?

Does it mean that some doctors bring some patients to their facilities to perform abortions? Does it mean even that some doctors select the operating rooms of HCA hospitals to perform even second and third trimester abortions?

Does HCA actively cooperate with pro-abort groups, like Planned Parenthood? Give grant money to NARAL?

It would be impossible to have a multibillion dollar hospital corporation that didn't once in a while incidentally get tangled up with abortion. It would be a horrible thing if folks refused to invest in health care businesses because they could not maintain "purity" on the issue of abortion. If that is the nature of HCA's involvement, then it's tough for me to think that Sen. Frist is morally compelled to divest.

But if HCA considers abortion part of "routine health care", or actively supports abortion through support of pro-abort groups, support of pro-abort research, support of pro-abort politicians, then Sen. Frist needs to announce a plan of divestiture (remember, he may be under some legal constraints in how he divests, and he has a moral right, also, to divest in a way that doesn't cause him undue financial harm).

I'd be interested to know more.

sitetest

"None of us know for sure if the companies we do business with donate to pro-abortion organizations or not." In many cases you can find out. You may be surprized what you find.

And, what's more, essentially everyone posting here has invested in the U.S.A. by staying here and paying taxes for government funded abortions. Following your logic, your only morally acceptable option is to sell your U.S. property and move out of the country, lending your productivity to an abortion prohibiting country.

As has been pointed out abortions in hospitals are a very small part of their business. They may be required to provide facilities as the market dominant hospitals in certain areas.

The causes of abortion are more associated with a lack of father commitment to and love for children than a hospital making itself available for this procedure. Getting government out of the provider business (strengthening the imperative for woman to say no), strengthening the family by allowing them to keep more of their own money, strengthening marriage laws and not funding abortions and pro-abortion propaganda is what the goverment can do to reduce abortions. Bigger picture, Senator Frist is better than what we have had in the past.

We don't know what Senator Frist's position has been in dealing with that aspect of the family business, but I don't think his divestiture would do anything to eliminate the abortions that do take place a HCA facilities.

We are in agreement on the basics. There are a few things that give me pause:
1) This is his family's business; which has two subpoints:
a) Familial ties are powerful and I can't get exceptionally exercised in insisting that a man sever familial business ties.
b) He may well have the greatest influence over the long run by remaining a shareholder.

2) This situation APPEARS to be the exception of a few hospitals within the larger corporation - certainly not a significant focus, let alone THE focus of the business of the corporation.

3) Frist is not responsible for every action of every employee of the corporate holdings of the businesses he invests in - EVEN if those actions are taken under the auspices of said corporation, and EVEN if he knows of those actions. Such a bar would be unachievable high for any of us.

I have seen nothing to indicate that this is a focus, a direction, or even an encouraged practice within the corporation. I am also unsure about the specifics of all of the laws of each state and locality where there are hospitals - I do recall the concern a while back that even Catholic churches might be forced to perform abortions. It is a very small - however a very horrible - part of the overall corporate picture. In reality, Frist's efforts to end partial birth abortion is a direct (and legal, BTW) effort to divest the company of the practice.

I hope you understand, my reluctance to condemn Frist is an "on balance" calculation. I would feel different if he was invested in a chain of abortion clinics that his family began. I put this more in the category of a person being invested in a real estate investment company with thousands of tenants that happens to have one or two abortion clinics as tenants. I HATE abortion. I want to see in ended and made illegal. I think this particular battle is a distraction and misdirected. I am comfortable with and confident in Frist's commitment to the pro-life cause. I remember him during the partial-birth battle, and he was a heavy lifter.

My position also allows me to have great admiration for those entities who are so diligent and commited that they have divested themselves of their holdings. But just like I have great admiration for the devoutness of George Washington, who prayed privately, aloud and on his knees for an hour in the morning and again in the evening - I cannot bring myself to condemn or even disparage a man who doesn't practice this admirable trait. I think we are out of place to do so in both cases.