Limited Health Care for the Poor; Unlimited Abortions for All?

The more I hear about the details of the proposed health care plan, the worse it sounds.  I posted something earlier supporting the USCCB's position in favor of a national health care plan, with the provision that it must support life.  For clarity, I have to point out the obvious: The pending bill for a national health care plan is increasingly inconsistent with what the USCCB said it would support, and increasingly inconsistent with what I said I could support.

I received this today from our Sen Feinstein:"I understand your opinion that private coverage of abortion services should be restricted in health reform. However, I believe that reproductive health services should be treated no differently than [sic] any other health care service."

Limited health care for the sick who are too poor to pay for it, and unlimited elective abortion for all, IS treating abortion differently from other health care service, isn't it?

On July 30, the USCCB released a Statement regarding Cardinal Rigali's letter to the members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee "urging them to amend “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act' (H.R. 3200) to retain longstanding government policies on abortion and conscience rights."  The Statement goes on to mention that earlier Statement that supported national health care with pro-life provisions:

"Cardinal Rigali reiterated criteria for 'genuine health care reform' set forth by Bishop William Murphy, Chairman of the bishops’ Committee on Domestic Policy, in his letter to Congress on July 17.  He described health care as 'a basic right belonging to all human beings, from conception to natural death' and said that 'the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is working to ensure that needed health reform is not undermined by abandoning longstanding and widely supported policies against abortion funding and mandates and in favor of conscience protection.'"

The more I know about the health care bill now before the U.S. Congress, the more disgusted I become.  Our Congress has before it a chance to meet the needs of many Americans who are greatly in need of health care, who do not qualify for existing Medicaid coverage, or who cannot find quality physicians still willing to accept it.  Instead of correcting the deficiency in providing basic healthcare for those who do not have insurance, the plan under consideration increasingly sounds like it offers health care that is very limited in its provision for the poor and the elderly who are sick,  and that is unlimited in its provision of elective abortion for all. 

Somehow, Pinto health care for the sick, and Cadillac elective abortion, sounds to me more and more like the pro-abortion lobby has taken complete control of the thing.  Instead of caring for the poor and the elderly, our Congress is sacrificing the poor to come up with more money to make the pro-abortion lobby happy. 

It sounds more immoral all the time.

Comments

[Johnny Dollar]

They could have us as allies, on this and many issues, and they obstinately refuse. We could tip support well over 50% and well into consensus, but they won't have it. They'd rather stick a finger in our eye and doing it alone, so the whole souffle is likely to collapse. Then in 2 years they can demagogue the issue and talk about what a crisis our health are system is, how gosh-darn immoral it is that so many are without coverage (right and right)& how they really really want to give free and unlimited Supercalifragilistic health care to everyone (but, shh, they refuse to make the compromises that would make that happen). Then, the election cycle after that, repeat... ad infinitum. It's dispiriting. I've given up on politics. I pray. I take care of those near me. I try to live a Christian life. The political system is a tangled, infernal mess.