Catholic Prelate Asks Congress to Keep Ban on Military Abortions
Cardinal Daniel DiNardo is chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities for the US Bishop’s conference has asked Congress not to approve language in the Defense Authorization Act that would permit US military facilities to conduct abortions.
The Cardinal noted that federal policies have prohibited military facilities from performing abortions since 1988, with the exception of 1993-1995 when Clinton overturned the policy (it was later re-instituted by Congress).
The Cardinal joined with military diocese Archbishop Broglio (who previously wrote in opposition of the repeal of DADT) in opposing the policy change that would
impose [a] tremendous burden on the consciences of Catholic and other health care personnel who joined our armed services to save and protect innocent life, not to destroy it.
This controversy, which is not an insignificant change in federal policy, has been largely unnoticed as it has been overshadowed by arguments over “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
watchtower online…
Although I understand the Pro-Life stance, I also believe that the woman’s right to choose outweighs all other opinions or preferences, especially the archaic views of any religious organization. Don’t get me wrong; in my opinion it is OK for the preachers / religious communities to tell their congregations’ what they should or should not believe in or do, however, those edicts do not apply to the rest of us.
Some federal policies, as noted with DADT, also have archaic views and need to be changed as well. Catholic and other health care personnel who joined our armed services were not asked to do what their consciences tells them with regard to what services they will or will not provide to our Military. I’m sick of hearing these people put their personal views/beliefs above everyone else’s, and likewise impose [a] tremendous burden on the woman who doesn’t want the pregnancy/child.
Being that abortions are LEGAL is the USA, our Military medical system should provide for abortions according to law. However, it might be more practical to send them to a civilian provider and share the cost of their choice.
watchtower offline…
watchtower,
I understand your view and dismiss it as this policy for the military is dictated by the branch that creates the laws and therefore declares what is legal.
I counter your argument of ‘tremendous burden on the woman’ and ‘right to choose’ with the following fact: the leading cause of pregnancy in the US is sex. I fully understand the concepts of forced sex, rape, incest, etc, but I also believe in the inalienable right of life. To me, life begins at conception. I dare you to prove otherwise.
As a side note, don’t you have to be online to post a comment?
watchtower online… (just for you dealer)
OK, there really isn’t anything for you to dismiss Dealer; the “policy” (created by the branch that creates laws) is wrong…just to flat our deny abortions by Military hospitals if the procedure is legal in the first place. I do not need to prove when life begins and apparently neither does the Supreme Court.
I personally would like for women NOT to get abortions, but I will not interfere in ANY way with their decision if they decide to abort…it’s just NOT anyone else’s call…period!!
My real issue is with the Magisterium interfering with US Military and the laws of our country. Their organization is corrupt and we should not take any advice from them until they learn to follow the laws too…like turning in pedophiles to the authorities instead of trying to cover it up and using their self righteous status to hide behind.
As a side note, don’t you have to have sex to get pregnant…well, except for one claim anyway?
watchtower offline…
watchtower,
I’m not following your thinking. You think that women shouldn’t get abortions, but you think there is a higher priority for you to not tell someone what to do. Then you criticize the Catholic church for doing something that you are doing yourself (attempting to persuade the laws of this country with respect to the military). Does an organization have to be perfect so that they can talk advice to someone else? I do think that the Catholic church has corruption and should be more open, but who am I to judge them (or anyone)?
Additionally, we could spend a lot of time discussing the many ways Congress has not been consistent with its laws.
watchtower online…
Dealer, Dealer, Dealer….you are a crafty writer/debater…
My personal opinion (for women to do what they want) has nothing to do with a higher priority to tell someone what to do. I would do everything in my power to help a woman make an informed decision about an abortion…but ultimately, if the woman decides to get it anyway that is her right.
With regard to persuading the laws… (1) it is legal to get an abortion, except in Military hospitals…how is the law fair in this case? (2) Clinton over-turned the policy because it was not fair, but to prevent a president from signing an executive order again, congress passed a law (hmmm…no surprise there).
A GAO report on the issue in 2002 found that the policy was a humiliation for servicewomen and Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy, in a letter to the Senate in support of lifting the ban because of what she saw in Germany in a civilian hospital amongst other things.
And yes, any organization, especially the Catholic church, MUST be above reproach to give advice with respect to our laws…respect goes both ways…they have violated that world-wide. Not a judgment…FACT!!
watchtower offline…
watchtower,
thank you for the compliment.
I think we are going to flat disagree on this one. I do not think that abortion is a right. From the top, our rights are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The woman’s choice falls under ‘liberty’ and ‘pursuit of happiness.’ The right of a baby to life falls categorically higher.
Second, the Catholic church is flawed, no argument there. Name any human that isn’t and I’ll submit to your argument about advice from people above reproach.