Some observations from the past 30 minutes of "debate" in the House of Commons over Bob Rae's motion to require the government to include abortion and contraception in its maternal health initiative. Bloc Quebecois MP Johanne Deschamps says she doesn't "understand" how a maternal health program cannot include abortion for 12- and 13-year-olds who were raped in war. Is that the cause [...]
We go to press tomorrow and I'm working on the fnal story on the Liberal Party's motion to require the Conservative government's maternal health initiative to include contraception and abortion. (The motion doesn't say abortion but that is what the party and their NGO advisors mean when they say 'reproductive health'.) Liberal MP Keith Martin in his contribution to this vital debate [...]
As Kathy Shaidle (among others, including the National Post) have noted, Ann Coulter's speaking engagement at the University of Ottawa has caused quite a stir. Mark Steyn notes: The reflexive position of the Canadian establishment (of which M. Houle is a very typical example) is to insist on ever narrower bounds of public discourse regulated by an ever more coercive state. Thus [...]
From William McGurn's column which Oz Clark noted previously, a very important paragraph: [F]ew accept the idea that the executive order really adds anything. In fact, on this point National Right to Life, the Catholic bishops and the Susan B. Anthony List are largely on the same page as Planned Parenthood. As are the pro-life Republican leader Mr. Smith and the pro-choice Democrat Diana DeGette [...]
William McGurn of the Wall Street Journal adds to the growing meme of the disappearing pro-life Democrat, but he mostly ignores the politics and gets into the ramifications of Stupaks' surrender: the Congressman's acceptance of the health care bill without the Stupak language "encouraged those who want to get rid of the Hyde amendment itself, which for decades has prevented federal funds from paying [...]
The Hill reports that Senator Ben Nelson (D, Neb) will vote against the reconciliation bill. His reasons have nothing to do with pro-life, unlike his earlier dance in December; three months ago he caved into pressure from his party's leadership. There is plenty of time for arm-bending if it is deemed necessary but because reconciliation is not filibusterable, the party probably won't need [...]
Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput condemned Catholics who endorsed Obamacare, suggesting that it is pro-life to support health care reform that increases access even if it means increasing access to abortion. Archbishop Chaput states eloquently why they make this tragic error: "[S]ome Catholics have an almost frantic unwillingness to see the abortion issue for what it is—a foundational matter of social justice and human rights."
W. James Antle III writes about the disappearing pro-life Democrat, beginning with some history: "Abortion has long divided the country, but it did not always divide the two major parties." George McGovern opposed inserting pro-abortion language into the 1972 Democrat platform and Jimmy Carter opposed taxpayer funding of abortion in 1980. (Carter would later leave the Southern Baptists over the congregation's opposition to [...]
Many Democrats who are usually silent about their concern for number of abortions committed in the United States argue that universal health care will decrease demand for abortion. William Saunders, vice president of legal affairs for Americans United for Life, debunks the argument at The Daily Caller. Saunders says that ease-of-access to abortion, not health care, determines how many abortions there are, and Obamacare expands abortion access.
The House of Representatives passes Obamacare by a vote of 219-212. Pro-life Republicans tried to get the fixer bill recommitted for more discussion (in committee) about taxpayer-funding of abortion. Rep. Joseph Pitts (R. Penn) called the health care bill the most pro-abortion bill Congress has ever considered. Unfortunately, Rep. Bart Stupak said that the pro-life thing to do is to pass health care [...]
Stupak said the Executive Order is good until 2014. In other words, the unborn and taxpayers are protected for four years, that's it.
Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D, Penn) is among those joining Rep. Bart Stupak in a press conference to announce support for the health care reform bill now that President Barack Obama has said he would sign an Executive Order outlawing taxpayer funding of abortion. Dahlkemper stresses that she is not pro-life, but 'whole-life' and that means not only opposing abortion but supporting a [...]
Rep. Bark Stupak (D, Mich) has just announced in a press conference that he will vote for Obamacare. He brings enough supposedly pro-life colleagues with him to help pass health care reform. Of course, abortion funding was not the only pro-life concern with Obamacare.
So reports Politico: Under the agreement, President Barack Obama would sign an executive order ensuring that no federal funding will go to pay for abortion under the health reform plans. In addition, Stupak will get to state his concerns about abortion funding in the bill during a colloquy on the House floor during the debate. That is insufficient. Even if the EO [...]
National Review has the text of a proposed Executive Order that would prohibit funding of abortion -- a scheme necessary to get Bark Stupak and other pro-life Democrats on board with the Senate version of health care reform. (Yuval Levin doubts the EO's language "possibly be a draft of actual executive order language" and therefore might only be symoblic.) I entirely endorse Kathryn Jean Lopez's [...]