The Obama Watch
Obama’s Conscience Claws
President Obama has a masterful ability to convince people he is their friend even while he attacks them.
President Obama has a masterful ability to convince people he is their friend even while he attacks them.
This talent was on display last Thursday July 2, when the President spoke to members of the Catholic press about conscience rights for pro-life doctors.
Obama seems to be persuading even pro-life Catholics that he supports “robust” conscience rights. The theologically conservative National Catholic Register said it was “most noteworthy” that the President “dispell[ed] … the expectation of the worst regarding conscience clauses.”
Yet one of Obama’s first actions was to repeal basic rules protecting conscience. Obama dismissed that action as an unfortunate misunderstanding, causing people to think “my position may appear unclear.”
What really happened with the repealed conscience rule shows that Obama’s position against conscience is crystal clear.
In the wake of Roe v. Wade, Congress began passing statutes protecting doctors from being forced to participate in abortion. Pro-choice legislators like Obama’s Illinois predecessor Senator Adlai Stevenson III agreed that even if abortion is legal, religious freedom requires that doctors never be compelled to participate.
The statutes are straightforward: no recipient of certain federal funds may discriminate against a health provider for refusing to participate in abortion. The statutes also explicitly protect activities such as sterilization, and in some cases they protect any religious belief (see 42 U.S.C. § 300a-7(c)).
But these statutes were rarely enforced. In recent years the abortion industry solidified abortion as a right but has faced fewer providers. So it began active persecution of pro-life doctors.
In 2007 the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists declared that Ob/Gyns must perform abortions or practice near abortionists, and must refer women to them. Obama’s core constituency on this issue is insistent: “Qualms about abortion, sterilization, and birth control? Do not practice women’s health.”
So in 2008 President Bush passed a basic regulation empowering the Department of Health and Human Services to actually enforce existing conscience statutes. The regulation, 45 C.F.R. Part 88, simply says that if an entity receives specific federal funds, it must promise to obey the conscience-protection law that applies.
The abortion industry vigorously opposed the rule as hasty regulation that exceeds its underlying statutes and restricts access to contraception.
President Obama bought into this campaign. He issued a regulation to repeal Bush’s rules completely, and he continues to use the empty rhetoric against Bush’s rule.
But this background sheds light on Obama’s comments to the Catholic press.
“There have been some who keep on anticipating the worst from us, and it’s not based on anything I’ve said or done.” The worst is based only on what Obama has done. He is repealing Bush’s conscience rules entirely — he has proposed no alternate.
Obama’s repeal can only signal opposition to conscience protection itself. Obama endorses his side’s “concerns about how broad [Bush’s rules] might be.” Specifically, abortion advocates complained that Bush’s rule could apply to “contraception, sperm donations and end-of-life care” — which is another way of saying that doctors should be forced to commit assisted suicide. But some statutes focus on abortion, while others offer broader protection, and Bush’s rules did nothing but implement the statutes as written. The only possible basis for Obama to revoke Bush’s rule is that he disagrees with the underlying laws.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (65) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Matt Bowman
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/07/obamas-conscience-claws
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Inside the Gates of Eden
- Self-Righteous Republic
- Eugenic Abortion 2.0
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
LU dumak| 7.7.09 @ 8:02AM
As a ex-Catholic I find it unbelivable that these so called Catholics vote for a prodeath President. Obama speaks with forked tongue. The words for the Common good or Social justice are just other ways to say Communism.
KyMouse| 7.7.09 @ 8:18AM
Mothers have the legal right to choose to kill their unborn babies, but physicians and pharmacists should NOT have the right to choose not to participate in the killing? Mothers are free to follow their consciences, but not doctors and druggists? Only certain people are allowed to be "pro-choice," apparently.
Richard Baker| 7.7.09 @ 9:00AM
Don't you understand? A confidence game/con job only works because the object of it WANTS to believe. The Kenyan exhibits all the skill at it that Ponzi himself had. Willingness on the part of the mark is the key.
Tim| 7.7.09 @ 10:15AM
An individual's ability to con folks is one thing and the willingness of many wanting to believe in the con is one thing but let us not underestimate the power of the press telling the masses that the Con is really not a con but a saintly intervention from above.
Without the "Propaganda" machine working on all thrusters, the con job cannot be sustained.
Just ask the Iranian people now that some of the ruling clerics have seen fit to call a spade a spade about their recent election .
Just ask the old Nazis and the old Soviets and ask Chavez.
The press(propaganda machine) is the key for any tyrant and without it there is no sustainable con job.
ccc| 7.7.09 @ 10:21AM
What kind of pressure is being applied? Isn't this a case of at-will employment? If the Dr. does not want to do the work because it is unconscienable, then the job goes to someone who conforms to the job description.
Tony in Central PA| 7.7.09 @ 10:46AM
As a converting Catholic, I am dumbfounded by the contorted rationalizations of so many Catholics in favor of Obama on this issue. There simply is no agreement or " common ground " on this issue between the teachings of the Catholic Church and Obama. I would expect that any rational person would leave the Church if they lined up with Obama on this subject. There are plenty of irrational people identifying themselves as Catholics who apparently want it both ways.
Obama's appearance and adulation at Notre Dame was a political masterstroke. He took on his greatest single critic on the issue of abortion and turned the subject into an intrafaith squabble. He was able to divide, if not conquer, with a little help from the heresiarchs currently in charge of the university. Its time for the Church to end its too - often tepid and timid responses to assaults on Natural Law. I can only hope that Obama's planned meeting with the Pope will see the same kind of moral courage we saw from JP2 against the Communist leaders of Poland.
John II| 7.7.09 @ 10:53AM
One small addendum to Mr. Bowman's excellent precis. Obama's "interview" with the "Catholic press" was minutely stage-managed. The questions were tightly vetted and restricted, and The National Catholic Register was the single representative of Catholic orthodoxy--all the other publications represented were "liberal," which is to say, they reject Church authority on key moral issues and even Church teaching on key social and economic issues. In other words, they aren't Roman Catholic, whatever they choose to call themselves.
The whole spectacle was yet another of Obama's manipulative showpieces, and the otherwise orthodox National Catholic Register allowed itself (and its readers) to be snookered.
Sigy| 7.7.09 @ 11:08AM
The Strange Case of Professor Obama and Mr Hussein is a real life drama playing out in the aftermath of the Presidential election of 2008. It is about the dilemma of the American citizen who sees strange dissonances between the new found Messiah, Professor Obama, and the misanthropic Mr. Hussein. It is a vivid portrayal of a split personality, split in the sense that within the same person there is both an apparently good and an evil personality each being quite distinct from the other. In mainstream culture the very phrase “Obama and Hussien” will come to mean a person who’s words are vastly different in moral character from his actions.
Oldefarte| 7.7.09 @ 11:18AM
Matt, are you impling that the president lies? Shazam! Maybe he's lying about NOT RAISING TAXES ON ANYONE MAKING OVER $250000 ALSO, huh? Maybe this smooth-talking, liberal-disguised-as-a-moderate did in fact TROJUN-HORSE HIMSELF into the white house on 11/4/08????????????????????
Oldefarte| 7.7.09 @ 11:19AM
Misspoke above----I meant anyone making "under $250000", not "over".
Mike| 7.7.09 @ 11:49AM
"President Obama has a masterful ability to convince people he is their friend even while he attacks them." A very clear statement of Rovian politics. Once again, we see a conservative projecting the hideous behavior of some of their own on Obama. Want to know what the worst in the conservative movement are up to? Simply note the accusations they hurl at the president.
Oldefarte: Its Trojan
Mad Mark| 7.7.09 @ 11:55AM
Mike,
The eight years of Bush demonstrate pretty well what happens to republicans, (Letterman's joke about Palin is the latest example). Real Americans are asking, "Why can't he show his real Birth Cerificate? I have one!"
J.C.Eaton| 7.7.09 @ 11:56AM
Tony, a very flawed and struggling Catholic welcomes you. In the same way that an adopted child is often the best loved, I think a convert is the most convicted. I agree with you, in matters of doctrine you are in or you are out. Thje Magisterium is not a suggestion box. AMDG
Tony in Central PA| 7.7.09 @ 12:06PM
Mike, the majority of faculty and students at Notre Dame reacting with cheers to Obama's promises of conscience protections for heathcare providers when it came to abortion either didn't know or don't care that he had already rescinded the protections left by the Bush Administration. It was all about the emotion of the moment. There was no need for the coldness of facts and rationality.
The cheerers probably knew even less about Obama's promised " Freedom of Choice Act ". As somebody earlier pointed out the Orwellian absurdity of the slogan of " free choice ". I guess some choices are freer than others. I will say that modern liberalism is all for tolerance as long as you agree completely with it.
John II| 7.7.09 @ 12:26PM
"A very clear statement of Rovian politics. Once again, we see a conservative projecting the hideous behavior of some of their own on Obama. Want to know what the worst in the conservative movement are up to? Simply note the accusations they hurl at the president. "
Thank you, Mike. That was a pretty clear and very characteristic example of the liberal dodge. The technical terms for the cluster that makes up the dodge are petitio principii, tu quoque, and ignoratio elenchi.
You should apply for a job with the Obama team; they can always use extra hacks.
No Neck| 7.7.09 @ 1:07PM
Obama is going to sell us the rope he uses to hang us.
KyMouse| 7.7.09 @ 2:07PM
Ccc, many of us believe that physicians, nurses, pharmacists et al. shouldn't be forced to choose between their consciences and their livelihoods. Here's one thing that they are up against: It's a medical fact that the "morning-after pill," a high dosage of a birth control drug, along with most other birth control drugs, can chemically prevent a human embryo from implanting in the uterine wall. The manufacturer of Plan B said on its Web site that "it may inhibit implantation by altering the endometrium." That constitutes chemical abortion.
Plan B (as well as more common contraceptives) give a false sense of security, which leaves girls and women open to the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. Between 1995, when Plan B became available OTC in Britain, and 2000, diagnosis of genital chlamydia went up 77%, gonorrhea by 57%, and syphilis by 56%, according to the British Health Service.
And euthansia: Efforts have been underway in many states to allow terminally ill people to request prescriptions for lethal drugs from their physicians; pharmacists would then be asked to fill those prescriptions. Study after study has shown that suicidally inclined patients are often clinically depressed -- a condition that can be treated.
Those who call themselves "pro-choice" should especially appreciate the desire of physicians and pharmacists (who entered their professions because they want to prolong and improve people's lives) to "choose" against being complicit in taking innocent human life or spreading disease.
ccc| 7.7.09 @ 2:42PM
Kymouse
Isn't that the point of at will employment, only seek jobs which you caan perform and only hire people who can perform the job.
A merine who refuse to kill because he is a devout pacifist who finds any violence unconscienable, should be dismissed. A bacon taste tester who refuses to eat any pig product because he has converted to islam should be dismissed. An executionor who believes the death penalty is immoral. An abortion clinic emplyee who refuses to do the job.
If someone refuses to do what they said they would do and have been hired to do, what other option is there but termiantion?
catladyjan| 7.7.09 @ 2:45PM
Wake up people! Obama has NO EMPATHY for anyone at anytime! That includes, the unborn, the managed to have been born even after deliberate assault on their life during a failed abortion, ( "born alive protection act" which Obama VOTED AGAINST. If he cannot even find it in his heart to have COMPASSION (that word he likes to use on everyone else) for a helpless infant then common sense would dictate why? why? why? would a person who LACKS a conscience himself care about anyone else having a conscience?
GA USA| 7.7.09 @ 3:03PM
Amen cat.
KyMouse| 7.7.09 @ 3:05PM
Ccc, abortionists are the only physicians who make their living by killing people; internists, GPs, OB/GYNs etc. do what they do in order to save lives and heal patients. Pharmacists dispense life-saving medications every day. Death-dealing prescriptions would, one hopes, never be more than a tiny percentage of what doctors and druggists would be asked to prescribe or dispense; yet pro-life ones believe that being involved in ending one life, or spreading disease, is one too many.
A bacon-tester would know that he will be required to eat bacon; an executioner would, by definition, execute people; an abortionist is in business solely to kill babies; and anyone in the military must learn how to shoot to kill. I enlisted in the Army Reserve when the Women's Army Corps was still around; I was trained primarily to work in an office, but there was no doubt about why I was trained to be very good with an M-16.
ccc| 7.7.09 @ 3:28PM
Kymouse,
Should the onus be upon the employee to inquire as to whether the job will require performing an infamous practice. Or should the onus be upon the employer to warn the employee that the job may require the performance of an infamous practice. Presumably both parties are well aware of the controversal nature of some aspects of the job.
A| 7.7.09 @ 3:38PM
ccc,
first do no harm.
how can that fit in to killing an infant.
this is different than a bacon tester.
jeffW| 7.7.09 @ 3:49PM
CCC as "A" referenced above. Here is a translation of the original Hypocratic Oath. Pay close attention to paragraphs 3 and 4.
I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement:
To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art.
I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.
I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.
But I will preserve the purity of my life and my arts.
I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.
In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.
All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot.
the-gunslinger | 7.7.09 @ 3:54PM
If you want to know what Øbama will do, just listen to him. He will do the opposite of whatever he says.
He does it so often, nobody will take my bets anymore.
KyMouse| 7.7.09 @ 4:55PM
Ccc, pharmacists and physicians, as well as other health-care professionals, should be allowed to follow their consciences when it comes to matters of life, death and the spread of disease. The Hippocratic Oath, although not binding in a legal sense on today's physicians, was an astonishing break from previous ancient practices; before that oath, doctors often prescribed deadly potions. For many centuries, the belief that physicians should only heal, not kill, has been considered a hallmark of moral, benevolent civilization. We now seem on the verge of returning to that previous point of view, which will take us even further into the abyss.
Warren Jewell| 7.7.09 @ 4:56PM
'. . . a friend' of MINE? Uh - not at all - he reminds me so very much of every pathological liar I have known. I have learned to avoid such as 'friends'.
More and maybe worse, he seems a born killer of the likes of a sworn fascist or communist (a 'socialistic redundancy', there) who thinks that blood is fine to spill if 1) it ain't his and 2) it furthers his delusional ideas.
And, such sociopathology is unlikely to understand conscience since he silenced his long, long ago.
Scott A Joseph, MD| 7.7.09 @ 6:13PM
When we were in training, killing patients was not part of the agenda. That requirement is attempting to be forced on us by sick little monkeys like ccc and the editorial staff at The New England Journal of Medicine.
Sherri| 7.7.09 @ 9:48PM
I agree with Dr. Joseph. When I was in pharmacy school none of us were ever told about, or had even ever heard of a doctor writing a prescription for a lethal dose of drugs. All the students and professors I knew of would have been appalled at such a thing. I refuse to participate in such a situation, even if my employer fired me.
John II| 7.8.09 @ 12:17AM
Fascinating in a creepy way. GG's posting and so many like it, again and again, is redolent of Satanic infestation, which I read about when I was younger and less impressionable. Now that I'm an old bastard, I'm much more impressionable and perfectly willing to entertain the impression that such postings indicate that a raw nerve has been struck in the Satanic Obama machine. Weird.
KyMouse| 7.8.09 @ 8:48AM
Dr. Joseph and Sherri, God bless you! Your comments have made my day. Ccc speaks for the spirit of our age, I'm afraid.
Tootsie| 7.9.09 @ 8:57PM
So, Mike, when you liberal morons called President Bush 'BusHitler', you were projecting? Works for me, fascist liberal.
Pingback| 7.23.09 @ 12:42PM
Obama’s Conscience Claws | OrthodoxNet.com Blog | Blog Archive links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.24.09 @ 12:52AM
Science: Theists Need Not Apply | OrthodoxNet.com Blog | Blog Archive links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: