Friday, December 12, 2008

The Tyranny of "Choice"

The incoming Obama administration has posted a memo that gives in detail the wish-list of the various pro-choice advocacy groups who support him. What did that memo say? Let's take a look at some key points.

The President’s budget should strike language restricting abortion funding for ... Medicaid-eligible women and Medicare beneficiaries (Hyde amendment)...

The Hyde amendment was passed in 1976, three years after Roe v Wade was passed, in order to prevent the government from funding abortions with taxes. Bottom line: pro-"choice" groups want me to help pay for abortions.

The budget submitted to Congress also should omit language known as the Federal Refusal Clause (Weldon amendment) and call on Congress to reject this language in its annual health spending bill.

The Weldon amendment, according to this pro-choice web page, simply allows health care providers to refuse to do abortions. Bottom line: pro-"choice" groups want doctors to be forced to participate in the practice of abortion.

Abortion. What exactly are we talking about here? What are my tax dollars going to pay for?  I always hear about a woman's right to "choose."  Choose what?  A job?  A house?  A car?  What?

The picture I put on this blog post is a picture of a baby who would've been aborted last year if it hadn't been for the efforts of committed pro-lifers. Behind the baby through the car window you can see the abortion clinic where he would've been aborted (read: killed).

Now, imagine telling one of these pro-lifers, "We're not asking you to agree with the practice of abortion; we're just telling you to pay for it." Have I no right to be outraged? Is this not pure tyranny?

And what about those doctors who cannot in good conscience participate in the practice of abortion? A while back I blogged about this very thing. Imagine if all the Catholic hospitals in this country were forced to shut down because of the tyranny of "choice."

Have I no right to choose? Does Barack Obama have no respect for my right to stand up for my brothers and sisters who are being crucified for the sake of "women's rights"? What a mockery it all is. If poor women need food, clothing, shelter, jobs--anything--I would be happy to sacrifice what I have for them. Instead, the government would have me pay for abortions, so that all women have "equal access" to so-called "health care."

I guess we'll see whether the great Barack Obama is able to follow through with this pro-"choice" agenda. Funny, that word "choice." I never thought it meant forcing people to do what you want.

No comments:

Post a Comment

I love to hear feedback!