Britain's Government Policy of Silent Euthanasia

While many are trying to reassure us that there is no danger to the elderly, disabled, and chronically ill, the wording in areas of the health care bills presented, as well as the blatant rejection of specific wording that totally rules out funding abortion, etc in the recent past has many convinced that tax payer money will be used.

The same applies to those concerned about the conscience protection that is either missing or very ambiguous, for those of us who cannot participate in abortion, euthanasia, cloning, embryonic stem cell research, 'terminal sedation' or starving/dehydrating a person to death. The public option, putting our health care in the hands of the government, is also worrisome for many reasons, including what is happening in other nations:


Britain Already Has a "Government Policy of Silent Euthanasia": Anti-Euthanasia Activists



Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Britain Won't Prosecute Assisted Suicide: Chief Prosecutor


Britain's Pathway to Euthanasia - NHS Protocols for Dehydrating Disabled Patients to Death


British Doctors Practising "Slow" Euthanasia through Deep Sedation: BBC Report.

DMV style health care . . .

House Members Working on Second Phony Compromise on Abortion in Health Care

Stupak has been awesome in his efforts to keep abortion out of nationalized healthcare. Unfortunately, the pro-aborts refuse to remove it.


Members of the House of Representatives are working on a second phony compromise that would try to mitigate some of the concerns pro-life lawmakers and groups have about the abortion funding found in HR 3200, the main health care "reform" bill in the House.

The current bill contains the Capps Amendment that abortion advocates have been portraying as a compromise that prohibits abortion funding.

But pro-life groups and leading pro-life lawmakers such as Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan have exposed the Capps language as a fraud by noting that it allows massive abortion subsidies and mandates.

Knowing Stupak has assembled potentially enough pro-life and moderate Democrats to join Republicans in voting down the rules for debate on the bill or the bill itself if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi doesn't allow a debate on his amendment to yank the abortion funding, pro-abortion lawmakers are hoping to pacify him and his coalition.

story here

cross-posted from A Catholic View

US bishops reiterate health-care priorities, criticize Senate Finance Committee plan

In a joint letter to United States senators, three bishops who chair committees of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops have outlined three priorities for health-care legislation and criticized Sen. Max Baucus’s finance committee proposal for failing to meet these standards.

The three priorities outlined by Cardinal Justin Rigali, Bishop William Murphy, and Bishop John Wester are universal coverage, exclusion of abortion funding and support for conscience protection, and “equity for legal immigrants in access to health care.”

story here

cross-posted from A Catholic View

Letter From 183 House Members Urges Pelosi to Allow Vote to Cut Abortion Funding

The number of Congressmen and Congresswomen seeking to exclude abortion funding from healthcare continues to grow to a number that even CINO Pelosi can't ignore them.

A bipartisan group of 183 members of Congress sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a letter on Monday urging her to allow a vote on an amendment to cut the massive abortion funding and subsidies from the main health care "reform" bill in the chamber.

HR 3200 currently allows for both abortion subsidies and mandates and pro-life Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan wants the opportunity to propose an amendment to remove the funding from the bill.

"We urge you to allow members of the House to vote their consciences with regard to abortion and health care reform by allowing consideration of an amendment to prohibit government funding of abortion," the letter says.

story here

cross-posted from A Catholic View

BILL DONOHUE: DISHONESTY MARKS HEALTH CARE DEBATE

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addresses the dishonesty that marks the debate over health care reform:

Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, is quoted in today’s New York Times commenting on allegations that abortion would be covered in the health care bill: “We are not changing current law.” Similarly, Sen. Olympia Snowe is quoted in the same newspaper as saying, “We want to preserve the status quo on abortion.” Interestingly, there is an editorial in today’s New York Times which calls for total funding of abortion for any reason and at any time during pregnancy, but which also disagrees with what Baucus and Snowe said. Indeed, it explicitly says that Baucus achieved a “compromise” between full funding and no funding. 

Here’s what the editorial says: “Health plans could provide abortion coverage provided they used only premium money and co-payments contributed by beneficiaries and kept that money segregated from the subsidy. In every state, there would have to be at least one plan that covers abortions and one that does not.” Thus, the New York Times shows how dishonest Baucus and Snowe are—existing public policy is not anything like that at either the federal or state level. But wait, the Times is also being dishonest when it maintains that by some magical force monies raised from premiums can be “segregated” from the subsidy: money is fungible and that is why the bishops are right to call such schemes a fiction.

It gets worse. Yesterday, Sen. Orrin Hatch introduced an amendment that essentially codifies the status quo, namely, it would ensure that the Hyde Amendment restrictions on federal funds for most abortions remained undisturbed in the proposed health care legislation. And who voted against the status quo? Baucus and Snowe. Consistent in their dishonesty, Baucus and Snowe also voted to kill conscience rights protections for health care workers, all the while maintaining that what they were doing was preserving the status quo. What they were really doing was preserving their place in the Abortion Hall of Shame.

Health Care Update: Abortion, Rationing and Public Option? It's In There!

Health Care Update: Abortion, Rationing and Public Option? It’s in There!

Posted using ShareThis