Naturally, the state's bishops conference is opposed to this bill. They, correctly so, do not wish to be involved in a practice that is directly opposed to the teaching of the Church. Good for them.
But this praise is muted.
The bishops report:
“Catholic hospitals provide emergency contraception to rape victims in the vast majority of cases,” the bishops noted in their letter (to the legislature). “In fact, it is an extreme rarity when this medication would not be provided.”
When won't they provide the drug? When the woman is pregnant or ovulating.
WTF???
Let's think about this a minute, folks. You're providing an emergency contraceptive to a woman except for the time when the pill would have some effect. (See below for a layman's explanation of why Plan B is objectionable). This makes no sense. None.
If this pill isn't being given when it would have some effect, you're administering hormones to a woman, why???
If this pill is being given when it would have some effect, you're giving this pill out in direct violation of the magesterium of the Church. From Humanae Vitae:
...the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. ... Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.
What part of “absolutely excluded” is confusing here, folks? I don't see much wiggle room in the above statement.
Either you're giving a woman a pill to make her think that she's doing something in direct violation of the Magesterium you're doing something that's in direct violation of the Magesterium. I, for one, just don't see much difference from an ethical point of view.
The CNA article also says:
DeLuca had proposed an amendment, which was endorsed by the Catholic Conference, would require every hospital to have a written protocol for dealing with rape victims. Hospitals would be allowed to refer such patients to other facilities, but would have to report their reasons for doing so to the Department of Public Health.
WTF???
So we don't want to get the blood on our hands, we'll hire a hit man to do it for us...that way our hands will stay pure. (Sounds like the scene from the Godfather where the undertaker wants Don Vito to do a hit for him)
COOPERATION WITH EVIL IS EVIL!
There is no moral difference between giving the Plan B drug out and sending somebody to a place where she can get the Plan B drug. None.
What is wrong with these people? Why is the perfectly obvious not obvious to them??
There are far too many bishops who are in favor of dancing with the devil like this and far too few who are willing to take a stand. We need to pray for the former, so that they get some brass and pray to get more of the latter.
These bishops need to understand what a "pastoral" role is. They've got to set the standard. They've got to lead the flock. Sheep are some of the most stupid animals ever created. And some of the most obstinate. It takes a shepherd who knows exactly how to use that staff to keep them together. And to keep them alive.
Bishops that compromise with evil like what is shown above cannot be expected to keep the standards when it comes to Catholic politicians and abortion. They cannot be expected to wield the staff when it comes to schismatic laity (e.g., VOTF). They may want to. Our Lord calls on them to do so. But if they don't know how...or aren't willing...to wield the staff, how can we realistically expect them to do so?
We need to pray for them that they accept and stand up to their vocations.
On edit,
Promised to provide what was wrong with Plan B.
According to the manufacturer's web site:
Plan B® works like a regular birth control pill. It prevents pregnancy mainly by stopping the release of an egg from the ovary, and may also prevent the fertilization of an egg (the uniting of sperm with the egg). Plan B® may also work by preventing it from attaching to the uterus (womb).It is that third action that makes it an abortifacient and totally unacceptable. For those of us who believe that life begins at the moment of fertilization, an act that intentionally interupts the development of that life from the moment of fertilization is an abortifacient act.
The manufacturer, also on the same web page, says the following:
Remember that Plan B® is not RU-486 (the abortion pill). Because Plan B® is used to prevent an unplanned pregnancy, it will not work if you’re already pregnant. If you take Plan B® and are already pregnant, it will not affect your existing pregnancy.What they are doing is employing a little word trick here ("depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"). They define pregnancy as beginning from the moment the blastocyst is implanted on the uterine wall, not as beginning at the moment of fertilization.
Of course, a woman has to be pregnant in order to have an abortion, right? So if a woman is not technically pregnant, she can't technically have an abortion...
A unique DNA strand is created at the moment of fertilization; the resultant cell that develops into a blastocyst that then develops into an embryo, a fetus, and finally emerges as a crying brat is a unique life from the time that unique DNA is created...not from the time that the blastocyst is implanted. As such, that unique life is deserving of the same consideration before implantation and after implantation.
Any other position is simply inconsistent.
0 comments:
Post a Comment