Quantcast
Channel: Your Vote Your Reason » 2012 Election
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 10

Side Note Number 5 Obamacare Revisited Part 2

0
0

Decreased Numbers of Abortions

For the interests of the middle class.

 Take no political ads, speeches, or debates at face value.
See notes at top of Side Note Number 4.

 Nicholas P. Carfardi, a civil and canon lawyer and a professor and former dean at
Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh, is an established Catholic,
who states that Pres. Obama is more pro-life than Gov. Romney.  His article
“Which Presidential Candidate Is Truly Pro-life?”

appeared in the Aug. 10, 2012 issue of the National Catholic Reporter.
The opening paragraphs concern the Church’s position.
The answer to the question begins at the fourth paragraph.
http://ncronline.org/news/politics/which-presidential-candidate-truly-pro-life

In brief, Obamacare, which does not pay for abortions, provides pregnant women with care
that enables them to continue their pregnancies and give birth,
thereby reducing the number of abortions.

 First, Prof. Carfardi writes that he knows no one who is “pro-abortion.”
That would put one in favor of pregnancies for the purpose of helping women
“abort their child and maybe profit from it.”
The word “. . .is used to emotionalize the debate when what we are really talking about is
people who do not favor criminalizing abortion because they believe criminal statutes
are ineffective ways to solve social evils. This makes them pro-choice, not pro-abortion.”

After stating that Obama is pro-choice and Romney has a pro-life platform, Cafardi writes,
“But any honest analysis of the facts shows the situation is much more complicated than that.”

 Following that statement is the crux, the strength of his argument:

“For example, Obama’s Affordable Care Act does not pay for abortions.
In Massachusetts, Romney’s health care law does.
Obama . . .  included in the Affordable Care Act, $250 million of support
for vulnerable pregnant women and alternatives to abortion.
This support will make abortions much less likely, since most abortions are economic.
Romney, on the other hand, has endorsed Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan’s budget, which
will cut hundreds of millions of dollars out of the federal plans that support poor women.
The undoubted effect: The number of abortions in the United States will increase.
On these facts, Obama is much more pro-life than Romney.”

 Carfardi continues: “But let’s not stop there.
Obama does not financially profit from the abortion industry. Romney does.”
In support, one activity of Gov. Romney’s Bain Capital is cited,
and another example of profits from loss of life is added.
Rather than summarizing or paraphrasing the specific activities and sources,
I think it preferable for you to read Carfardi’s words.

 Footnote to Side Note:

 Carfardi is not the only established Catholic to support Obama.
They are, of course, at odds with edicts of the Catholic Church as Church officials have stated.
The difference may be similar to the distinction that could be drawn
from the October vice-presidential debate:
the Church as an agent of service or the Church as an Institution of set principles.

  Side Note to Side Note Number 5:

At one time in the past when abortion was much in the news,
some students in freshman composition classes chose
to write essays on the subject. In-class discussions arose.
In one class, after several minutes of exchanges,
a student asked what I thought. I said that I was uncomfortable
with the idea, that I would never have an abortion.
Several students began “But you’re” statements:
“You’re a man.” “You’re too old.” Slowly, there was realization.
In another class, there was a similar discussion and
the same question. That class was faster.
There was immediate facial and vocal recognition that
comments by a middle-aged male were not germane.

Roe vs. Wade was decided in 1973. A news report 10-15 years later concerned a group
composed of individuals on opposite sides of the issue who agreed that the two sides
should be talking with each other in civil discourse
but who found no consensus.
A search for such a group led to a site on which reference was made to
“Common Ground Network for Life and Choice,
a project of the Washington DC-based nonprofit Search for Common Ground.”

“The Network for Life and Choice articulated a philosophy and designed a process
framework for dialogue among pro-life and pro-choice supporters.
Initially responding to abortion-related incidents in Buffalo in 1992,
the Network has since worked in at least 20 cities in the U.S. and Canada,
convening one-day dialogue workshops and, in a number of cases,
supporting ongoing consensus-building processes.”
(That is probably not the group referred to above.)
http://www.mediate.com/articles/prolifeC.cfm

A search for Common Ground Network for Life and Choice led to many articles
about the organization and one website for it.
http://thecommongroundblog.com/2011/02/14/disagree-but-engage-thats-civility/

With such movements, advances made by medical science,
and programs such as Obamacare provides,
progress should be made toward common ground acceptable to a much larger segment.

—O—

More before.     More to follow.     Please return.     Please tell others.

 


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 10

Latest Images

Trending Articles





Latest Images