|
Letters 09.06.09
September 6-12, 2009 Issue |
Posted 9/4/09 at 1:23 PM
Health-Care Factions
You are correct that we cannot
achieve a good health-care system without the proper goal/vision (“Benedict on
Health Care,” Aug. 9). I think many have long forgotten that the modern health-care
system started with Christ’s command to “heal the sick” by dedicated religious
who invented hospitals.
However, look at the caliber of
people President Obama has brought into his Cabinet, staff and czars — don’t
think there is one who would represent a Judeo-Christian philosophy, beginning
with the respect for life. If you read the review by the Liberty Counsel of
House Bill 3200, it is terrifying. It is also contrary to what the president is
saying.
So call your congressional
representatives and tell them what you want, but don’t for a minute think they
are looking out for us, the people.
In general, there seem to be two
factions. One group wants universal health-care at all costs; the other wants
to conserve the current health-care system with reforms to address things like
affordability, portability, pooling across state lines for small businesses to
get better rates, and definitely not have a government person interjecting the
government into our health-care decisions.
There is a problem with marathon
compromise sessions — they tend to so concentrate on a compromise that they
lose sight of the original goal: good health care.
Al
Wunsch
The
Villages, Florida
Who Is ‘in Need’?
Regarding “Health-Care Battle Is
Shaping Up” (Aug. 23):
President Obama wants us to believe
his health-care plan will help those in need. What does this mean?
The government health-care plan will
mandate that taxpayer money be used to pay for the killing of children as women
choose not to reproduce (i.e., abortion). To this day, Obama [plays politics
with the question of whether or not] abortion would be funded in his
health-care plan. Unless you want to pay for abortions, you need to let your
voices be heard.
Obama would rather pay doctors to
abort more people and pay less for Medicare services to ensure seniors die
sooner. This great plan for the future should last a few generations.
Laura
Jones
Yorba
Linda, California
Beware Abortion Expansion
Regarding “Pope to President:
Promote Life” (July 26):
A good place to start would be with
the pending health-care legislation. Health care is supposed to heal the
patient, not kill the patient. But the legislation being
supported by President Obama would promote the killing of our youngest patients
— unborn children — through abortion.
Even worse, you and I could be
forced to pay for the killing of these innocent babies with our tax dollars.
Pending bills in Congress could also
result in private businesses and organizations being forced to pay for
abortions through government mandates stating that abortion be covered in
health-insurance plans.
Because of this, the president’s
“health-care reform” could lead to the largest expansion of abortion in our
country since the tragic 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme
Court decision, according to National Right to Life (NRLC.org).
The U.S. bishops have stressed that
reform legislation should not promote abortion. “No health-care reform plan
should compel us or others to pay for the destruction of human life, whether
through government funding or mandatory coverage of abortion,” stated Bishop
William Murphy, chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Domestic Justice and
Human Development.
Any health-care reform legislation
should specifically exclude
abortion from coverage. Let’s support health care that heals, not kills.
Rita
Kelly
Corpus
Christi, Texas
Born-Alive Bill Killer
Regarding “Does Obama Really
Want Less Abortion?” (July 26):
They talk about preventative health
care. Eat the right foods, exercise, etc. How about the government mandating
genetic testing to determine if the unborn baby is healthy? Remember, there is
built into this plan a panel that looks at quality of life vs. cost.
We already test for Down syndrome
and other defects — and doctors often recommend abortion. The government plan
will cover the cost of abortion. That is currently in all of the Democrats’
plans.
Suppose the government just
eliminates coverage for various genetic diseases. Don’t force anyone to have an
abortion; just make it the logical economic choice. Look at the cost savings.
Eventually, they could dramatically reduce or eliminate the need for neonatal
care and also subsequent special education in schools.
Sounds unthinkable? Those in charge
are the same people who have no problem with late-term abortions when the baby
is fully formed. No big deal?
We used to have the inalienable
rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and we have already lost the
right to life. Pro-life people had to get a law passed that said you have the
right to life if you are born alive. It’s called the Born-Alive Infants
Protection Act. And guess who voted against it in Illinois as a state senator?
Barack Obama.
Charles
Venus
Liverpool,
New York
Bush the Lifesaver
Thank
you for the beautiful commentary about President George Bush by Paul Kengor
(“Bush Quietly Saved a Million African Lives,” Aug. 9). It was good news amidst
all the very bad news.
I
am truly disappointed it had to be on page 7, when it should have been on page
one. We have heard so much from Mr. Obama about the health-care initiative —
none of it good news. Yet Mr. Kengor explains how this was news that never made
it to the headlines of any news sources when it occurred — so now why on page 7
of your paper? Shouldn’t we give credit where credit is due?
Sister
Mary Marcella, SCL
Topeka,
Kansas
Cool Toward Warming
My
many thanks to the Register and reporter Wayne Laugesen regarding the issue of
global warming (“Global Warming: Is It for Real?” Aug. 9). Having a B.S.
in geological science and a M.S. in geophysics, and as the CEO of a national
environmental-consulting firm, I have long been a skeptic on this issue.
I
applaud the Register for printing this article. I encourage anyone who has
an interest in this issue to visit the Heartland Institute website
(Heartland.org). They are doing very good work debunking this theory.
I
am also becoming more encouraged as the tide seems to be turning — more and
more scientists who have long been skeptical of global warming’s relationship
to man’s activities seem willing to speak out.
The
truth will come out eventually, but what damage will be done to our economy and
our standard of living in the meantime?
As
a final note, this debate once again convinces me that our God has a true sense
of humor.
I
cannot tell you how many global-warming conferences and congressional hearings
have been canceled over the years as a result of blizzards in Washington. Look
it up; it cannot be a coincidence.
Earl
H. Scott
President
and CEO
Earth
Consulting Group, Inc.
Marietta,
Georgia
Depression and Catholics
I
don’t usually write about anything I read, but the post on depression,
“America’s Depressing Reality” (Daily Blog, Aug. 5), just made me have to
express my point of view.
I
am a practicing Catholic, my prayer life is very healthy, I go to confession at
least once a month, have two hours of adoration a week, and am an excellent sub
for it also.
Hard
work is an old friend. Sometimes depression just isn’t cured by what your
article stated! If it is caused by an imbalance in the brain, then hard work,
prayer, etc., aren’t going to make it go away. To be truthful, I am offended
when I keep reading this rule of thumb, so to speak. There were saints who had
depression.
As
you can guess, I have been treated for depression for quite some time, and
sometimes it is all the things mentioned, plus
medicine that helps the person.
I
do not like to be made to think I am a slacker and taking medicines for no
reason. I think this article is very unfair and hurtful!
Ann Vescio
Pendleton, Oregon
Editor’s
note: Many good Catholics take
antidepressants. That is why we included this sentence in the Register article
that this blog post linked to, “Get Thee Behind Me, Depression”: “Of course,
anyone suffering from a clinically diagnosed condition should seek the advice
of a credentialed professional before making any changes in medication or
therapy.”
Unfair Smear?
The
tag “ObamaCare” is a partisan term that is most often used to smear the
Democrats’ health-care reform efforts and has no place in well-reasoned
argument (“ObamaCare and the Right to Life,” Aug. 9).
While
I agree that there is a need for language continuing the prohibitions on
funding abortion, the tone of your recent articles all seem aimed at ensuring
that readers believe this cannot be accomplished and that reform must be
stopped. This lacks the truth component of Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth). Shame!
Dee Pierson
Charleston, South Carolina
Filed under
Advertisement
Advertisement
Make a Donation now!
Insightful. Informative. Uncompromisingly faithful. The National Catholic Register is more than a newspaper. It’s a cause. Your support for the Register funds important journalism that helps to build a Culture of Life in our nation, and throughout the world. Help us promote the Church’s New Evangelization by donating to the National Catholic Register right now.
Click here to donate
|