Confessions of Cultural Heretics

"When the whole world is running headlong towards the precipice, one who walks in the opposite direction is looked on as being crazy." T.S. Elliot

NY Times and Pro Aborts Scared by Expanding Catholic Hospitals

I was browsing twitter this morning when I came across this article by the NY Times discussing how the  “financially stronger Catholic-sponsored medical centers are increasingly joining with smaller secular hospitals, in some cases limiting access to treatments like contraception, abortion and sterilization.”

This is just another example of why the government is doing what it is with the HHS mandate.  The culture of death knows that Catholics have the capacity to limit the abortions and sterilizations done in this country because it is the Catholic Church that is the most successful in regards to health care.  One would hope this is the case after these many centuries of providing care for people.

At the same time, we must continue to urge Bishops and Catholic health systems to be faithful to Church teaching and continue to provide authentic health care.  It may be a hard battle in the coming days, but the Church has prevailed before, and will continue to do so in the future.


Single Post Navigation

3 thoughts on “NY Times and Pro Aborts Scared by Expanding Catholic Hospitals

  1. I know it’s a really popular way of refering to abortion supporters, but I think we should avoid using the term “pro-aborts”, it tends to depersonalize, and that is not something we need while attempting to build a culture that respects the humanity of all..sort of a pet peeve of mine, I guess.

    I really like how you’re addressing the whole HHS mandate though! It’s interesting to be a part of life right now, with the world as it is, sometimes I feel sort of unaffected, on the fringe, because we are so comfortably removed from a good deal of the discussion out here, your posts bring me back in, and are a reminder that no one should be completely removed.

    Miss you all!

    • What term wouldyou suggest we use? I suppose I could have described them as “abortion supporters”. I emphatically will not use their euphamism of “pro-choicers”. As it stands, I am not ashamed of the term I did use because it is a succint way of describing their position. I do not think it is any less humanizing than referring to groups as “pro-lifers”.

      As for your awareness of the HHS Mandate, I would really encourage both of you to continue to try and actively stay present with what is going on. We need to rally everyone possible in order to fight this, and a big part of this is to spread the awareness, particularly among those who may be on the fence about where they stand. You and Seth know a great many people and could positively influence them if you had the opportunity.

      We miss you all too! -Brian-

      • The term pro-lifer is not great either, but as the people who generally use it aren’t exactly trying to create an attitude of respect for persons, I don’t have *as* big an issue with it’s use. Abortion supports, is long, but it’s my choice for phrasing. 🙂

        I’m grateful to you guys for continually reminding me to stay involved, I think I’ve become so disallusioned politically that I tend to retreat from particpation in discussions of the issues, “like all dreamers, I confuse disenchantment with truth,” but your right that our life tends to put us in a place to be heard by those who might not normally listen, and your posts are an encouragement to do just that!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: