The Unconscionable Clause
By: Marion Edwyn Harrison, Esq.
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Founder and future President James Madison, Jr. wrote in FEDERALIST # 45:
How far our contemporary American federal government has obliterated any such division of power is manifest everywhere. More recently it arises in the crunching of a citizen’s right to exercise his conscience - and his religion.
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce...The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
The Barack H. Obama administration and the overwhelmingly activist and liberal 111th Congress seem to be competing with one another as to which is the more radical, which the more determined to impose or infuse federal control over States and citizens - and now over the medical and related professions and an American’s access to the world’s most advanced medical care.
This writer’s view of abortion is that biologically a human mother carries a human baby, not some combination of flab which if not killed might magically transform itself into a human. For theological reasons that also is the view of the Roman Catholic Church, of most Christian churches, and of Muslim and various other religions.
Let us hypothesize for the precise point of this little piece that the foregoing view is erroneous. Does not a physician, nurse or other provider of care have the Constitutional, and humane, right to exercise the pro-life view? More specifically, is there not the right to refuse to perform an abortion?
There are analogies. Let us note a dramatic one. A prison guard who does not believe in the death penalty has the right to decline assignment to activate the electric chair.
Yet the Obama administration and Congress are moving quickly to deny a medical provider the comparable right. By a 56-41 vote, the United States Senate has defeated an amendment to legislation which would have sustained the right of a physician or other person to decline to abort a baby if federal taxpayer funds or the long arm of the feds were involved in the treatment.
Sixteen senators claiming to be Roman Catholic, 15 Democrats and one Republican, voted against the conscience clause. Nine such Senators, eight Republicans and one Democrat, voted for the conscience clause.
The Obama administration has utilized every opportunity to promote abortion. It reversed the so-called Mexico City Policy, which precluded usage of American taxpayers’ money by international organizations to provide abortions. It repealed embryonic-stem-cell research restrictions. It championed funding by American taxpayers of $ 50 million to the United Nations Population Fund, which has supported cruel aspects of Chinese population control procedures. Perhaps most dramatically of all, the President nominated, and the Senate confirmed, that conspicuous friend of abortion, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, to be Secretary of Health and Human Services, a new dimension for the camel-in-the-tent riddle.
Whatever their views about abortion or any other aspect of a mother’s medical attention, how amazed the Founding Fathers would be that the federal government intrinsically is active in, almost dominating, our personal medical and related care.
We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by