« | »

WSJ: Waking Up To Dangers Of ‘Obama-Care’

From the editors at the Wall Street Journal:

ObamaCare’s Great Awakening

HHS tells religious believers to go to hell. The public notices.

FEBRUARY 8, 2012

The political furor over President Obama’s birth-control mandate continues to grow, even among those for whom contraception poses no moral qualms, and one needn’t be a theologian to understand why. The country is being exposed to the raw political control that is the core of the Obama health-care plan, and Americans are seeing clearly for the first time how this will violate pluralism and liberty.

Which, we have to say, is about time. But, in truth, most people still won’t notice.

In late January the Health and Human Services Department required almost all insurance plans to cover contraceptive and sterilization methods, including the morning-after pill. The decision came after passionate lobbying by religious groups and liberals from the likes of Planned Parenthood, amid government promises of compromise.

Actually, HHS made their ‘decision’ way back in August. Kathleen Sebelius only announced it back in January. And she cushioned it by giving these providers until after the elections to begin complying with the new rule.

In the end, Planned Parenthood won. HHS chose to draw the rule’s conscience exceptions for "religious employers" so narrowly that they will not be extended to religious charities, universities, schools, hospitals, soup kitchens, homeless shelters and other institutions that oppose contraception as a matter of religious belief.

Apparently, we are supposed to be grateful that churches and synagogues and mosques won’t have to give away free condoms and ‘morning after’ pills. But they are about the only exceptions allowed.

The Affordable Care Act itself is ambiguous about what counts as a religious organization that deserves conscience protection. Like so much else in the rushed bill, this was left to administrative discretion.

Remember how many times the phrase, "as the Secretary shall determine" appeared in the 2,300 pages of Obama-Care? — And now we are discovering just how much power this unelected official has been given over our lives.

What the law does cement is the principle that the government will decide for everyone what "health care" must mean. The entire thrust of ObamaCare is to standardize benefits and how they must be paid for and provided, regardless of individual choices or ethical convictions.

Not quite. "The entire thrust of Obama-Care is to" use healthcare as a way control every aspect of our lives that the government sees in need of being controlled.

To take a small example: The HHS rule prohibits out-of-pocket costs for birth control, simply because Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s regulators believe no woman should have to pay anything for it.

After all, birth control is a human right. No one should have to pay for their human right.

To take a larger example: The Obama Administration’s legal defense of the mandate to buy insurance or else pay a penalty is that the mere fact of being alive gives the government the right to regulate all Americans at every point in their lives.

By this logic, how long will it be before we are required to buy Volts? After all, when people buy gasoline powered cars we all suffer.

Practicing this kind of compulsion is routine and noncontroversial within Ms. Sebelius’s ministry. That may explain why her staff didn’t notice that the birth-control rule abridges the First Amendment’s protections for religious freedom. Then again, maybe HHS thought the public had become inured to such edicts, which have arrived every few weeks since the Affordable Care Act passed.

They noticed. This has always been the plan. They just hoped that no one else would notice.

Bad call. The decision has roused the Catholic bishops from their health-care naivete, but they’ve been joined by people of all faiths and even no faith, as it becomes clear that their own deepest moral beliefs may be thrown over eventually. Contraception is the single most prescribed medicine for women between 18 and 44 years old, and nine of 10 insurers and employers already cover it.

Yes, but even then there might be some token co-pay involved. And, again, we cannot have anyone pay anything, even a token sum of $1 dollar when it is a human right.

Yet HHS still decided to rub it in the face of religious hospitals.

Mr. Obama’s allies among Catholic liberals are also professing shock—even the Catholic Health Association’s Sister Carol Keehan, who lobbied for ObamaCare, and Notre Dame’s Father John Jenkins, who invited Mr. Obama to speak on campus in 2009. But if they now claim they were taken for a ride by the secular left, the truth is that they wanted to be deceived in the name of their grander goal of government-enforced equity. The Catholic left was one of ObamaCare’s great enablers.

Speaking of scales from the eyes, we’re eager to hear from former Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak, who for a brief moment led a faction of pro-life Democrats against ObamaCare in 2010. They surrendered when Mr. Obama gave them the fig leaf of an executive order that will supposedly prevent federal funds from subsidizing abortions. Mr. Stupak is now a lobbyist at the D.C. law firm Venable LLP.

Translation: Mr. Stupak was given a golden parachute in exchange for betraying his constituents.

This is also a teaching moment for Mitt Romney, who has joined the calls to defend "the right to worship in the way of our own choice," as he put it in a Colorado speech on Monday. "This is a violation of conscience. We must have a President who is willing to protect America’s first right, our right to worship God," he added.

This is fine as far as it goes, but as usual the GOP front-runner is missing the larger policy and moral issue. The HHS diktat isn’t something unique to President Obama. It is the political essence of government-run medicine. When politics determines who can or should receive what benefits, and who pays what for it, government will use its force to dictate the outcomes that it wants—either for reasons of cost, or to promote its values, which in this case means that "women’s health" trumps religious conscience.

In fact, we will soon learn that abortion trumps everything. Killing babies is the holiest of holies in Democrat doctrine.

If Mr. Romney can’t make the obvious connection between this infringement of American values and all the other infringements that are inherent in government health care, then he needs better political advisers.

And better conservative reflexes. – Which is to say, some conservative reflexes.

The White House is now trying to cauterize the political damage and saying it is open to some "compromise" on its own contraception decision. But the rule is already final. HHS tried to sell it as a compromise when it was announced, and in any case HHS would revive this coercion whenever it is politically convenient some time in Mr. Obama’s second term. Religious liberty won’t be protected from the entitlement state until ObamaCare is repealed.

Again, rolling back the health care ‘conscience clause’ has been job one for Obama since he took office.

From the CNN archives:

White House set to reverse health care conscience clause

By Saundra Young
February 27, 2009

The rule protects the rights of health care providers who refuse to participate in certain procedures.

The Obama administration plans to reverse a regulation from late in the Bush administration allowing health-care workers to refuse to provide services based on moral objections, an official said Friday.

The Provider Refusal Rule was proposed by the Bush White House in August and enacted on January 20, the day President Barack Obama took office.

It expanded on a 30-year-old law establishing a "conscience clause" for "health-care professionals who don’t want to perform abortions."

Under the rule, workers in health-care settings — from doctors to janitors — can refuse to provide services, information or advice to patients on subjects such as contraception, family planning, blood transfusions and even vaccine counseling if they are morally against it.

For Obama and the Democrats, destroying religion is an article of faith.

The goal of Karl Marx and his followers has always been to destroy everything but the government, the state. So that everyone will be dependent on the state. Which is why Marxists seek to destroy every other competing institution in society.

That is why they want to destroy marriage, the family and, of course, religion. Everything must come from and through the state.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, February 8th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “WSJ: Waking Up To Dangers Of ‘Obama-Care’”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    “Like so much else in the rushed bill, this was left to administrative discretion.

    THERE IT IS!

    Yup, whenever I find myself facing some sort of challenge, the first thing I like to do is defer to “administrative discretion”.

    This is like having the DMV paint your house.

  2. GetBackJack says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4s0nzsU1Wg

    They’ll have to find us, and I assure you, that won’t be easy … or safe … and if they can get there, and get past our …. “intrusion preventions” …. either they or us will be out of bullets.

    ‘Cause none of us are going down easy.

  3. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Steve said:

    That is why they want to destroy marriage, the family and, of course, religion. Everything must come from and through the state.

    Especially salient, Steve. I am currently reading Mark Levin’s book “Ameritopia” which is covering this very point in detail.

    In one respect, I have to allow Mr Ears just a little lee-way since his whole life is the result of government largesse, he can’t help but think of government as the be-all/end-all benefactor even if he doesn’t know what a Marxist is. In fact, being ignorant of that fact is a good clue as to why he considers himself so beneficent and so unique. Without the formal education pertaining to socialism and communism, he truly thinks he is paving an untrodden path.

    His remarks concerning despot nations and their leaders, the Constitution and his dislike for it are also glaring. His tutelage under Ayers, rev. Wright and others who may have never uttered the word “communist” in his presence could very well have given rise to ideas in his head that he thinks are uniquely his own.

    And, when you couple this with a distinct lack of self-critique this person exhibits, it’s no wonder that he’s the way he is. It takes a certain kind of person to approach things with a complete lack of self-doubt. In one case, as I suspect Obama is, he’s never been told “no”, never been held accountable, no failure of his (like flunking out of Occidental College) has ever been held in his face and he’s never been told he’s wrong. Thus, the individual lives in a shell of reality where he actually believes he’s right all the time. The other case is where the individual, having had years of experience at something, has the ability to now rise up above the original fear of failure or apprehension toward something new and accomplish something of great note.

    Sadly, the left confuses the two cases as one and the same, having never understood the axiom “Some people do something wrong for years and call it experience”.

    Obama operates inside his own head–A lot–. And with that, never having been forced in younger years to self-evaluate, second-guess anything he’s ever done or been lectured (I suspect his momma let him do pretty much anything he wanted to do and his grandparents never scolded or had a sit-down with him, probably out of shame/embarrassment/weakness) he is thus the quintessential “Body Perfect” and thinks he does everything just fine and carries that perception and attitude into adulthood. Now, most people with that attitude get their ass handed to them at some point. But Obama…well…he’s had his way paved for him every step. Therefore the ongoing false perfection continues to cripple his mind and gets reinforced every time he runs into trouble and that trouble is assuaged or deflected due to affirmative action or some other character; Possibly something as simple as someone protecting him because they like him (for whatever reason) I have witnessed this phenomenon on occasion.

    The odd thing about people like this is you can see how their mind is poorly and cripplingly compartmentalized and operating at a reduced capacity. For example, when taking their car to the shop, they have no common sense, no understanding of what needs to be done but puts infinite faith on the shop to do it right. Although a lot of us do this, the Body Perfect does it with an arrogance and attitude that they think they know what needs to be done, even so far as telling the shop what the problem is, based entirely, of course on ignorance and terms he’s heard that sound sophisticated, like “the carburetor is probably sucking too much air”. It has that sing-songy, earthy tone to it he likes yet he is blindly ignorant that his car most-likely doesn’t have a carburetor (few cars have since the 1980’s since fuel injection became much of the established standard) but that “sucking too much air” is a spurious and nebulous assessment since it takes a good technician to determine if that’s so and the symptoms can range in presentation.

    But Obama is a know-it-all because he’s been told all his life how smart he is. But he is not only intellectually lazy, he is a coward. Unless he’s flanked by like-minded people, he cannot think, cannot speak, cannot operate. He’s out of his element and not knowing that, the end result is intense discomfort. He rationalizes his discomfort by blaming it on something he thinks he knows something about. Such is the mind of the Body Perfect. He can blanket the fear he has about facing the unknown with an air of arrogance, which many people confuse as confidence. Arrogance, at least a certain kind of arrogance is fear of being found out, mostly.

    Of course, you see this behavior a lot in despots like Mao, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Kim Jong Il, etc.

    Never would you hear Mao say to a visiting dignitary, “You know, I don’t know much about X, would you please explain to me how that works and why does it do it that way?” Likewise, you’ll never hear Obama say, “I’m completely ignorant of ______ and I need to get educated on that.” Unless of course it’s something that can deflect blame. “We had no idea how bad things were until we started ‘running the numbers’ (another earthy colloquialism) and found out just how bad it was. And by the way, it’s all Bush’s fault”. But you see, I would have more respect for the guy had he said instead, “We had no idea how bad it was and I have to take on the responsibility to make sure it doesn’t get any worse and be very careful to stay informed so I know if it’s failing or succeeding”. Such would be the mark of a leader.

    But in our system here in the US, although these people of course do exist, it would have been unthinkable that one would get elected to office some years ago, no matter how the accusations of being such were thrown about. Even John F Kennedy had a fair degree of humility. Johnson, not-so-much but he was more of an egotist than a Body Perfect. The Body Perfect has never had an ass-whoopin’, never been humbled, never been held accountable, never had to make amends and thus, never felt guilty, obligated or otherwise accountable. And Obama actually “grew up” without any adult supervision. None.

    Such is the personality of Barack Hussein Obama….MMMM…..mmmm…mmmmm

    • tranquil.night says:

      The “Body Perfect” is a great way of putting it.

      “Therefore the ongoing false perfection continues to cripple his mind and gets reinforced every time he runs into trouble and that trouble is assuaged or deflected due to affirmative action or some other character; Possibly something as simple as someone protecting him because they like him (for whatever reason) I have witnessed this phenomenon on occasion.”

      Yes, that is a great insight into the social psychology of Collectivism. Personal responsibility and accountability are never a factor in their worldview. Failure is always because of someone else: bad advice or underlings, Bushitler, a bad danish for breakfast.

      Ever notice how Obama doesn’t bother to even give the impression that he understands any of the details of his job? 98% of the lifting is done by his regime and underlings while he golfs, parties, and hams it up on the campaign. His job in the Collectivist machine is to be the likeable face that will seduce Americans into voting themselves into despotism, nothing else is expected of him by the Left or matters to them but the ability to hold onto power and continue the agenda.

      They think and operate totally different from conscience-driven individualists.

  4. proreason says:

    “For Obama and the Democrats, destroying religion is an article of faith.

    The goal of Karl Marx and his followers has always been to destroy everything but the government, the state. So that everyone will be dependent on the state. Which is why Marxists seek to destroy every other competing institution in society.

    That is why they want to destroy marriage, the family and, of course, religion. Everything must come from and through the state.”

    yep, including the Boy Scouts. Everything is a threat when your goal is total power.

    • GetBackJack says:

      A virus attacks every healthy cell it can, capturing them, creating host cells (bacteria, plant or animal) in which to live and make more viruses. Outside of a host cell, viruses cannot function. A virus needs a host cell to survive. For this reason, viruses tread the fine line that separates living things from nonliving things. Most scientists agree that viruses are alive because of what happens when they infect a host cell. [1]

      Unlike human cells or bacteria, viruses do not contain the chemical machinery (enzymes) needed to carry out the chemical reactions for life. Instead, viruses carry only one or two enzymes that decode their genetic instructions. In other words, they cannot do any useful or valuable work on their own, they have to feed off others in order to exist.

      If you need further explanations beyond this, you’re probably a site troll liberal.

      [1] Almighty God, when He gave Canaan to the children of Israel instructed them in the sternest language possible not to intermarry with surrounding peoples or allow them any intrusion into the affairs of the ten tribes of Israel. Here endeth the lesson.

  5. tranquil.night says:

    That’s right. This isn’t just an assault on religious liberty, but all insurance and coverage providers. It always has been, even when all these same religious groups and leaders cared about was carving out their interests and exemptions from the ObamaCare monstrosity they supported. The allure of Utopian-Statist ideology has massively infiltrated many religious institutions and blinded them to the predictably disastrous results of State command and control.

  6. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    “some time in Mr. Obama’s second term”

    Most frightening thing I’ve ever read.

  7. BigOil says:

    Interesting to watch how indignant the deluded become when reality comes crashing in. The church was all to happy to support the Marxists during passage of Obamacare because it seemed to fit with their belief in social justice…but tyranny does not play favorites.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »