No Catholics Need Apply?

The National Review has an editorial about the Coakley statement that's caused such a buzz:

In an radio interview on Thursday, Coakley explained that although “you can have religious freedom,” she said, “you probably shouldn’t work in an emergency room” if you are someone who would not want to participate in such things as providing emergency contraception (EC) to rape victims.

So, I'm guessing that Coakley would force Catholic hospitals to either provide EC, or close down?  This is the sticking point of the "Health Care" bill:

Martha Coakley is effectively saying that faithful Catholics can’t work in emergency rooms, whether in public or Catholic hospitals. She is saying that faithful Catholics cannot be pharmacists. And it is, of course, not just Catholics this thinking affects. She is saying that “do no harm” is out the window in the age of Roe v. Wade. She is saying what the U.S. Senate just said: that an American should not have the freedom to choose whether or not his tax dollars will fund abortions. They will be so used, consciences be damned.

Yet another reason to oppose it - that ISN'T related to the fact that it's unlikely to provide high-quality health care, and will cost just about everything you'll have left after bare necessities.

"But, but...Obama said that it won't cost US (the "little people") any money - only those dreadful rich"

Uh, he also said that if we spent the stimulus money, we'd get the economy back on track - last time I looked (today), unemployment is TWICE that it was under Bush - when unemployment was said to be outrageously high.

Share