Will Obama Forget FOCA? Should Parents FightFOCA?


So Obama keeps Bush man Gates as SecDef. Some hints at not raising taxes. Wants to reduce abortion.

Is Obama governing like a, gasp, Republican?

Will Obama not push for the so called “Freedom of Choice Act” FOCA?


Obama might surrender in Iraq and to Iran even with Gates, but Obama will never surrender on FOCA.

Cecile Richards and Barack Obamacecile_richards_obama.jpg

Three reasons why Obama will fight for FOCA,

Obama will sign whatever Reid-Pelosi pass thru congress.

Obama will not veto FOCA. He does not have the political capital nor the political will to resist. Planned Parenthood paid too much money to be ignored. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood will earn her million dollar W-2. And Hillary will not let him forget FOCA.

Obama will keep his campaign promise.

FOCA will be the first legislation Obama will sign. When Your Business Blogger(R) did a tour of duty in government the fixed point, guiding star were Campaign Promises. They were a matter a public record and private integrity. If the candidate promised, The Honorable delivered.

But, then again, I worked for a Republican…

Abortion is the religious sacrament of The Party of Death.

The religion of the abortionists appears in the book, The Sacrament of Abortion by pro-abortion Ginette Paris and Joanna Mott

The Alert Reader would well know that abortion is a religious tenet of the Democrat party. To proselytize for the abortionists is, well, Biblical:

they not only continue to do [evil] but also approve of those who practice them Romans 1:32.

Steven Ertelt, Editor of LifeNews.com reports,

Detractors Downplay Pro-Abortion FOCA Bill’s Reach, Say Pro-Lifers Exaggerate

Kathryn Jean Lopez, the editor of National Review Online, responded Tuesday to the attempts to downplay the concerns about FOCA.

“Though it’s often referred to as a mere codification of Roe, FOCA, as currently drafted, actually goes well beyond that,” she explains.

She quotes information from pro-abortion Sen. Barbara Boxer who, in a statement on her web site, explains that FOCA would nullify all existing laws and regulations that limit abortion in any way, up to the time of fetal viability.

“While there is strenuous debate among legal experts on the matter, many believe the act would invalidate the freedom-of-conscience laws on the books in 46 states,” Lopez said.

Yes, parents should continue to FightFOCA.

Please sign the petition.

Pro-Abortion Melinda Henneberger from Slate writes,

Lose-Lose on Abortion; Obama’s threat to Catholic hospitals and their very serious counterthreat,

There are also serious questions about whether FOCA as currently drafted exceeds congressional authority. But when Obama was campaigning on FOCA, he didn’t say anything about wanting to change it.

The FOCA fight will continue.


Thank you (foot)notes:

Please note The Warner Family. And see what four fun kids would look like.

The Sacrament

of Abortion Post details: Fight FOCA!

Visit Twenty Items of Interest (v.40)

Read what An Huynh said, in Fighting FOCA.

Real Choice has a better video on Only Women Bleed than seen on Reasoned Audacity.

Ou phoneuseis teknon en phthora (“Thou shalt not murder by abortion”)

Didache, late first or early second century, AD. (Yes, Anno Domini, Latin for The Year Of Our Lord, NOT CE Common Era)

Read an Amazon reviewer’s comment on the confusion of abortion and The Sacrament of Abortion at the jump,

From an Amazon commenter on Sacrament,

“This is a book that challenges you to think and to open your mind. I still don’t know precisely where I agree and disagree with her, but many years after reading “The Sacrament of Abortion,” I am still thinking about what Paris had to say still agreeing and disagreeing and that makes this book far more valuable to me than most books I have read.

Ginette Paris goes right to the heart of one of the scariest and most difficult issues in the world today: abortion. She shows a courage, bordering on recklessness in confronting the issue. Paris doesn’t glorify abortion as a ritual sacrifice, she sees the decision about whether or not to carry a child as a sacred decision which involves life, death, love, motherhood, sexuality and the origins of each humans’ existence on earth. Paris suggests that no one should take the decision lightly. Having an abortion without truly considering the weight and significance of the decision is wrong, a violation of a sacred bond – but so is taking the decision away from a woman. Abortion is not a sterile choice. When a woman has an abortion, something sacred – something of value is destroyed. Yet, sometimes abortion can be the right choice. For Paris, a woman who chooses to have a child – when that child will clearly and obviously suffer a damaged, limited and wounded life has made the wrong maternal decision. No one should decide for the woman according to Paris, but there is a moral obligation for the woman to choose wisely.

Paris says that debates about the viability of the fetus are far too materialistic. Viability means more than just the ability to live outside the womb, viability should be seen socially and relationally. If I am to be a mother, I should consider: is there a community ready to embrace this child? Is there a world that I can prepare for this child so that s/he will thrive? Who will name and love the baby?

Ginette Paris also comments on how comfortable many of us are with singing the praises of men who fight and kill in war, or fights for honor. Society honors wise men who decide when to kill another and when to spare a life… yet we are so uncomfortable with the idea that a pregnant woman might make the same kind of decision about the life growing within her that we can’t think straight about it. It is either an evil murder of an innocent, or a choice about a minor surgical procedure. Paris says it is neither. The reception that her book received shows how hard it is for us to think straight about the issue.”


You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. jeanedcrusader says:

    It’s hard for me to believe that something this evil could happen in our country, and even though Obama is a member of the liberal illuminati which is notoriously in bed with Planned Parenthood, he could live with himself for supporting FOCA. Anybody who is decent and rational could not support this bill. It removes any conscience from the horrific practice of abortion, and lifts any ban on the ongoing genocide. I don’t think we can descend any lower.

  2. SoMG says:

    If Obama’s smart, and he seems to be, he’ll throw his whole weight behind FOCA. He’s on video promising it. Passing it will establish him as a man of his word, someone to take seriously when he talks. Friends will believe his promises and enemies will believe his threats.

    FOCA will not force anywhere near 1/3 of hospitals to close. That’s obvious hysterical govno. At VERY worst, if FOCA passes as it is currently written and the courts find that paying right-to-life obgyn providers constitutes “discrimination” against abortion, the right-to-life hospitals might have to close their obstetrics departments, in order to avoid “discriminating”.

    Even that’s unlikely. FOCA prohibits the governments, not the providers, from discriminating against abortion, and if your government health-care package offers you a choice between a Catholic birth-center that doesn’t refer for abortions and an abortion clinic that doesn’t refer for births, your plan isn’t discriminating, right? So no problem under FOCA.

    Even more likely: the Senate will with great ceremony amend FOCA to say specifically that right-to-life facilities can be paid without participating in abortions, provided the patients are able to get their abortions elsewhere. The Republicans will take credit for saving the Catholics from the pro-aborts. The Dems will take credit for being reasonable in victory. Catholic pro-Obama people will be reassured.

    You may be surprised but I predict that in the end, Catholics will like FOCA when it becomes law. For the first time, pregnant women will be Federally protected from forced abortions and/or government-mandated abortions–this is NOT currently a Federal or Constitutional right. It will be increasingly important as we move toward universal health care and the gov acquires a stronger interest in aborting problem pregnancies to save money. Also, FOCA will prohibit government-funded health plans from discriminating against childbirth by charging the patients higher deductibles for birth than for abortion. That’s pro-life.

    The Catholic Church fought bitterly agaainst FACE too–and called Big Bill “The Abortion President” for signing it. Now they’re grateful for the protection it provides for Churches, and for the decrease in anti-abortion violence which was a big public-image problem for right-to-lifers.

  3. Jack Yoest says:

    SoMG, you are correct only so far as FOCA when reconciled between the House and Senate will be watered down thru a series of compromises.

    But the Life advocates and the churches now realize that the walling off the churches in an exception to policy is still bad policy.

    For example, legislation is being advanced to demand that a quota be used to hire homosexuals. Churches are being exempted on grounds of religious beliefs.

    Church communities are wisely rejecting this limited conscience clause exception because it is bad policy to demand that homosexuality-preference be treating as a civil right — in the same manner of skin color pigmentation — a non- preference: the individual had no decision in his race; the individual can decide on his sexual preference.

    One is born Black. No one is born homosexual.

    So the Catholic Church will not accept the encroachment of homosexuality in civil society outside the church walls and will not accept mandatory abortion-provision in the hospital across the street.

    FOCA supporters well understand the incremental push to force acceptance of abortion on the population and on health care providers. The Catholic hospital system well understands the pro abortionists tactics and will fight and win — or simply close the entire system down.

    As Burke said, In this case “Good men” are going to do something.

    There is nothing to like in FOCA in any version.

    This is a battle.

    Thank you for your insight,


  4. Jack Yoest says:


    Obama will need to pay off the campaign donations and his promises to Cecile Richards president of Planned Parenthood.

    Our goal is to make this a very, very difficult fight — one that Obama the politician will not take on, even though abortion is the sacrament of his party of death.

    There are still a few pro-Life Democrats — they are still our friends, we hope.



  5. SoMG makes very good points. There is one factor that I think he ommits.

    The RCC will never approve of FOCA, even if it reduces the number of abortions – because the RCC does not seek to reduce abortion. It seeks to eliminate abortion. Entirely. No exceptions. If a single abortion is performed the RCC considers that unacceptable, no matter the circumstances. Thus they really don’t care if FOCA prevents *some* abortions, because it also makes considerably harder their long-term goal of preventing *all* abortions.

    I also wouldn’t be entirely surprised if the church closes down hospitals entirely – note closeing down, not selling to secular medical providers – as a form of protest or blackmail: “Pass this law and we’ll destroy a substantial part of the healthcare system.” I don’t *think* that’ll happen because the church knows full well how unpopular that would make them and how it would destroy much of their moral standing, but it remains a possibility.

    I also stress some points in which we are in agreement: The only chance FOCA has of possibly passing would be if it was so watered-down as to be unrecognisable.