Another Take on the Bishops and Health Care Reform, From AMERICA Magazine

Here's another take on the Catholic bishops and Health Care Reform, written by Michael Sean Winters for America Magazine. He states:

The USCCB argues that people will be forced to pay for other people’s abortion. But, that is only the case if someone chooses a plan that covers abortion.

And he also points out:

The latest statements from the USCCB also fail to note the specific pro-life provisions of the current bill.... If the USCCB at least acknowledged these parts of the current bill that are pro-life, but still concluded it was insufficient, their stance would have more credibility. Their failure to acknowledge these provisions is difficult to explain.

He also seems to take a swipe at an alleged tie between the bishops and the National Right to Life committee:

It is troubling that the USCCB seems to be working hand-in-glove with the National Right to Life Committee, which has become, for all intents and purposes, an adjunct to the Republican Party.

And he takes on Richard Doerflinger, who is the associate director of the USCCB's Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities:

The USCCB point man on the pro-life issues is Mr. Richard Doerflinger. Mr. Doerflinger is undoubtedly sincere and undoubtedly smart. But, he tends to view all policy issues through a single lens, the lens of abortion policy and a certain way of approaching that policy... The bishops should be wary of following his way. Many commentators think he is mistaken in many of his assessments and prognostications, but even if he is not, the bishops should only risk defeating health care over a genuine moral principle, not because of anyone's guess about how market forces will react, or what insurance companies will do. Neither the House/Stupak bill nor the Senate bill provides government funding of abortion. That is a statement of fact, not a statement of opinion and Mr. Doerflinger is entitled to his own opinions but not to his own facts.

I do wish that the Senate had adopted the House's language on this issue -- we wouldn't have this wrangling. But in following this ongoing conversation back & forth, it seems to me that the Senate language might well be sufficient to meet the bishops' requirement of the government not funding abortion. However, I can't help myself: I do wish that I could hear this admission from the bishops directly.

***Another late addition to this post... there is another posting from the bishops on the USCCB website, available as of earlier today, going into more detail about their position. It contains several other links, going further into legal reasons for their stance. Worth the read.