Posts Tagged ‘ birth control

ALERT: Hobby Lobby Supreme Court Ruling NOT About Contraception

The New York Times and many others are contributing to the false notion that the recent Supreme Court decision, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc allows businesses to ban birthheadscratcher control. In the spirit of truth, the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby is about abortion-causing drugs and devices NOT contraception. To quote page two of the court’s official opinion, “The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions, and if they do not comply they will pay a very heavy price . . . If these consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see what would.” You can read the high court’s opinion in full here.

Hobby Lobby did not say that providing no cost contraception to employees was against their religious convictions. They said providing abortion-causing drugs and devices violate them. Of the 20 FDA approved contraceptives they have no problem with 16 of them because they have not been proven to end the life of a child. It is important to note that the court recognized along with Health and Human Services that the four ‘contraceptives’ in question in fact can and do end the life of an embryo. The court states on page 32, “They [the business owners] therefore object on religious grounds to providing health insurance that covers methods of birth control that, as HHS acknowledges may result in the destruction of an embryo.” Since the owners of Hobby Lobby have a deeply held religious conviction that all human life is valuable and begins at conception they only had a problem with those drugs (e.g. Plan B, Ella) and devices (e.g. IUDs) that end a newly ‘conceived’ life.

Again, this case is not about businesses blocking birth control it is about ham handed bureaucracy forcing companies to violate their deeply held convictions just so a government can implement a political abortion agenda. For expert interpretations see responses by Princeton Law professor Robert George and the Director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom at the Christian Legal Society, Kim Colby.

A Brief Pause Before Uncorking the Champagne
For all the hoopla out there on the pro-life side touting this decision as a great victory we should be cautious. It should be noted that this decision is monumental if not only for the fact that this is the first time in the history of the abortion problem that it has been directly connected to individual religious liberty. That is, the moral cost of access to health insurance is to pay for everybody’s abortion. To that point there are several sobering factors to consider in this decision before we celebrate the ‘victory.’

  1. The first point to consider before champagne is the 5-4 decision. This was an issue of freedom of religion my friends. The question as to whether or not a person, acting as an We the peopleindividual or as a corporation, can live out their religious beliefs in the public square was narrowly upheld. That is to say it was refuted by four Supreme Court Justices! Remind me again why this country was founded? So let’s say one of the five majority justices retires and is replaced by a justice who sides with the minority…at that moment when one’s religion becomes a public matter at odds with official government policy it comes with criminal penalties (er…taxes).
  2. A second point that we ought to consider to temper our enthusiasm is the sad fact that holding as true a fact confirmed by empirical science could be considered a religious belief if it does not support the secular government position. ‘Human life begins at conception’ is now considered a religious belief simply because it aligns with the Christian worldview, embryology and human genetics notwithstanding. It would be understandable for the court to site as religious the belief that all humans are made in the image of God and therefore ought to enjoy protection under the law at every stage of development from conception to nature death, hence abortion is bad But that was not the point of religious belief the court considered. It happens to be terribly inconvenient to the abortion agenda that science sides with the pro-lifers on this point. And the court, complicit with that agenda per Roe vs Wade, already ruled that a pre-born child is not a person deserving of protection under the law. So now they are stuck with the Solomon-like act of slicing the baby called science between two would be religions, theirs called secularism or Christianity. So does this mean that embryologists who recognize the new organism with human DNA created at fertilization are religious zealots?
  3. The third point is that the abortion industry has gotten not only the government (including Health and Human Services [HHS] and the Supreme Court), but the media, and 1237682_untitledeven many pro-life advocates to call certain types of abortion ‘contraception.’ The word ‘contraception’ is intended to define the use of methods that block conception which apparently in all other species but human takes place at fertilization. The abortion industry prefers to talk about when ‘pregnancy begins’ (they say it is at the time the embryo implants in the uterine wall) while the pro-life population prefers to talk about when the life of a separate and distinct human being starts (fertilization of the egg by the sperm). If contraception is supposed to mean the prevention of pregnancy and a pregnancy is not said to begin until the newly formed life is firmly implanted in the uterine lining (an arbitrary and convenience definition by the way) then drugs and devices that make it impossible for the embryo to implant are benignly called ‘contraceptives.’ If on the other hand life begins at fertilization, as embryology tells us, then that’s when pregnancy begins and those same drugs cannot be considered anything but abortifacients.
  4. A fourth cooling effect the decision should have on us is that it represents a ruling on a detail of an unethical, wrongheaded law (PPACA, aka Obamacare). This amounts to a sub-ruling serving only to further cement what ought to otherwise be repealed. Obamacare represents the takeover of the profession of medicine inserting itself in the place of the patient in the doctor/patient relationship. Now the government decides what ‘good health’ is for you, a member of a population that they manage, rather than you and your doctor. So, since the government has identified a population block called ‘women of child bearing age’ they have mandated that abortion-causing, carcinogenic drugs are good for all women. Individual health care no longer matters despite the rhetoric. It’s the population objective that counts as determined by non-elected rule-makers at the HHS. The same ones who wrote the contraceptive mandates at issue here. Simply Orwellian.

At the Heart of the Government Shutdown; Obamacare and Abortion

Jim HardenYou and I are being forced to make a choice. Obamacare brazenly mandates that all U.S. citizens purchase health insurance that directly pays for abortion and abortion-causing ‘birth control,’ or face stiff financial penalties. This violates the religious beliefs and moral convictions of millions of Americans. Curiously, Planned Parenthood (PP), the nation’s largest abortion provider, had a hand in developing these mandates and has been hired by the Federal Government to enroll members in the new State health care exchanges beginning October 1st. However, Obamacare is experiencing massive resistance and is currently in flux. The Senate is deliberating whether to delay funding for Obamacare till January 2015. If they vote to pass the Blackburn Amendment then the deadline for compliance will be postponed for one year. 

Twenty-three states have passed measures barring the use of health insurance premiums to directly fund surgical abortion, but there remain several problems even in those states:

  1. Most insurance companies do not have ‘pro-life’ plans.   Cuomo on Reproductive Health Act
  2. Since most plans cover abortion and due to the long-standing Hyde Amendment forbidding federal funding of abortion, an ‘abortion surcharge’ of at least $1 per month will be deducted from each employee paycheck under section 1303 of Obamacare.  
  3. All federally subsidized plans available in all 50 States will include abortion and abortion-causing contraception which will be paid for by tax dollars. 
  4. Every plan, including those that do not cover surgical abortion, treats abortion-causing ‘birth control’ as a separate issue from abortion. Even if you are fortunate enough to find and enroll in a plan that does not cover surgical abortion, it will cover abortion-causing contraception without co-pay or deductible. These ‘contraceptive’ methods include the Pill, IUDs, the morning after pill (Plan B), and the week after pill (Ella) – which are all proven to create inhospitable uterine environments making it difficult for the fertilized egg to implant in the uterine lining thereby ending a pregnancy (i.e. abortion). This does not even address the extreme cancer-causing nature of these drugs (see National Institute of Health Report and World Health Organization Report).

CompassCare’s policy on contraception stands in stark contrast to Planned Parenthood’s and the prevailing conventional wisdom. Given the government takeover of American medicine via Obamacare and the fact that forced contraception coverage creates a massive violation of religious liberty, we thought it timely to discuss CompassCare’s position. CompassCare educates all patients on all forms of contraception and how they work. However, CompassCare never provides or refers for contraception.

So why doesn’t CompassCare refer for or provide contraception, aside from the obvious carcinogenic and abortifacient nature of a majority of the methods? Doesn’t it reduce non-marital pregnancy and the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STD)? The simple answer is, “No.” Why? Because of a sociological phenomenon called “risk compensation.” Dr. Jokin de Irala, Professor of Epidemiology at the University of Navarre in Madrid, Spain, defines risk compensation as people increasing “risk-taking behaviors if they perceive themselves to be at less risk due to a technological preventive measure. The benefits of an intervention can be offset by this increase in risk taking” (video minute 12:30). Dr. de Irala goes on to site examples such as sunscreen use and increased skin cancer; seat belts and increased reckless driving. In regards to sexual activity, if students are told that condom use will protect them from pregnancy and STDs, they will likely increase the number of sexual partners and the frequency of sexual contact, thereby offsetting the potentially protective effects of the technology. Therefore pregnancy and STD rates go up with ‘safe sex’ campaigns because of increased risk-taking behaviors. It’s also important to note that condoms have been proven ineffective at avoiding HPV, Herpes, and Chlamydia (New England Journal of Medicine June 22, 2006 Vol 354, No 25 shows 100% condom use equals 38% HPV infection rate). 

According to the Guttmacher Institute 54% of all abortions were given to women who became pregnant during the same month they were using a contraceptive method. The percentage of unmarried births skyrocketed from 18% in 1980 to 41% by 2010, and STD rates are at epidemic levels despite the massive amounts of resources pouring into ‘safe sex’ education. Studies have demonstrated that the introduction of contraception has actually increased the incidence of pregnancy and STD rates as seen in Britain, the U.S., and other places, while rates decline dramatically when abstinence or fidelity is promoted as in Uganda.

Ignoring the facts, Obamacare and Planned Parenthood are committed to providing free, easily accessible abortion-causing ‘contraception’ under the guise of women’s health. Now they want you and me to pay for it through our health insurance premiums or face fines. You and I are being forced to make a choice.

Contraception, Obamacare, and Cuomo

While different forms of contraception have been used throughout history and in many different cultures, the term “birth control” was coined in America in the early 1900s by Margaret Sanger, foundress of the  the American Birth Control League (ABCL). “We who advocate Birth Control…lay all our emphasis upon stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction…” –Margaret Sanger, “Birth Control and Racial Betterment” (Birth Control Review, Feb 1919, pg 11). The ABCL changed its name in 1939 to the Birth Control Federation of America and in 1942 changed it again to Planned Parenthood Federation, perhaps to disassociate themselves with the revelations of moral travesties committed by Nazi Eugenics policies .

Margaret SangerMargaret Sanger and many others in the 1920s and 30s promoted a “Malthusian” philosophy of population control, first introduced by economist Thomas Malthuse. Malthusians embraced the idea that humanity was quickly approaching a size which the earth could no longer sustain. Therefore birth control (among other more heinous practices such as forced sterilization and abortion) was deemed an appropriate solution.

The flawed concept of overpopulation in conjunction with Darwinian social engineering for a ‘cleaner race’ conspired to produce a political agenda that promoted the mass application of birth control and the undermining of the family unit. The early targets for efforts to slow the growth of the population were the “unfit” and “undesirables.” These were defined by Malthusians as immigrants, the poor, indigents, minorities, the ‘feebleminded,’ and went on to include violent criminals and girls who had lost their virginity.   

The roots of birth control in this country have a decidedly anti-family, anti-Christian origin. Margaret Sanger once said, “Birth control…is calculated to undermine the authority of Christian Churches. I look forward to seeing humanity free someday of the tyranny of Christianity . . . .”

Fast Forward . . .

Obamacare was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court in 2011 and forces all individuals to carry health insurance coverage or be penalized. Obamacare mandates that all health insurance coverage include birth control and abortifacient contraceptives. This means that Christians and others who oppose the draconian worldview that gave rise to birth control and abortion in America will be forced to fund it, or suffer penalties via the Internal Revenue Service. In response to the overwhelming tide of First Amendment Violation lawsuits, the Obama administration provided a small window of accommodation set to expire January 1st, 2014 so that those who had moral objections could change their apparently flawed views and comply with the law as it is written. Americans United for Life in a recent analysis stated, “The Obamacare mandate forces countless family businesses, religious organizations, and other non-profits into a terrible set of choices:

1)       Violate deeply held belief by complying with the mandate

2)       Resist the mandate and face federal fines of up to $100 per employee per day

3)       Drop health insurance altogether, harming employees, and pay a roughly $2000 annual fine per employee for doing so (Obamacare clarification video).

Then Andrew Cuomo this past legislative session attempted to pass a bill called the Reproductive Health Act (RHA) that would have enshrined contraception and abortion as fundamental rights. The scary thing about a right is its eventual corollary, duty. This bill would have reduced the standard of care for women permitting non-doctors to perform surgical procedures as well as create an environment where not referring for contraception and abortion could be grounds for discrimination lawsuits. The bill was narrowly defeated thanks to your support.

Obamacare and Cuomo’s RHA have this in common: the promotion of Margaret Sanger’s ideology, which is both anti-family and anti-Christian, by making it illegal to practice a worldview that runs counter their own in your healthcare choices. This ideology undermines the family unit through the promotion of “sex without responsibility” and also subjugates future generations to the tyranny of immediate gratification. Sanger’s fundamental philosophy is still, sadly, very much alive today.

NY to Deregulate Abortionists; Destroy Pregnancy Centers

“Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it,” said British statesman and philosopher, Edmund Burke. Similarly, those in who fail to fight the machinations of NY politicians will be doomed to their designs at the Federal level; especially when it comes to abortion and Pregnancy Resource Centers (PRC).

Black Population ExtinctionCorning, New York is home to infamous Margaret Sanger, proponent of the destruction of certain races and classes of people and founder of Planned Parenthood. One way she thought to accomplish her agenda was by what she called, “Birth Control.” The African American Community in NY now meets the criteria for an endangered species. On July 1st 1970 New York legalized abortion on demand. On July 2nd, one day later, the first free standing abortion clinic opened in the Rochester/Syracuse region.  

In 2010 New York City (NYC), the abortion capital of the U.S., voted to pass a city ordinance restricting the advertising capability of pregnancy centers. At a hearing regarding that ordinance I urged that ‘the vote on this proposed NYC amendment be tabled indefinitely until such a time as a more thorough review of women’s reproductive health service standards can be done so that a more equitable and constitutionally sound alternative can be developed,’ (For my full testimony click here). However, the ordinance passed, an injunction was rendered and we await an appellate decision as to whether or not the ordinance violates the 1st amendment rights of Pregnancy Centers.

Now New York Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, with close ties to the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), just served a subpoena investigating pro-life pregnancy centers in NYC claiming misleading advertising. Is it a coincidence that just a few days before a NY State Senate bill was introduced in May 2013 that mirrors the NYC ordinance, U.S. Representative Carolyn Maloney of NYC re-introduced her Federal bill to restrict pregnancy center advertising nationwide the very next week? All this just as NY Governor, Andrew Cuomo, vows to introduce his abortion expansion bill making abortion and contraception fundamental human rights thereby paving the way for discrimination lawsuits filed against pregnancy centers and pro-life doctors.

ericschaffNew York has hundreds of abortionists who are not held accountable to current Health Department regulations similar to the debacle with Gosnell just a few short miles to the South. One abortionist who researched the abortion pill RU-486 in Rochester, NY was the Medical Director responsible for a Planned Parenthood office in Wilmington, DA that was closed for what staff RNs called, “meat-market style abortions.”

Instead of investigating to increase standards of care for women in an obviously corrupt abortion industry, NY politicians are seeking to pass legislation reducing the already low bar set for abortionists by insulating them from malpractice in cases of botched abortions as well as permitting non-doctors to perform surgical abortion. Ironically all this is perpetrated under the banner of ‘Women’s Equality.’ The provisions in Cuomo’s heinous abortion expansion bill are summarized here.

There is a legislative cancer in NY State government which, if we are not careful, will spread to the Federal government endangering Good Samaritan pro-life doctors and Pregnancy Centers. It must be stopped in NY or it will continue to metastasize. Please continue raising awareness of this unjust state of affairs. Use social media and the resources available here, write letters to the editor, contact your legislator, preach, pray, volunteer, give money.  Governor Cuomo has until the end of the legislative session, June 20th, to get what he wants. Let’s keep pushing for what’s right, together!