From Catholic World News Daily:
President Barack Obama has directed the Department of Health and Human Services to rescind the "conscience clause" that protects health-care personnel from pressure to participate in procedures they regard as immoral, such as abortion. The "conscience clause" was established by outgoing President George W. Bush in an executive order he released in December 2008. President Obama-- who has already issued an executive order to end the "Mexico City policy" barring taxpayer subsidies for abortion advocacy-- could end this policy as well.
Pro-life leaders quickly denounced the White House plans. David Stevens, the head of the Christian Medical Association, noted that the Obama administration had claimed that the Bush policy was confusing, "without offering a shred of evidence." Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said: "No one should be forced to have an abortion, and no one should be forced to be an abortionist in violation of their religious or ethical convictions." Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who is a medical doctor, said that he would challenge the policy by civil disobedience if necessary.
Here's the change Obama's
worshipers voters asked for. Such changes keep rolling out like rats in the New York City subway.
More on what you can do from Lifesite News:
WASHINGTON, March 6, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - President Obama's proposal to rescind a policy that protects the conscience rights of health care workers has now been formally published in the Federal Register, thus opening the 30-day period available for public comment on the proposal. Pro-life groups in the United States are urging concerned citizens to voice their concerns.
The policy, one of the last acts of the Bush Administration, protects health care workers from being forced to perform and provide controversial services that conflict with their personal, moral and religious beliefs.
Comments may be submitted by email at email@example.com
According to the Proposed Rule comments should provide the following:
"1. Information, including specific examples where feasible, addressing the scope and nature of the problems giving rise to the need for federal rulemaking and how the current rule would resolve those problems.
"2. Information, including specific examples where feasible, supporting or refuting allegations that the December 19, 2008 final rule reduces access to information and health care services, particularly by low- income women.
"3. Comment on whether the December 19, 2008 final rule provides sufficient clarity to minimize the potential for harm resulting from any ambiguity and confusion that may exist because of the rule; and
"4. Comment on whether the objectives of the December 19, 2008 final rule might also be accomplished through non-regulatory means, such as outreach and education."