RE: Making Sense of Supreme Court Decision

[Guest guest]

Yeah. I hear the attorneys who argued the case against the administration were raving mad at the decision, and said that the American people were duped, because all along the Obama administration insisted it wasn't a tax, until prompted by the Justices during oral arguments to declare whether it might according to some perspective be considered a kind of tax. stands in a historical line of "conservatives" appointed to the court by Republican presidents, who then turned around and went against the very hand that fed them.

Was it really ' job to find a pretext in which to consider the law constitutional? Especially when that very pretext was explicitly rejected by the framers of the law themselves?

Despite being a conservative I've never put too much faith in the Republican Party; to a great extent they have stopped being a party of God, family, and country that they used to be. I believe Savage is correct when he says that we have essentially Demicans and Republocrats, basically one party with 2 faces. This is also said by the Bircher G. , who says the current 2 party system is a kind of collectivist conspiracy where they pretend to differ (but only in the accidentals) while really being substantially the same (in the essentials). See him at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAdu0N1-tvU. 90 minutes long but well worth it, even if some of his other ideas are somewhat questionable.

Much more could be said, but we need to be a bit more savvy. And engaged. And suspicious of ovally simplistic political formulas like Republican=good, Democrat=bad.

Sincerely yours,

Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, CNFPMC, ABVM, ACPh

Interventional Cardiologist, Endovascular Diplomate, Varicose Vein Specialist, Noncontraceptive Family Planning Consultant, Family Planning Researcher

Medical Director, The Oklahoma Vein and Endovascular Center (www.noveinok.com, veininfo@...)

Executive Director, The Edith Stein Foundation (www.theedithsteinfoundation.com)

405-947-2228 (office)

405-834-7506 (cell)

405-947-2307 (FAX)

pedullad@...

"...the priestly ministry is not just a pastoral service; it ensures the continuity of the functions entrusted by Christ to the Apostles and the continuity of the powers related to those functions. Adaptation to civilizations and times therefore cannot abolish, on essential points, the sacramental reference to constitutive events of Christianity and to Christ himself." (Inter Insignores)

Making Sense of Supreme Court Decision

Dear Friends, just read this from NCBC and it has made as much sense as anything else I have heard today...

The National Catholic Bioethics Center is deeply disappointed to learn that virtually the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) remains standing in the wake of the June 28, 2012 U. S. Supreme Court ruling. The ACA includes provisions that violate respect for human life and dignity and the rights of conscience, and that undermine the principle of subsidiarity. Of course, the Court did not rule that the law is good in its entirety or even that it can be effectively implemented and sustained. It merely ruled that it does not violate the Federal Constitution.

We

find it odd that the Supreme Court, having found an insufficient basis to judge in favor of the ACA on Commerce Clause grounds, chose to accept the secondary justification offered by the administration, namely, that the mandate is a tax on the American people. As noted in the minority’s dissent, it is dangerous to ignore the legislative intent of the Congress in a case such as this.

The National Catholic Bioethics Center remains opposed to the law not because universal health care coverage is somehow undesirable as a goal, but predominantly because the ACA will provide coverage for abortion on demand and violate the conscience of employers and enrollees who will be forced to subsidize abortion. There also is little protection of health care providers who may be coerced to provide contraceptives and abortifacients. Furthermore, the Health and

Human Services mandate has come to be woven into the fabric of the ACA as a post-provision that poisons the well of authentic health care and radically contradicts respect for conscience, which is particularly important in healthcare settings where the human person is vulnerable and easily violated. The National Catholic Bioethics Center thus remains compelled to oppose the measure in its entirety until a proper respect for the First Amendment, religious freedom, rights of conscience, and human life are properly incorporated into the law, and safeguarded in medical decision-making.

From the perspective of social justice, this law jeopardizes the principle of subsidiarity, which, like the principle of federalism upon which our Constitution was written, holds that services ought to be provided by those social agencies and instrumentalities of government that are closest to the point of delivery. Tremendous dangers lie in health care

being orchestrated by the highest level of social organization, our federal government.

The Catholic Church and others of conscience remain deeply troubled this law and will continue to work to ensure the protection of the consciences of those providing health care and other social services to those in need.

Saints Fisher and More, Pray for Us. Blessings,

Dr. Peck, MD, CCD, ABFM, Marquette NFP Instructor

Pecks Family Practice, PLC

1688 W Granada Blvd, Ste 2A

Ormond Beach, FL 32174

(386) 677-2018 fax: (386) 676-0737 cell: (386) 212-9777

"I have chosen you from the world, says the Lord, and have appointed you to go out and bear fruit, fruit that will last, alleluia" (Cf. Jn 15:16,19)

[Guest guest]

I believe it is true that the ideology that seeks to eliminate people because of their perceived inferiority--race, religion, color, nationality, lack of education or status (money) or health--is not exclusive to one political party. Rather, it is somewhat universal among elitists--those who have lots of money, and therfore power/control/authority, including political power which they purchase with campaign contributions that assure re-election of the favored. And that is how the elitists are able to transfer the funding of their ideology to the taxpayer, as just endorsed.

This strategy follows the example of Margaret Sanger and her elitist friends in establishing and funding Planned Parenthood by McCormick, Gamble, Rockefellor, Ford, etc, in the last Century to Gates, Buffet, , and Soros in the present.

You can find more information about the anti-people people at Dr Stanley Monteith's website--www.radioliberty.com/ThePopulationControlAgenda.pdf

AND, you can read it on p 12 of One More Soul's "Obey Mandate or Scripture" newspaper challenge to the HHS mandate which includes articles by Drs Davenport, Peck, and Fr Velez, and Prof Ray Noble, as well as many others----> www.onemoresoul.com/news-commentary/obey-mandate-or-scripture.html

Pray hard. Blessings to all.

Steve Koob

From: pedullad@...Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:27:29 -0400Subject: Re: Making Sense of Supreme Court Decision

Yeah. I hear the attorneys who argued the case against the administration were raving mad at the decision, and said that the American people were duped, because all along the Obama administration insisted it wasn't a tax, until prompted by the Justices during oral arguments to declare whether it might according to some perspective be considered a kind of tax. stands in a historical line of "conservatives" appointed to the court by Republican presidents, who then turned around and went against the very hand that fed them.

Was it really ' job to find a pretext in which to consider the law constitutional? Especially when that very pretext was explicitly rejected by the framers of the law themselves?

Despite being a conservative I've never put too much faith in the Republican Party; to a great extent they have stopped being a party of God, family, and country that they used to be. I believe Savage is correct when he says that we have essentially Demicans and Republocrats, basically one party with 2 faces. This is also said by the Bircher G. , who says the current 2 party system is a kind of collectivist conspiracy where they pretend to differ (but only in the accidentals) while really being substantially the same (in the essentials). See him at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAdu0N1-tvU. 90 minutes long but well worth it, even if some of his other ideas are somewhat questionable.

Much more could be said, but we need to be a bit more savvy. And engaged. And suspicious of ovally simplistic political formulas like Republican=good, Democrat=bad.

Sincerely yours, Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, CNFPMC, ABVM, ACPhInterventional Cardiologist, Endovascular Diplomate, Varicose Vein Specialist, Noncontraceptive Family Planning Consultant, Family Planning ResearcherMedical Director, The Oklahoma Vein and Endovascular Center (www.noveinok.com, veininfo@...)Executive Director, The Edith Stein Foundation (www.theedithsteinfoundation.com)405-947-2228 (office)405-834-7506 (cell)

405-947-2307 (FAX)pedullad@...

"...the priestly ministry is not just a pastoral service; it ensures the continuity of the functions entrusted by Christ to the Apostles and the continuity of the powers related to those functions. Adaptation to civilizations and times therefore cannot abolish, on essential points, the sacramental reference to constitutive events of Christianity and to Christ himself." (Inter Insignores)

Making Sense of Supreme Court Decision

Dear Friends, just read this from NCBC and it has made as much sense as anything else I have heard today...

The National Catholic Bioethics Center is deeply disappointed to learn that virtually the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) remains standing in the wake of the June 28, 2012 U. S. Supreme Court ruling. The ACA includes provisions that violate respect for human life and dignity and the rights of conscience, and that undermine the principle of subsidiarity. Of course, the Court did not rule that the law is good in its entirety or even that it can be effectively implemented and sustained. It merely ruled that it does not violate the Federal Constitution.

We find it odd that the Supreme Court, having found an insufficient basis to judge in favor of the ACA on Commerce Clause grounds, chose to accept the secondary justification offered by the administration, namely, that the mandate is a tax on the American people. As noted in the minority’s dissent, it is dangerous to ignore the legislative intent of the Congress in a case such as this.

The National Catholic Bioethics Center remains opposed to the law not because universal health care coverage is somehow undesirable as a goal, but predominantly because the ACA will provide coverage for abortion on demand and violate the conscience of employers and enrollees who will be forced to subsidize abortion. There also is little protection of health care providers who may be coerced to provide contraceptives and abortifacients. Furthermore, the Health and Human Services mandate has come to be woven into the fabric of the ACA as a post-provision that poisons the well of authentic health care and radically contradicts respect for conscience, which is particularly important in healthcare settings where the human person is vulnerable and easily violated. The National Catholic Bioethics Center thus remains compelled to oppose the measure in its entirety until a proper respect for the First Amendment, religious freedom, rights of conscience, and human life are properly incorporated into the law, and safeguarded in medical decision-making.

From the perspective of social justice, this law jeopardizes the principle of subsidiarity, which, like the principle of federalism upon which our Constitution was written, holds that services ought to be provided by those social agencies and instrumentalities of government that are closest to the point of delivery. Tremendous dangers lie in health care being orchestrated by the highest level of social organization, our federal government.

The Catholic Church and others of conscience remain deeply troubled this law and will continue to work to ensure the protection of the consciences of those providing health care and other social services to those in need.

Saints Fisher and More, Pray for Us. Blessings,

Dr. Peck, MD, CCD, ABFM, Marquette NFP Instructor

Pecks Family Practice, PLC

1688 W Granada Blvd, Ste 2A

Ormond Beach, FL 32174

(386) 677-2018 fax: (386) 676-0737 cell: (386) 212-9777

"I have chosen you from the world, says the Lord, and have appointed you to go out and bear fruit, fruit that will last, alleluia" (Cf. Jn 15:16,19)

[Guest guest]



Maybe the decision will help our bishops realize that the Courts aren't going to do their work for them. That is, they need to teach Humanae Vitae with confidence and vigor.

Also on June 28th, the Wanderer published my article calling for NFP courses to be part of the New Evangelization and give people the information they need to make informed choices.

Kippley

Making Sense of Supreme Court Decision

Dear Friends, just read this from NCBC and it has made as much sense as anything else I have heard today...

The National Catholic Bioethics Center is deeply disappointed to learn that virtually the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) remains standing in the wake of the June 28, 2012 U. S. Supreme Court ruling. The ACA includes provisions that violate respect for human life and dignity and the rights of conscience, and that undermine the principle of subsidiarity. Of course, the Court did not rule that the law is good in its entirety or even that it can be effectively implemented and sustained. It merely ruled that it does not violate the Federal Constitution.

We find it odd that the Supreme Court, having found an insufficient basis to judge in favor of the ACA on Commerce Clause grounds, chose to accept the secondary justification offered by the administration, namely, that the mandate is a tax on the American people. As noted in the minority’s dissent, it is dangerous to ignore the legislative intent of the Congress in a case such as this.

The National Catholic Bioethics Center remains opposed to the law not because universal health care coverage is somehow undesirable as a goal, but predominantly because the ACA will provide coverage for abortion on demand and violate the conscience of employers and enrollees who will be forced to subsidize abortion. There also is little protection of health care providers who may be coerced to provide contraceptives and abortifacients. Furthermore, the Health and Human Services mandate has come to be woven into the fabric of the ACA as a post-provision that poisons the well of authentic health care and radically contradicts respect for conscience, which is particularly important in healthcare settings where the human person is vulnerable and easily violated. The National Catholic Bioethics Center thus remains compelled to oppose the measure in its entirety until a proper respect for the First Amendment, religious freedom, rights of conscience, and human life are properly incorporated into the law, and safeguarded in medical decision-making.

From the perspective of social justice, this law jeopardizes the principle of subsidiarity, which, like the principle of federalism upon which our Constitution was written, holds that services ought to be provided by those social agencies and instrumentalities of government that are closest to the point of delivery. Tremendous dangers lie in health care being orchestrated by the highest level of social organization, our federal government.

The Catholic Church and others of conscience remain deeply troubled this law and will continue to work to ensure the protection of the consciences of those providing health care and other social services to those in need.

Saints Fisher and More, Pray for Us. Blessings,

Dr. Peck, MD, CCD, ABFM, Marquette NFP Instructor

Pecks Family Practice, PLC

1688 W Granada Blvd, Ste 2A

Ormond Beach, FL 32174

(386) 677-2018 fax: (386) 676-0737 cell: (386) 212-9777

"I have chosen you from the world, says the Lord, and have appointed you to go out and bear fruit, fruit that will last, alleluia" (Cf. Jn 15:16,19)