Catholic nurse forced to participate in abortion, lawsuit filed

[libby060]

You are all correct in that we are called to be saints. We are called to take up the cross and be nailed if that’s what it takes. Christianity will not thrive unless we do. Historically the Church has had greatest growth in times of greatest persecution. We Catholics who continue with quasi-hedonistic lives, at least moderately comfortable, find complacency a very easy trap into which to fall.

For instance, Planned Parenthood receives thousands upon thousands in donations from corporations or their foundations, large and small. If handed a list of businesses which support Planned Parenthood, would you promise to boycott them all? Are you sure?

Life Decisions International is a credible organization that keeps tabs on who donates. The list is incredibly, depressingly long. One can attain it through

fightpp.org/index.cfm

However to give you a taste, do you do business with:

Whole Foods Market, JPMorgan Chase (including Chase Bank, & Bank One), Bank of America, Lost Arrow (Patagonia), Wells Fargo (including Wachovia), Chevron (including Caltex, Xpress Lube, & Texaco), eBay (including PayPal), Kenneth Cole, Nike, Midas, Marriott (including Courtyard Hotels, Fairfield Inn, Renaissance Hotels & Inns, Ritz-Carlton Hotels, etc.), Johnson & Johnson, and Sonic (drive-in restaurants). And this is just a partial list!

Note: We must be careful and accurate. Some people spread false lists which are damaging to reputations and to the cause. Always check with credible sources.

Get the full list. I’m sure that most of you have connections somehow with at least one of these or on the longer, much longer, list. Stop your relationship today, write them and tell them you are and do it.

Not likely it will be as much of a sacrifice as giving up your job, license (how much/long did it take to attain?), benefits including health, position, security and be asked to do it in a moment’s notice. If you cannot sacrifice in small ways, then think twice before expecting it of another.

This nurse is suffering now, I’m sure, with memories and guilt that will haunt her the rest of her life. She did not have to take it public. In doing so she has given the entire Pro-Life movement a great hope. But I’m also sure she is suffering under the media glare. (Think of how much like hungry hyenas reporters and photographers can be) And do you think for one moment that the pro-aborts are leaving her alone? And how about her job? Is it as pleasant for her to enter her place of work as for you? Do you think her family, probably extended too, is suffering with her?

Be aware that she may be reading this. While I want to think I would have made a different decision at the moment, I haven’t any idea what I really would have done. None of us do until we are tested. Remember we are all made of different inner strength by God.

For every heroic saint there are thousands, millions who could have made the same sacrifice but didn’t.
Get the list. Write the letters. Pray.

 

[Insight]

In Harlem, here in New York, the abortion capital of the United States, the abortion rate is 60%. Isn’t it interesting that so many of these abortions are minorities? Are these the populations that Justice Ginsberg said "we don’t want too many of

That’s exactly correct, if you notice, all the abortion clinics are strategically located in black neighborhoods. Margaret Sanger, the atheist founder of Planned Parenthood established the organization to limit the proliferation of “undesirables”. She gave speeches to the KKK and sought to pay black pastors to promote abortion.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger

www.blackgenocide.org/planned.html

Who would figure that we would have a black President giving speeches to Planned Parenthood bolstering his support for FOCA. Go figure.

God Bless

 

[Insight]

I think the law should make hospitals maintain the life of any fetal victim of abortion who survives the procedure.

That was the “Born Alive Protection Act” that Obama voted against 3 times.

God Bless

 

[Supercatholic]

We cannot take all blame away from this nurse. Humanity will never get any better unless there are people that are willing to lose their jobs (and worse) in order to stand up for what’s right. God never tempts us beyond our ability to resist, which means that when you do something wrong it is wrong. Yes being pressured makes it more understandable, but it would be disastrous for us to start taking all blame away from people doing bad things just because they were put in bad situations. We are called to be better than that.

I respect your post. According to the nurse’s lawyer, who stated on the Steve Maulsberg Show, “The nurse was told right at the start of her shift she would have to assist in an emergency life threatening to the mother abortion. The nurse was lied to. She was also told that not only would she be fired, she would also lose her nursing lisence for insubordination”. Had the nurse resisted, you know as well as I do they just would have found another nurse to assist in this evil act and the baby would have been killed anyway. The hospital didn’t say to the nurse if you quit your job we won’t kill the baby. The nurse’s non compliance would have accomplished nothing. An innocent baby would still be dead and another person would just be added to the economic strife of the rapidly growing unemployment rate. What about the doctor who performed the abortion, why is no one condemning the doctor? Doctors have far better legal protection than nurses do, and could have refused to commit this atrocity with a lot less threat to their position.

 

[mlchance]

The nurse’s non compliance would have accomplished nothing.

Her noncompliance would have kept for her from participating in a gravely evil act.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Insight]

I respect your post. According to the nurse’s lawyer, who stated on the Steve Maulsberg Show, “The nurse was told right at the start of her shift she would have to assist in an emergency life threatening to the mother abortion. The nurse was lied to. She was also told that not only would she be fired, she would also lose her nursing lisence for insubordination”. Had the nurse resisted, you know as well as I do they just would have found another nurse to assist in this evil act and the baby would have been killed anyway. The hospital didn’t say to the nurse if you quit your job we won’t kill the baby. The nurse’s non compliance would have accomplished nothing. An innocent baby would still be dead and another person would just be added to the economic strife of the rapidly growing unemployment rate. What about the doctor who performed the abortion, why is no one condemning the doctor? Doctors have far better legal protection than nurses do, and could have refused to commit this atrocity with a lot less threat to their position.

You are exactly correct. Years ago before we had kids, my wife was a head nurse at Pediatric Neurological Research @ NYU. Its hard to fight these people, they would go after your Nursing License or come down on you with the best attorneys Park Avenue has to offer. Everything would be a loss, the Nursing Degree, License, student loans, etc. The Catholic Nurse would have to become a hairdresser. This Nurse should be commended for even trying to sue, but it could backfire. As the legal system is pro-death, the end result could be a ruling forcing all nurses to partake in abortion irregardless of Faith.

 

[Supercatholic]

You are exactly correct. Years ago before we had kids, my wife was a head nurse at Pediatric Neurological Research @ NYU. Its hard to fight these people, they would go after your Nursing License or come down on you with the best attorneys Park Avenue has to offer. Everything would be a loss, the Nursing Degree, License, student loans, etc. The Catholic Nurse would have to become a hairdresser. This Nurse should be commended for even trying to sue, but it could backfire. As the legal system is pro-death, the end result could be a ruling forcing all nurses to partake in abortion irregardless of Faith.

Insight, the legal system is more pro-death than anyone can imagine. My son was brutally killed by a drunk driver and all the driver got was a four year sentence, with the possibility of parole after the third year. First there was a big demand for nurses because of a so-called shortage. Now I can see why they wanted so many. To make sure they were staffed heavily enough to perform this atrocity. A few may quit, but there will always be enough on hand to participate in the government’s reduce the “surplus population” agenda. Thanks to this Obamanation tyranny, many people will choose to avoid going into the medical field. We’ll be lucky if we have one hospital per state soon. As for the 77 million Roman Catholics mentioned in your tag, a majority of them are corrupted by secularism. At best they say “I’m pro-life, except for…” This “except for” is all our goverment needs to continue it’s genocide under the cloak of “medical procedure”. As of now, STUPID people say “I’m so glad I live in a free country that allows and encourages me to kill my own baby”. Someday people will be saying “Please Mr President can I have at least one baby?” I think it was either one of our Popes or early church fathers who said. “God has placed a limit on our intelligence, but he didn’t place a limit on our stupidity”. This is why stupidity runs rampant in our society. It’s free, limitless, easily accessible, convenient, supported, encouraged, rewarded, and I fear someday, will be mandated.

 

[Insight]

When it comes to Health Care Reform, the devil is in the details

cc.org/commentary/when_it_comes_health_care_reform_devil_details

When it comes to legislation, there’s a general rule of thumb that the number of details someone doesn’t want you to see is directly related to how quickly they try to pass it. The so-called health care “reform” bill is a text-book example.

The reason Obama and liberal Democrats are pushing so fast and furious is because the details, (where the Devil usually hides), are beginning to get out. And as the details start to sink in, they’re cutting through all of the “yes we can” rhetoric and leading more Americans to say “no you don’t”. So what’s getting them worked up? Let’s take a look at some of the details of this “reform”.

Despite Obama’s best efforts, the financial implications are finally becoming more widely appreciated, (so to speak). According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the proposed legislation would not reduce the overall amount of money spent on health care in America, which undermines Obama’s rationale for the massive overhaul in the first place.

They estimate that the “reform” would add between one and one and a half trillion dollars to our national debt, just over the next decade alone. The result will be a call for massive tax increases and the eventual rationing of care to cover and reduce costs. nAnd of course this is before we find out how much more it will really cost once it becomes law, as every federal program eventually costs more than initially advertised.

And there are plenty of non-financial “details” to be concerned about as well. The legislation would provide taxpayer funding of abortion by mandating coverage in the “public” (government run) version of health insurance. Democrats specifically opposed an amendment that would have mandated that no public funds go to cover abortion in the bill, and worse yet they approved an amendment that explicitly includes abortion coverage. In short, the bill would represent the greatest expansion of abortion in America since Roe vs. Wade.

There’s trouble for doctors and nurses too, as they’re likely to lose the “conscious protections” that keep them from being forced to provide abortion services, or risk losing their jobs. Obama’s administration has already moved to rescind Bush era regulations that helped guarantee those protections.

The “public” (government run) version of health insurance would provide free health care to illegal aliens, but would result in the rationing of care for elderly and disabled American citizens in order to save money. Congressional liberals even defeated an amendment that would have specifically banned the rationing of health care.

And what happens when the government starts to ration care? Who decides who gets what, and when? Why bureaucrats and politicians, that’s who. And what happens when people are left to wonder what kind of care they’ll get if they’re not supporters of the right political party? Such fears (not to mention corruption) become plausible given a government run system.

Obama claims that rationing is already going on by our insurance companies, so we shouldn’t get worked up about it. Maybe so, but that doesn’t mean we should trade private rationing (done by private companies that have to compete for consumer dollars) for public rationing by a government with no competition.

Then there’s Obama’s pledge that, “if you like your current insurance plan, you can keep it”, which is a hollow promise at best, if not an outright lie.

A recent Heritage Foundation study projects that the “reform” Obama wants would cause almost 90 million Americans to lose their current employer-based insurance, as many employers will simply cease to offer coverage and push employees onto the government plan in order to save money.

Worse yet, the current version of the legislation would make it illegal for Americans to buy, or for insurance companies to sell, any individual private insurance plans after the first of the year.

The “reform” also would force all Americans to pay for health insurance, whether they want it or not - and use the IRS to levy fines on anyone who doesn’t have the level of coverage that the government mandates.

The bottom line is that this plan represents a massive foot-in-the-door towards a “single-payer” system, where private insurance is completely abolished and all medical personnel work for the government. In fact, many of its supporters have admitted as much.

Representative Jan Schakowsky was caught on video in April stating that this was indeed an attempt to move toward a single payer system and to run the insurance companies out of business. And Obama himself stated in 2003 that, “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer, universal health care plan.” What more do we need to know?

Who doesn’t believe that this plan won’t become a gateway for the regulation of an ongoing list of human behaviors? Once the government’s paying the tab, every type of human behavior becomes a potential cost to be analyzed and controlled.

Don’t believe me? Look no further than the Pentagon’s recent trial balloon about banning smoking in the military because it increases military health care costs. Now just replace “Pentagon” with “National Health Service”, and replace “smoking” with “cheeseburgers” or “mountain climbing”. You get the picture. Americans seem to be catching on.

The most recent polls bring bad news for Obama, showing a continued drop in just about every category, job approval, his ability to “fix” health care, support for his plan and with at least one poll showing the Republicans now leading Democrats on a “generic ballot” test. Which means that, at least for the moment, being the “party of no” is working just fine for the GOP.

As a result, the Democrats just this past week re-tooled their rhetoric to make insurance companies the latest boogie-man in their attempt to distract people from the facts. But the only problem is that this “reform” means more government, which is one of the few things people dislike more than insurance companies. And speaking of insurance companies, if the Democrats do run them out of business, who will all the trial lawyers sue? Just curious. John Edwards has child support to pay!

God Bless

 

[WillieWonka]

I’d suggest a rational hospital that provides abortions would quietly avoid hiring Catholics in any obstetrics department.

 

[Insight]

I’d suggest a rational hospital that provides abortions would quietly avoid hiring Catholics in any obstetrics department.

They don’t need to, Catholic Nurses already know to avoid departments that could put them in precarious predicaments.

God Bless

 

[WillieWonka]

They don’t need to, Catholic Nurses already know to avoid departments that could put them in precarious predicaments.

God Bless

Yes. I would expect this to be a natural, self-reinforcing discrimination on both sides.

I haven’t studied hospitals, but I wonder how that works in smaller hospitals. In a large place, there are different departments, specialities, floors, even buildings. But how about the small place? Are nurses more generalists than in the larger hospitals? Would they have a higher probability of being assgned to OBGYN cases as well cardiac, kidney, emergency, etc?

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

The US bishops do support universal access to health care. What they don’t support – indeed, cannot support and still comply with Catholic teaching – is Obamacare. Of course, that is a distinction that the Obamapologists don’t want advertised.

Regarding the thread, so much for conscience clauses and protecting people’s beliefs. Could it be the fruit of yet another Obama Administration falsehood?

– Mark L. Chance.

Let’s not confuse our terms. While Catholics may agree that people have a right to medical treatment, the bishops can not, and can never, in good conscience, support state-run ‘health’ care.

It makes no difference who is in charge of it; it will always lead to a who-deserves-to-live situation, run strictly on a bottom-line basis.

I doubt very much any real Catholic can support such eugenics.

 

[sharmin]

Let’s not confuse our terms. While Catholics may agree that people have a right to medical treatment, the bishops can not, and can never, in good conscience, support state-run ‘health’ care.

It makes no difference who is in charge of it; it will always lead to a who-deserves-to-live situation, run strictly on a bottom-line basis.

NO it won’t. It doesn’t in Canada.

 

[WillieWonka]

NO it won’t. It doesn’t in Canada.

Canada has a 42% mortality rate for colon cancer.

The US has a 31% mortality rate for colon cancer.

In the US a powerful drug is used to fight colon cancer.

In Canada the government has decided that drug is too expensive, so the Canadians die.

 

[Supercatholic]

Her noncompliance would have kept for her from participating in a gravely evil act.

– Mark L. Chance.

Mark, Christ commands us to forgive. He doesn’t suggest it. As a sinful person in God’s eyes, I know how difficult to sometimes downright impossible this can be. But if we can’t forgive someone who was weak, threatened, and confused, how then can we learn to forgive the ones who sin with evil intent. Being a christian is complicated from both sides, being a sinner and forgiving a sinner. I know of a pope who feared for his life that he publicly announced he wasn’t a christian and that he didn’t know who Jesus was. Yet Jesus still forgave him.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I respect your post. According to the nurse’s lawyer, who stated on the Steve Maulsberg Show, “The nurse was told right at the start of her shift she would have to assist in an emergency life threatening to the mother abortion. The nurse was lied to. She was also told that not only would she be fired, she would also lose her nursing lisence for insubordination”. Had the nurse resisted, you know as well as I do they just would have found another nurse to assist in this evil act and the baby would have been killed anyway. The hospital didn’t say to the nurse if you quit your job we won’t kill the baby. The nurse’s non compliance would have accomplished nothing. An innocent baby would still be dead and another person would just be added to the economic strife of the rapidly growing unemployment rate. What about the doctor who performed the abortion, why is no one condemning the doctor? Doctors have far better legal protection than nurses do, and could have refused to commit this atrocity with a lot less threat to their position.

Way to show charity towards the nurse who was bullied into this decision.

 

[Insight]

Yes. I would expect this to be a natural, self-reinforcing discrimination on both sides.

I haven’t studied hospitals, but I wonder how that works in smaller hospitals. In a large place, there are different departments, specialities, floors, even buildings. But how about the small place? Are nurses more generalists than in the larger hospitals? Would they have a higher probability of being assgned to OBGYN cases as well cardiac, kidney, emergency, etc?

Catholic Nurses (I mean real Catholic Nurses – not Catholics with a Notre Dame level of conviction) will make it explicitly clear that they would quit before murdering a baby. Its real tuff if you know they would go after your Nursing License. Before accepting the job, it might be wise to find out how the Hospital behaved in past incidents, passed practice.

God Bless

 

[mlchance]

Mark, Christ commands us to forgive.

Irrelevant to the point at hand. The nurse should’ve refused. Period. No job is worth participating in grave evil.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[sharmin]

Irrelevant to the point at hand. The nurse should’ve refused. Period. No job is worth participating in grave evil.

– Mark L. Chance.

But the relevance of the forgiveness is that Christ already forgave her. Maybe we should too, as Christ commanded.

 

[Supercatholic]

Irrelevant to the point at hand. The nurse should’ve refused. Period. No job is worth participating in grave evil.

– Mark L. Chance.

All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. All except for Mark L. Chance. He will be directly assumed into Heaven for he is completely without stain and is required to show no charity. The nurse made a regrettable mistake and is now living in turmoil for that mistake. Through the love of Jesus, the Catholic church offers forgiveness for sins even greater than the one the nurse committed. Are you greater than Jesus and his church?