.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Expressions of Liberty

A commentary on the governmental respect for natural human rights as expressed by the founders of the United States and how it effects us today. I also show how the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution and other related documents are not dead documents in America today, but merely ignored and misused.

Name:
Location: Champaign, Illinois, United States

I am a classical liberal which is considered a type of conservative in these modern days. I am pro-right to life, pro-right to liberty, pro-parental rights, pro-right to property and a number of other natural human rights.

Saturday, November 19, 2005

The ACLU Moves To Opress Free Enterprise And Religious Expression

The ACLU shows it is ignorant about religious freedom in a June 1,1995 article on its web site. There is absolutely no mention of religious freedom as a fundamental right. They do mention reproductive rights, which do exist but they have enlarged the definition beyond its natural borders once again showing their ignorance of natural rights. Reproductive rights is a right to property issue as well as a right to liberty issue in that your body is your own and you have the right to do with it what you will in regards to reproduction. To be technical all that means you can choose whether or not to have sex and who to have it with, since that is all the birth control choices nature provides you with. The use of birth control devices which are not natural falls under the right of liberty, not reproduction, since you have the natural ability to make a choice and the devices are artificial. It is clear that abortion is a violation of any right to liberty our forefather mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution since according to John Locke's theory of natural law which they held to be self evident, liberty does not justify endangering either yourself or any living creature. Below I critique the ACLU paper mentioned previously.

The ACLU wrote "Patients are often not informed of policies that deny women reproductive health services. "

I thought the ACLU were for separation of Church and State. It must be they mean only when it fits in with their politics. I could not verify the truthfulness of the story of this Oregon woman but I wonder if she bothered looking at her bill or if she discussed the sterilization procedure with her physician. In other words there is not enough information here to go on. In addition one case that itself remains unproven hardly makes a frequent occurrence.

The ACLU wrote "Religiously controlled hospitals evade a legal obligation to provide essential reproductive health services. "

And what law is the ACLU speaking of. The only obligation I have heard is that hospitals can not turn away patients who are in need of emergency medical care. Even in critical cases they can deny care for ethical reasons such as what happened in Texas when a hospital refused to take care of a critical ill baby by the name of Sun Hudson, despite the mothers wish to keep him alive.

The ACLU claims "Mergers with religiously controlled hospitals restrict women's access to reproductive health care services, even at non-sectarian institutions. "

Yes many religious hospitals are ethically opposed to abortion and in some cases sterilization.

The ACLU evidence is "For example, in 1992, 14 Catholic hospitals in the Chicago area denied 1,004 rape victims access to the morning-after pill. Of these 1,004 rape victims, 45% were low-income women seeking services in Catholic hospitals in poor and minority communities "

Catholics are ethically opposed to birth control of any type. In this argument the ACLU is attempting to convince us that the ACLU’s ethics should trump the ethics of the Catholic Church in hospitals owned by the later in blatant ignorance of what religious freedom is all about.

The ACLU stated "Clinics that provide abortion services must be affiliated with hospitals. "

Now we have the real objection which shows ignorance of the free enterprise we have in the United States. So instead of spending money to oppress people maybe the ACLU should exercise their right to property and start up some hospitals that go according to their doctrine. Never mind that abortion oppresses people who are still in there mother’s womb already.

The ACLU reasoned "Because these hospitals are forbidden from providing a wide variety of health services, women who need reproductive health services must find them elsewhere. "

Wide variety? This is an overstatement of reality as all we are talking about are population control procedures which hardly comprise as large variety. The Catholic church is opposed to the population control agenda as they believe people are to be fruitful and multiply. Their own statement displays thate once again the ACLU is ignorant of way the free enterprise system operates in the United States.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home