Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. Whatever reason you decide for not supporting this health care bill works for me. The fact that this is a take over of the health care industry that would take us down the slippery slope of socialism is my resaon for being against it. Also, I do not support abortion for any reason, it is a crime to take a potential human's life with out justice, just as it is a crime to take a human's life.
   Jerry L. Moody

   Posted By: Jerry L. Moody

2. Congressman Cao deserves enormous praise for his faith and courage. He is also an enormous rebuke to all those so-called "Senator-Catholics" (especially in the Democratic Party) who sell their souls for temporary political popularity and power.

   Posted By: Michael Bernard

3. In a dark and weary world a good deed shines through.
   
   What a beautiful example Congressman, to protect and serve.
   

   Posted By: Eamon Hatley-Smith

4. Mr. Cao, you are a man of integrity. You are also well educated and a man worthy of respect for the manner in which you have formed your life. In fact, Mr. Cao, you might just look at becoming the first American of Vietnamese ancestry to be mayor of New Orleans. You would have Rhett and my vote. Thank you for your stance.

   Posted By: RhettsWife

5. Thank you Mr. Cao. As a fellow Practising Catholic and resident of Louisiana, I am proud to stand with you. I wish other Catholic politicians (Catholic Democrats) had the will power to put their faith before their personal political career.

   Posted By: veefox

6. Cao's congressional district elected him to represent their interests, not the interests of his Church.

   Posted By: AJ

7. As a Louisiana Resident, I say it is nice to have a Congressman we can be proud of.

   Posted By: jh

8. Mr Cao was elected to represent all his constituents, not to promote Catholic doctrine. He can abstain from voting to satisfy his conscience. If he votes against the Bill, he must consider many other conscience issues, such as contributing to people both suffering and dying because they cannot afford healthcare. He is reported as saying “Being a Jesuit ….”. He is not a Jesuit, he just studied with them for awhile. Odd, then, that he did not learn of the moral principle of “double effect reasoning”. Hence, he could vote for the Bill on the grounds that his intention is to provide needed health care support, not to support abortion elements. This is the same moral principle used to allow tubal removal of an ectopic gestation, or for bombing an enemy city knowing that also innocent civilians will be killed. His courage, though admirable, seems misguided in this instance.

   Posted By: Boutros Neru

9. Good for you Congressman .... fancy supporting legislation that's aimed to give America's huge underprivileged population access to the same health care the n'er-do-wells are able to afford.
   What next, providing breakfast at school for the children of the poor? That'll never do(!).
   [And thank goodness "abortion for any reason" doesn't maintain here in Australia; otherwise my young niece would have died recently when her pregnancy went ectopic and nearly killed her.]

   Posted By: Greg

10. Full support to you Anh!!!
    
    Your courage and faith is a tremendous witness to those who are in similar situations and are tempted by the world.
    
    

    Posted By: Nathan

11. Good on the congressman.
    AJ & Boutrous Neru, I guess that just means mob rule - the will of the majority, regardless of whether it might actually be right or wrong. For my part I think these guys get elected to exercise prudential judgment, not to be some sort of automaton counter. And as to "contributing to people both suffering and dying because they cannot afford healthcare", if one welcomes and facilitates evil so that other good may come, that's not a moral approach.

    Posted By: Peter

12. For all we know Congressman Cao may have remained in CLC the equivalent of the third order of the Jesuits. Nowhere does he deny the principle of double effect or suggest that this may not apply to an ectopic pregnancy, or to him for that matter.If he votes against legislation that widens funding for abortion he is hardly going to stop it and so prevent Medicaid. If the principle is being applied to his actions, as I am sure it is,the second effect will be to lose his seat in Congress. 'The cost will have been reckoned'.

    Posted By: Lewis P Buckingham

13. Thank you Mr. Cao, it seems like he is the only politician with a soul. I will always support you in whatever politcal arena you are. Thanks for not voting for this government takeover.

    Posted By: vanessa lee

14. I applaud Cangressman Cao for tanding by his convictions and not being swayed by party politics. This is a bad deal no matter how you look at it.

    Posted By: chuck

15. Kudos Cao! You are a man of integrity! Shame on Boutros Neru for trying to defame you. If you don't have health care you are either too lazy or ignorant to go to the Medicaide office. NO ONE IS DENIED CARE AT A HOSPITAL FOR THEIR INABILTY TO PAY!!! Just ask the millions of illegal aliens that get care daily. As a Louisiana resident, I easily could qualify for LaChips for my children, but I have dignity and I choose to pay for my children's healthcare. Just as there is no legitimate reason for anyone in the United States to go hungry, neither are they denied care. A few exceptions may be the mentally ill or challenged who don't know any better. Ask all the welfare recipients that are ahead of you in line at the Doctor's office next time how they get healthcare.

    Posted By: Jay

16. Mr Neru, thousands of Mr Cao’s constituents are unborn babies. How could Mr Cao be said to be representing these constituents if he votes for a law that enhances the likelihood of their being deliberately killed?
    
    Or perhaps you don’t count these human beings as constituents deserving of government in their best interest, but, rather as some viewed black people and slaves once, you view the unborn as sub-human?
    
    Double effect? Would you be equally supportive of this health bill on this ground if, alongside medical subsidy provisions, it funded the dismemberment and crushing of another class of non-voluntaries, such as red-heads or Latinos?
    

    Posted By: Hugh

17. Actually, whatever they might believe on the matter, AJ's and Boutros Neru's cases politically are far weaker. We elect people, not machines. Which means that, as Burke said so long ago, we elect them to give us the benefit of their consciences, not to indicate the wishes of the majority. That is what makes modern democracy superior to mob rule.

    Posted By: Adeodatus

18. "fancy supporting legislation that's aimed to give America's huge underprivileged population access to the same health care the n'er-do-wells are able to afford."
    
    Red herring, Greg.

    Posted By: Lance Eccles

19. Having Medicare is not "socialism". That is an American excuse for leaving health care in he hands of private health funds which are rip off merchants.
    
    Congressman Joseph Cao is to be congratulated for standing up for life. "save his soul" should not be in quotation marks but rather be without so as to show that this is no snide and sneering journalism but rather a statement of truth, that one does in fact move towards salvation by being pro life and acting accordingly in public office.

    Posted By: Michael Webb

20. Greg is always supporting red herrings and bogeymen. He joined that dopey outfit called the Acton Institute. He read and re-read social encyclicals completely ignoring the social and economic implications that leap from their pages. The National Civic Council and the DLP hve got the social and economic policioes right as did the commentary on the old Green Catechism that spoke of legitimate government ownership of public assets and strategic industries in order to hep the rest of us and small and medium businesses get a better deal. Why any self respecting Australian would sign up to that Acton Institute detritus or to that Von Mises liberalism rubbish is completely beyond me. Those philosophies are based on the working man being the slave and God as represented by corporations and well to do neo- cons as the Catholic equivalent of economic calvinists. YUk, yuk and yuk.
    
    We catholic laity need to be shown respect and one way to maintain one's self-respect is to put the Acton Institute and the Von Mises ideas in the rubbish bin. The NCC and the DLP actually show respect to the ordinary worker and family because of our deeply Australian Catholic and labor traditions and experience accross all the social and economic issues.
    http://www.dlpnsw.com/ and also
    
    http://www.newsweekly.com.au/

    Posted By: Michael Webb

21. I think Jay unwittingly made a critical point, that he won't use LaChip, because "I have dignity" . Then he must believe all those who have to depend on charity have no dignity. Having the right to supported health care gives everyone equal dignity, which is what Christianity teaches. As for his invitation to me to talk to the "welfare recipients ahead of me" in the Doctor's office, cannot do - I am in Australia, where we have an excellent dual system of public and private insurance. But I enjoyed the satire of an American citizen's comments at: http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/126603.html
    Other remarks about my opinion obviously do not understand "the principle of double effect reasoning". So ask your priest - you'll find it is part of catholic moral theology

    Posted By: Boutros Neru

22. I do have to wonder whether there is any actual evidence that such a health care plan would include abortion funding. As far as I have read, there is nothing to imply that this might be the case.

    Posted By: Alex Knight

23. Alex, actually, there is. See for instance:
    
    http://www.americanprinciplesproject.org/blogs/6-facts-proving-abortion-is-in-the-health-care-legislation.html

    Posted By: Adeodatus

24. Does this mean that the many thousands of Catholics who give their time and donations to hospitals, who care for sick and dying children and adults, are risking their souls because there maybe terminations carried out in other parts of these hospitals?

    Posted By: Chris

25. Michael Webb's propaganda on the DLP's policies is a sham. They are not Catholic and are purely sectarian. It is sad that the DLP is still trying very hard to galvanise old hatreds and prejudices. Medicare is a pluralistic policy, embraced by the Greens as well, and ‘Yes’, there are many Catholics in many political parties, and 'No' Michael Webb, they are not 'UnAustralian' and 'UnCatholic' as you might suggest again.

    Posted By: TJ Lawson

26. Chris, I believe the issue reduces to this: may I give $500.00 to Dr John Smith with the knowledge that he will be thereby enabled to carry out his proposal to heal and save the life of some people, and to deliberately kill some others?
    
    Germain Grisez, the eminent moral theologian, commented on analogous situations: "One might contribute to such [people/organisations] intending to support the good they do and only accepting as an unwanted side effect one's contribution to the harm. Still, in my judgment, contributing to the harm is not justified, for there always are ways to put surplus wealth and other resources to work meeting others' genuine needs without contributing to anything one recognises as bad."
    
    To put this another way: what reasons could justify donating resources which partially end up facilitating the killing of innocents? One reason cannot be: because the same organisation that deliberately kills X and W is also using some of my money to save A and B. But given that I could donate money & support to a plethora of organisations that ONLY save lives, why, if I truly valued human life, would I not restrict my donations to them?

    Posted By: Hugh

27. Hugh, that hare won't run! Your logic about donations is fine when you are dealing with your own money. The politician here is using taxpayers' money. They are a diverse group with a plurality of values, many of whom see nothing wrong with abortion. A different moral principle needs to be invoked, hence the "double effect" reasoning.

    Posted By: Boutros Neru

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Swiss villagers want to reverse vows regarding glacier

   Swiss Catholic villagers who have for centuries offered a sacred vow to God against the advancing ice mass of the Great Aletsch glacier now want to alter their vows.

2. Solar statue for Padre Pio

   Italian saint, the stigmatic Padre Pio, is to get a new 200 ft (60.9 metre) high solar energy producing statue.

3. Researcher rejects suicide link to social networking

   University of Queensland researcher Dr Keith Harris disputed a warning against social networking by the Archbishop of Westminster, saying the internet doesn't necessarily push people to suicide, but a news outlet is supporting the Archbishop.

4. Turkey refuses Pope's Tarsus request

   Turkey's government has refused a personal request from Pope Benedict and from other Christian leaders for the reopening of the only church in Tarsus, the city of St Paul's birth.

5. Bruno brands Palestinian Christian as "terrorist"

   Palestinian Christian activist, Ayman Abu Aita, says he will sue British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen for defamation for describing him as a "terrorist group leader" and using footage of him in the movie Bruno.