Bishop Asks Sen. Casey to Rescind Vote on Policy
Affecting Overseas Abortions
Most Rev. Joseph F. Martino, D.D., Hist. E.D.
Bishop of Scranton
January 30, 2009
In a letter to Sen. Robert P. Casey, Bishop Joseph F. Martino condemned the
vote taken by Sen. Casey against an amendment to a bill which would have
prohibited millions of U.S. tax dollars from going to organizations abroad that
provide and promote abortion.
The Martinez Amendment to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
would have reinstated the Mexico City Policy rescinded by President Obama on
Jan. 23. The amendment was defeated in a vote of 60-37.
In his letter, Bishop Martino condemns Sen. Casey’s vote against the Martinez
amendment which would have prevented “over 450 million dollars of American
foreign aid . . .[from going] to organizations that are militant in promoting
abortion as a method of population control, particularly in countries that find
abortion objectionable on moral grounds.”
The Bishop continues, “Your vote against the Mexico City Policy will mean the
deaths of thousands of unborn children. This is an offense against life and a
denial of our Catholic teaching on the dignity of every human being. This action
is worthy of condemnation by all moral men and women.”
The Bishop’s letter urges Sen. Casey to rescind his vote on the Martinez
amendment. “Your failure to reverse this vote will regrettably mean that you
persist formally in cooperating with the evil brought about by this hideous and
unnecessary policy,” says the Bishop.
The Mexico City Policy was first implemented under President Reagan. It was
rescinded by President Clinton and reinstated by President Bush. The policy
required that non-governmental organizations abroad “agree as a condition of
their receipt of [U.S.] federal funds” that they would “neither perform nor
actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.” The
policy exempted abortions done in response to rape, incest, or life-threatening
conditions.
“The core of the argument is whether U.S. taxpayers ought to be forced to
fund efforts abroad that utilize abortion as a means of family planning,” said
Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL). “If we want to continue fostering a culture of life,
where every life is considered sacred, every child is celebrated, and life at
all stages is given the dignity it deserves, then we will reinstate this [Mexico
City] policy.”
A release issued by Sen. Casey’s office the day after the vote says that
“Restrictions on the federal funding of abortions are in place both domestically
and overseas. U.S. funding of abortions overseas is prohibited by the 1973 Helms
Amendment. . . . [which reads] “No foreign assistance funds may be used to pay
for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or
coerce any person to practice abortions.”
But as Bishop Martino’s letter points out, the Helms Amendment does not
restrict organizations from using their own money to provide and promote
abortions. It does not deny money to organizations that are militant about
pressuring foreign governments to reverse anti-abortion legislation. The Mexico
City Policy does both.
The full text of Bishop Martino’s letter to Sen. Casey follows:
January 30, 2009
Dear Senator Casey:
I wish to thank you for voting in favor of the Hatch Amendment to the
Children’s Health Insurance Program Reorganization Act of 2009 which would have
made unborn children eligible for child health assistance had it passed. I am
grateful for what you have done on behalf of children in America who are without
health care.
It is with deep regret, however, that I learned of your vote against the
amendment offered by Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) to the same Children’s Health
Insurance Act. Senator Martinez’s amendment would have reinstated the Mexico
City Policy. That policy, instituted in 1984, required foreign non-governmental
organizations “to agree as a condition of their receipt of [U.S.] federal funds”
that they would “neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of
family planning . . . .” It also prohibited them from lobbying governments to
make abortion legal. In effect, the reversal of the Mexico City policy will mean
that over 450 million dollars of American foreign aid will go to organizations
that are militant in promoting abortion as a method of population control,
particularly in countries that find abortion objectionable on moral grounds.
Senator, is not this vote a contradiction of your repeated claim that you
support the protection of unborn life?
Contrary to a release issued by your office yesterday, the 1973 Helms
Amendment does not provide the same restrictions as the Mexico City Policy. The
Helms Amendment prohibits only U.S. funds from being used to pay for abortions
or to motivate or coerce anyone to practice abortions. It in no way keeps U.S.
federal funds from organizations which use their own money to pay for or support
abortions. Nor does it place restrictions on organizations that lobby foreign
governments to reverse anti-abortion laws. While I understand that the Helms
Amendment is still in place, it does not have the same effect in limiting
abortions abroad.
On Respect Life Sunday, October 5, I addressed the faithful of the Diocese of
Scranton. In keeping with the obligations of my episcopal office, I called upon
my brothers and sisters in faith to be vigilant against the objections to the
Church’s teaching on life so prevalent in current political discourse. I vowed
to be vigilant in correcting Catholics who are in error with regard to the
sanctity of life. Your vote against the Mexico City Policy will mean the deaths
of thousands of unborn children. This is an offense against life and a denial of
our Catholic teaching on the dignity of every human being. This action is worthy
of condemnation by all moral men and women.
Your release also says that you support “family planning . . . specifically
because reducing unintended pregnancies reduces the number of abortions.” I
remind you that it is never permissible to use immoral means (e.g., artificial
contraception) to achieve a good end.
As I have done on several occasions, Senator, I urge you to consider that
Church documents speak clearly and compellingly on the special responsibility
that falls to you as a lawmaker to oppose abortion and other clear evils,
including contraception, infanticide, euthanasia and embryonic stem-cell
research. To that end, I refer you to two documents:
1. Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding The Participation of
Catholics in Political Life. It says, “Catholics . . . have the right and
the duty to recall society to a deeper understanding of human life and to the
responsibility of everyone in this regard. John Paul II, continuing the constant
teaching of the Church, has reiterated many times that those who are directly
involved in lawmaking bodies have a ‘grave and clear obligation to oppose’ any
law that attacks human life.”
2. Christifideles Laici. It states, “If, indeed everyone has the
mission and responsibility of acknowledging the personal dignity of every human
being and of defending the right to life, some lay faithful are given a
particular title to this task: such as parents, teachers, health workers and
those who hold economic and political power.”
I remind you further that when he was Prefect for the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger sent a memo to the bishops of the
United States advising them that advocacy of, or participation in, abortion and
euthanasia can never be justified by invoking respect for the freedom of others
or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits or requires it. He said there
can be no diversity of opinion among Catholics regarding abortion and
euthanasia.
It is my deepest wish, Senator, to convince you of the necessity of
rescinding your vote on the Martinez Amendment. It is the height of irony that
this amendment was defeated while the Senate passed legislation to provide
health insurance for children who would otherwise be without it. What hypocrisy
offers health insurance to children in one part of the world when children in
another part will be deprived, by the stroke of the same pen, of their first
breath?
I recognize and respect the burdens that you bear as a United States Senator;
however, I remind you that your responsibilities as a Catholic bound by the
faith of the Church exceed even those of your office. Your failure to reverse
this vote will regrettably mean that you persist formally in cooperating with
the evil brought about by this hideous and unnecessary policy.
As I have done several times before, I offer to make myself available to you
to discuss the grave concerns that I raise here.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Most Rev. Joseph F. Martino, D.D., Hist. E.D.
Bishop of Scranton
More from our
Bishops
