Catholic Groups Outraged After Martha Coakley Tells Them to Find New Work
Posted by Jim Hoft on Friday, January 15, 2010, 3:55 PM
Catholic groups are very concerned about Democrat Martha Coakley’s attack on their faith from an interview yesterday with WBSM radio talk show host Ken Pittman.
Here again is that interview segment from yesterday:
The Catholic News Agency reported:
Massachusetts U.S. Senate candidate Martha Coakley has come under fire for saying pro-life medical workers with conscientious objections to some treatments “probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.” One critic said her remarks are a “wake-up call” about the threats to the religious freedom of orthodox Catholics.
Coakley, a Democrat and Massachusetts Attorney General, is seeking to fill the former seat of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. Recently her campaign has targeted her Republican opponent, state senator Scott Brown, for proposing an amendment to 2005 state legislation which mandated the provision of emergency contraception to victims of sexual assault.
Brown’s amendment, which was defeated, would have provided conscience protections for medical workers “to the extent that contraception conflicts with a sincerely held religious belief.”
Ethical and religious objections to “emergency contraception” for victims of sexual assault center on the possibility that the treatment will prevent the uterine implantation of any embryo conceived in the assault or in sexual relations before the assault.
Normally the drug works by preventing ovulation. There is debate over whether it renders a woman’s womb hostile to a fertilized egg, a new human being, if she has already ovulated.
Coakley’s controversial comments came in a Thursday interview with WBSM radio talk show host Ken Pittman.
Bill Donahue with the Catholic League also released a statement today following Coakley’s attack on the Catholic faith.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue responds to what Massachusetts senatorial hopeful Martha Coakley said last night in a WBSM interview:
When Martha Coakley, a Roman Catholic, was asked whether she supports conscience rights for health care employees, she offered a resounding “NO.” So completely wedded to the extremists in the pro-abortion community, Coakley would not allow Catholic doctors and nurses—who unlike her accept the teachings of Catholicism—to recuse themselves from participating in procedures they find morally repugnant.
Coakley said that if she were asked to consider a bill that would say “if people believe that they don’t want to provide services that are required under the law and under Roe v. Wade, that they can individually decide to not follow the law. The answer is no.” When asked by host Ken Pittman about the rights of Catholics who follow the teachings of the Catholic Church, Coakley offered the separation of church and state mantra. Pittman then said, “In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.” Coakley conceded that point but hastened to add, “you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.” Translated: You really don’t have a right to exercise your religious-liberty objections.
This is the opinion of the attorney general, the chief law enforcement agent in the state of Massachusetts. She effectively told practicing Catholics who work in the health care industry that they ought to get another job. As far as she is concerned, those who invoke a right to conscientious objection—a staple of religious liberty—should lose.
President Obama says he supports conscience rights for health care workers. The Catholic bishops support conscience rights. Survey after survey show that the American people support conscience rights. But Martha Coakley does not—she says they’re all wrong. Glad to know which side of religious liberty she is on.
Related… I will be on with Ken Pittman today at 4:10 PM CST on WBSM.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Republican Military Hero & First Female to Command Fighter Squadron Will Announce Run For Congress Today
Published February 8, 2012 at 8:42 pm - 105 Comments
Typical Whte Person commented:
I wonder if there are any Catholics in Massachusetts that care. They seemed to have elected Kennedy in spite of his multitude of misgivings, errors and botcheries.
Scott W. Somerville commented:
Obama will be speaking in a Massachusetts church on Sunday. (Not a Catholic Church!) Will Massachusetts Catholics be speaking up on Sunday, too? Print out this article and put one on every windshield in a parking lot.
OBAMANATION at NOTRE DAME commented:
Please get on the email list at – http://www.ProjectSycamore.com
JPL17 commented:
They seemed to have elected Kennedy in spite of his multitude of misgivings, errors and botcheries.
Not to mention his “DEE-botcheries….”
ADVERTISEMENT
Max Silverhammer commented:
Ahhh, progressives! Can anyone match them on their fascist viewpoints?
1 commented:
Uh, _erstwhile_ Catholic.
Jack Smith commented:
“if people believe that they don’t want to provide services that are required under the law and under Roe v. Wade, that they can individually decide to not follow the law. The answer is no.”
That quote has not been widely reported and is far more damaging than the rest of it.
Teddy's SEARCH+RESCUE commented:
OUR FOUNDER was a devout CATHOLIC just like Nancy Pelosi – http://www.FATBOY.cc
Carbon Monoxide commented:
All you folks in MA need to contact your local republican central committees to help get out the vote. Repubs in adjacent states as well. Most elections are won or lost by 1 or 2 votes per precinct.
dj commented:
Article on Bill Clinton’s support speech of Coakley at the Boston herald:
Clinton:
“I came here to tell the people of Massachusetts this: This country’s revolution was born in Massachusetts. The Revolutionary War was first won here. The war was over here years before it was finally finished. It started with the Boston Tea Party, and the right wing Republicans have appropriated that on the premise the tea party was against government.”
Clinton added, “What they were against was abuse of power.”
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Exactly Bill, Exactly
Sojourner commented:
So there you have it.. you should be denied a job because of your faith beliefs because of laws dictated by the ‘State’.. this is what ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help’ Coakley believes.
I guess a Muslim or Mormon who refuses to sell a bottle of gin,based on his/her beliefs would get the boot under MC’s interpretation of religious liberty and conscience too… ( and this is what could become a Senator from MA)?..creepy.
(Godspeed Scott Brown!)
Solaratov commented:
How do coakley’s handlers/advisers allow her to say such stupid things?
Or do they believe that the senate seat is a “legacy thing” that will always go to a democRAT – no matter how stupid they are?
Mr Moto commented:
Self Loathing Anti Catholic Bigot
Sojourner commented:
OT.. Jim Hoft, caught your remarks on WBSM.. great work.
Daniel commented:
Keep on talking, Martha.
Just a few more days to go.
And if BO comes up to work on your committee, just tell him you need a doorstop to save you from the precipice.
Or. Not.
daryl commented:
First the Catholics were forced out of work.
And we did nothing because we were leftist democrats. And we elected them
Sound familiar? Think it can’t happen here?
Then think again, because it began to happen when you leftists elected these snakes.
Free The ND 88 commented:
Yes We Can http://www.FreeTheND88.org YES WE CAN!
Dim Bulb commented:
Pittman then said, “In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.” Coakley conceded that point but hastened to add, “you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.”
The 21str century liberal’s version of “Irish need not apply.”
HANOI JOHN KERRY commented:
DO IT FOR TED! http://www.LIVESHOT.cc
In Memory of Mary Jo commented:
Remember, Ted Kennedy was ALL ABOUT HEALTH CARE!
Details here – http://www.inlibertyandfreedom.com/mjk.htm
Paul B. commented:
Martha just keeps giving gifts every time she opens her mouth – exposing a forked tongue and poisonous fangs. This is one such gift that we need to take and run with. A truly horrible candidate and woman. GB.
Sojourner commented:
Dim Bulb|#20
‘The 21st century liberal’s version of ‘Irish Need Apply’
Exactly.. spot on.
Sojourner commented:
Dim Bulb|#20.. meant to say
‘The 21st century liberal’s version of ‘Irish Need NOT Apply’
Exactly.
pm commented:
Is #2 right – BO will be speaking in a *church* on Sunday in Massachusetts? Interesting.
The only reason for that, that comes to my mind, is he’s hoping that locale will keep his critics from “acting up.” You know he’ll protect himself from any kind of embarrassment.
I just remember, though, that the synagogue was the very place Jesus expressed his anger, and rather dramatically.
This bamboozler, who studied, followed and taught the rules of another man (Alinsky) – one who dedicated his work to LUCIFER – chooses to use the Christian church when it suits his purposes.
He deserves to be driven out of that church, out of office and out of our lives forever.
Gail F commented:
“if people believe that they don’t want to provide services that are required under the law and under Roe v. Wade, that they can individually decide to not follow the law. The answer is no.”
So because abortion is legal, health care providers are REQUIRED to do it? Last I checked, the Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in my city does not offer open heart surgery. But I guess the only “health care” that “providers” are required to offer is abortion. This is a pervasive and frightening attitude, despite its making no sense at all.
Ignatz commented:
She’s right. If you can’t do your job, get another job. Anyway, it’s a phony issue, manufactured by right-wingers who want to kill health care. They seldom do abortions in hospitals. Do you think Catholic pharmacists can refuse to fill birth control prescriptions? No, they can’t. You can believe what you want, but you don’t have the right to make a decision for anybody else.
Chisum commented:
Coakley Ignorant of Religious Exemption in Senate Health Care Bill
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/01/coakley-ignorant-of-religious-exemption.html
Marg commented:
Instead of continuing with this argument, there is something that bothers me about Coakley a lot more.
What about the case where she deliberately allowed a man who raped a 23 month old infant with a curling iron, to escape prosecution. She allowed an innocent man to stay in jail for three years to appear tough on crime.
If you want to talk about Coakley’s beliefs take a look at what she has done as AG.
MochaLite commented:
Will Coakley also say that Muslim health care workers don’t belong in ERs?? … waiting … crickets