Catholic hospitals no more

The Santa Cruz (Calif.) Sentinel reported last month:

SANTA CRUZ - Dominican Hospital officials announced Monday that they remain wedded to the Catholic mission, despite an announcement by the hospital's parent company, Catholic Healthcare West, to split from the Catholic Church and adopt a new name, Dignity Health. ...

The change comes as the health care industry prepares for major federal reforms due to take effect in 2014.

Reading between the lines, it appears that there are irreconcilable conflicts between the mission of the Catholic hospitals and the Barack Obama health care reform.

Today's compromise is supposed to make everyone happy:

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama announced a compromise Friday in the dispute over whether to require full contraception insurance coverage for female employees at religiously affiliated institutions.

Under the new plan, religiously affiliated universities and hospitals will not be forced to offer contraception coverage to their employees. Insurers will be required, however, to offer complete coverage free of charge to any women who work at such institutions. ...

"No woman's health should depend on who she is or where she works or how much money she makes." Obama said at the White House. But "the principle of religious liberty" is also at stake. "As a citizen and as a Christian, I cherish this right."

Not forced? Obama is not just forcing new rules on Catholic hospitals, he is making it impractical for hospitals to continue as Catholic hospitals.

Obama is using several euphemisms here. No health care is free. Someone is paying for it. The contraception coverage is for healthy women, so women's health is not at stake. Of course rich people do tend to be healthier than poor people.

The press is reporting that this "compromise" is making everyone happy. I don't believe it. Unless and until the Catholic hospitals are able to operate with open Catholic affiliations as they have operated for centuries, it appears to me that the Obama health care reformers are out to destroy the Catholic hospitals.

More Reasons to Oppose National Popular Vote

The National Popular Vote campaign lets people believe that their plan will elect Presidents who win the majority of popular votes, but that is false. Because of third parties, we've had many elections (including three of the last five) when no presidential candidate received a popular-vote majority. Abraham Lincoln won with less than 40% of the popular vote and only our Electoral College system elected him President.

National Popular Vote Is a Bad Idea

Moving quietly without any publicity is a plan to change how U.S. Presidents are elected. It would bypass the procedure spelled out in the U.S. Constitution which has been used successfully for over two centuries. The Constitution prescribes how we elect our Presidents. It is a mirror image of the Great Compromise designed by the Constitutional Convention of 1787, which brought together the large and small states by means of a national Congress, with the House based on population and the Senate based on state sovereignty. Likewise, when the presidential electors meet in gatherings called the Electoral College, each state's vote is equal to the sum of its House and Senate representation in Congress. Our Founding Fathers understood that America is a nation of both "we the people" and a federal system of states, so it allows all states, regardless of size, to be players in electing our President.

Keep Sharia Law Out of U.S. Courts

Several state legislatures have passed a law to instruct judges not to use any foreign law in deciding cases in U.S. courts, and several more state legislatures are considering bills that say the same thing. These are very important laws because we certainly do not want any foreign law to override the U.S. Constitution or our rule of law. However, the Muslims are taking offense at these laws because they want their law, called Sharia, to be recognized in our courts, especially in domestic disputes.

Bad Effects of Internet Gambling

Since Barack Obama opened the door to internet gambling on Christmas Eve by having his Justice Department re-interpret the law to allow gambling online, we can expect the gambling industry to become an even bigger player in politics. It is already a major contributor to political candidates and parties.