A socialist blueprint
The outcome of the health care reform legislation in the House demonstrates that while the Republicans don't have the votes to stop it, the Catholic Church has the votes to pass it.
Could the same thing happen in the Senate?
On Nov. 7, Catholic lobbyists working for the church's bishops finalized a deal with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. An anti-abortion amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak, a Catholic Democrat, was offered and passed. The bishops then came down officially in favor of a bureaucratic plan that could spell the end to freedom of choice in health care.
The turn of events once again demonstrates the left-wing drift of the Catholic Church. But the bishops' role in passing socialized medicine is not the only evidence of such a turn. They poured more than $7.3 million of parishioners' money through the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) into the corrupt left-wing organization ACORN before negative publicity forced suspension of the funding.
Government-guaranteed "rights," in the view of the Catholic bishops, don't stop with health care. The papal "Peace on Earth" encyclical says that man has a "right" to "food, clothing, shelter, medical care, rest and, finally, the necessary social services."
This is a blueprint for a socialist state.
Beyond religion, there is a practical reality. The Catholic Church operates 600 Catholic hospitals. A national health care plan is a means by which some of the costs could be dumped on taxpayers.
Another factor is the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which recently announced a major agreement with the Catholic bishops to make it easier for workers in Catholic hospitals to join unions. These employees would normally be entitled to employer-paid health insurance. But under the national health care bill, they could be transferred to a government plan offered under a health insurance "exchange."
Since it was reported in the press that Pelosi, a Catholic Democrat, sought approval from the Vatican before the critical House vote, it is important to note that L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, published a shocking article by Professor Georg Sans that praised the Marxist theory of alienation under capitalism.
The article said that the church "must be grateful" to Marx for explaining the concept of "alienated labor" and "surplus value."
So-called "surplus value," which is said to amount to exploitation of workers under capitalism, justifies the confiscation of private property for the "common good" and its ultimate abolition.
The notion of surplus value is supposed to reflect the amount of output that exceeds the cost of the workers to produce a commodity. By definition under Marxism, this "surplus value," the source of what is commonly called profit, constitutes exploitation of the workers.
However, as Thomas Sowell points out in his book "Marxism," the analysis ignores the value produced by the capitalists who exercised private property rights in creating the means of production and employing the workers in the first place.
Hence, the Marxist concept of surplus value, Sowell argues, is "plainly arbitrary and unsupported."
Conservative Catholics are fighting the socialist tendencies in their church. In Battle Creek, Mich., for example, they have been exposing a group called JONAH, standing for Joint Religious Organizing Network for Action and Hope. An affiliate of the Gamaliel Foundation, which originally sponsored the work of "community organizer" Barack Obama in Chicago, it works to increase government involvement in the economy to benefit selected minority groups.
Like ACORN, the Gamaliel Foundation has been funded by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development. Unlike ACORN, CCHD money continues to flow to Gamaliel. The bishops call this "social justice."
Curiously, in this mad rush for socialism, some Catholics find themselves in bed with George Soros, an admitted atheist. A review of the records of his Open Society Institute finds that a group calling itself Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good received $200,000 from his foundation over the last several years.
It lobbies for national health care.
Soros money has also gone into the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, an organization established by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops back in 1988. It has received at least $530,000 from the Open Society Institute.
The two issues merge in the fact that the Catholic bishops are demanding that national health care legislation cover illegal aliens. Their Nov. 6 letter to Congress said they "support access for immigrants to the health-insurance exchange, regardless of legal status."
A popular and telegenic priest, Jonathan Morris, who is a Fox News analyst, told Sean Hannity that the Catholic bishops support "a universal right to have access to basic health care" but not "socialized medicine."
In fact, a 1993 bishops' statement urged "concerted action by federal and other levels of government" on the issue and declared that government "has an essential role to play in assuring that the rights of all people to adequate health care are respected."
Father Morris seemed unfamiliar with the teaching of his own church. But if socialized medicine comes to the United States, the Catholic Church will bear much of the responsibility.
Cliff Kincaid is President of America's Survival Inc. (www.usasurvival.org)
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.