Religious Liberty Marks Connecticut Debate

The Connecticut legislature is considering a bill by Representative Deborah Heinrich that would force Catholic hospitals to violate the teachings of the Catholic Church by providing emergency contraception to all rape victims, independent of whether ovulation has begun.

The following letter was sent by league president Bill Donohue today to all members of the Human Services Committee:

As president of the nation's largest Catholic civil rights organization, I urge you to veto any legislation that would compromise the right of Catholic hospitals to refrain from providing abortion services. To be explicit, the emergency contraception pill may act as an abortifacient — not a contraceptive — depending on whether the woman has begun ovulation. In those instances, it would be totally immoral for Catholic hospitals to cooperate in the termination of innocent human life. If it has been determined that ovulation has not taken place, then Catholic hospitals are free to prescribe Plan B.

It would be one thing if Catholic hospitals were deliberately seeking a confrontation over this issue. But, on the contrary, doctors at Catholic hospitals currently provide rape victims with a list of places where they can receive Plan B, and even provide free transportation. Therefore, it is not Catholic hospitals which are remaining obstinate — it is those lawmakers who seek to impose their will on these institutions.

I respectfully urge you not to jeopardize the religious-liberty prerogatives of Catholic hospitals.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Guest

    Yet another attack on religious freedom, just like the article yesterday about the bishop who faced legal penalties for saying that homosexuality is a sin.  It seems like the Catholic Church is constantly targeted.

  • Guest

    If the Catholic Church would stand up, pool its resources and get the word out they will not adhere to this corrupt law, the fear of civil disobedience or acts thereof would make the legislators back off.  


    "As Christians, there are certain principles we must all aspire to attain, even though our individual roles can differ drastically. The meek and spirit-filled gentlewoman patiently dispensing salvation in the ghetto to her diseased and infirm companions is every bit as worthy in God’s sight as the steely-eyed and faithful combat veteran hording 13 kills under his belt. This is the word my Lord has requested to mention from his Lord."

  • Guest

    Now, I thought the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights said, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” (my emphasis)
    With this in mind, how did it evolve that that a citizen of this country MUST do something against his/her religion? To me, this is prohibiting my free exercise of my religion. As an RN working in OB/GYN in a Catholic hospital, this makes me quake in my scrubs that I’ll be the next in line to face this kind of persecution.
    Zephyr424, you make an excellent point. Where are our resources, and our leaders, to fight this obvious miscarriage of legislation?? Where are the Catholic lawyers who could argue the second part of the establishment clause, when the ACLU and their ilk are such great activists for the first part? Thank God for Bill Donohue and his work.

  • Guest

    God loves you .

    Well, we simply must have ‘separation of church and state’ – a Constitutional misrepresentation – in order to fix targets for the state to violate religion – a Constitutional offense.

    All this makes me so weary – as if in an auto going Home, our Father in the drivers seat, and me a tired young’un pleading from the back seat: ‘Are we there yet?’

    Remember, I love you, too

    Through Christ, with Christ, in Christ,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell or …