Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
ABORTION FOE TO LEAD HHS FAITH-BASED OFFICE.
President Obama has appointed Alexia Kelley, executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG), to head the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services. Kelley is a leading proponent of "common ground" abortion reduction -- only CACG's common ground is at odds with that of Obama. While the administration favors reducing the need for abortion by reducing unintended pregnancies, Kelley has made clear that she seeks instead to reduce access to abortion. That is an extremely disturbing development, especially coming this week in the wake of George Tiller's assassination.
Under George W. Bush, the faith-based centers didn't play a policy role. But Obama has expanded the faith-based project to include a policy side, and one of its chief goals is to reduce the need for abortion. I have opposed this, because reproductive health is a public health, not a religious issue. Also problematic: It is counterproductive for Obama to appoint someone who disagrees with the administration's stance. Obama finds himself now in the difficult position of having elevated the importance of religion to making policy, and having appointed a religious figure whose opinions on policy conflict with his.
Kelley and CACG have made clear they are committed to Catholic doctrine on abortion and birth control. CACG has supported the Pregnant Women's Support Act, aimed at stigmatizing abortion and making it less accessible. In discussing legislation on reducing the need for abortion, Kelley has written that various pieces of legislation concerned with women's health "are not all perfect; some include contraception -- which the Church opposes." Never mind that more than 90 percent of American Catholics use it anyway.
As Catholics for Choice points out in its press release criticizing the pick, "the Department of Health and Human Services is responsible for providing and expanding access to key sexual and reproductive health services. As such, we need those working in HHS to rely on evidence-based methods to reduce the need for abortion. We need them to believe in men's and women's capacity to make moral decisions about their own lives. Unfortunately, as seen from her work at CACG, Ms. Kelley does not fit the bill."
In a 2008 press teleconference co-sponsored by CACG and Sojourners, Kelley stated that she supported state-imposed restrictions on abortion, such as waiting periods and informed consent. In her 2008 book, A Nation for All, co-written with Chris Korzen, Kelley wrote, "Each abortion constitutes a direct attack on human life, and so we have a special moral obligation to end or reduce the practice of abortion to the greatest extent possible."
Despite this inflammatory language, Kelley has positioned herself as above the fray of the "culture wars." While she believes making abortion illegal is the best solution, she recognizes that perhaps restricting abortion in other ways is more practical. In A Nation for All, she continued, "Culture warriors in America will argue that to be pro-life, we must ensure that the unborn are protected under the law. This would indeed be an ideal situation. But legal status doesn't always realize the goal that we desire."
CACG did not issue any public statements about the Tiller assassination, though it signed one by Faith in Public Life condemning the murder. But the statement did not condemn the inciting rhetoric of the anti-choice movement. Rather, it made a kumbaya plea for common ground (which as we have seen, is not so common after all).
--Sarah Posner
COMMENTS (35)
The message here that if one does not belong to a right-wing Christian organization, don't bother applying for Federal funding. Though I'm sure Operation Rescue has already started drafting grant applications.
Posted by: A.Lizard | June 4, 2009 6:42 PM
Unless this woman (or this office) has real say over federal abortion policy/women's health, what do I care if she's anti-choice? The head of the office's department, Kathleen Sebelius, is rather manifestly pro-choice, as the right-wingers who so vociferously opposed her confirmation couldn't stop pointing out.
Posted by: Yossarian | June 4, 2009 7:05 PM
Longing for the good ol' days of Bushco already? Quelle surprise. And yes a great way to derail Dums is to keep up the anticatholic tirades, toots. Just keep em coming why don't you.
Posted by: Catholics in the Crosshairs | June 4, 2009 8:21 PM
This is a profoundly uninformed and distorted perspective on Alexia Kelly. Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good is an organization which strives in a meaningful way for common ground solutions--so that progress can be made in resolving the contentious issue of abortion. The fact that she has foes on the far right and the far left--as evinced by this blog entry--is a testament to her genuine middle-ground approach.
In fact, the argument that Alexia Kelly is interested in reducing access to abortion is similarly misfounded. It is based on nothing but mere speculation and an out of context quotation. None of that should concern advocates of abortion rights. On the other hand, Ms. Kelly is interested in good faith efforts to reduce the need for abortions through enhanced pregnancy support and better faith based initiatives to support nascent families. Surely no one is opposed to such measures.
It's time we move past the dualisms of the Roe v. Wade debate and find some common ground. This appointment is a step in that direction.
Posted by: Colin | June 5, 2009 12:23 AM
Colin:
Who are you sockpuppeting for?
Posted by: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle | June 5, 2009 1:11 AM
"Faith based initiatives" you say.....sort of rhymes with hope and change in a grim reaper sort of way. Mr. Obama and the evilness that he is speading makes using phrases like faith or hope truly sacriligious. May God have pity on us all.
Posted by: jennifer | June 5, 2009 1:17 AM
It's time we move past the dualisms of the Roe v. Wade debate and find some common ground.
There is no common ground when one side wants to take from her a woman's autonomy over her body.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 5, 2009 8:51 AM
"common ground" = even more legal obstacles and strong public expressions of solemn disapproval that prove how Very Serious we are about this issue. Because even though the 'moderates' can't seem to grasp this, even the most vehement pro-choicers already support preventing unwanted pregnancies, and always have.
I want both fewer obstacles and better prevention-- the supply needs to be increased and the demand brought down by means that are neither manipulative nor coercive. Since it's not the sort of product that really needs to grow its sales (I know, it's not really a free-market thing), this isn't a problem since there are plenty of non-abortion-related reproductive health care needs that can be fulfilled as well.
Posted by: latts | June 5, 2009 10:10 AM
Ms. Kelly is interested in good faith efforts to reduce the need for abortions through enhanced pregnancy support and better faith based initiatives to support nascent families. Surely no one is opposed to such measures.
Sure, we're not opposed, as long as reproductive rights and scientifically proven methods of reducing abortions do not fall by the wayside under the guise that all women need is to be more "supported" in their pregnancies.
Posted by: malathion | June 5, 2009 10:55 AM
"Pregnant Women's Support Act" aimed at limiting women's options. How's that for doublespeak?
Posted by: propitiousmoment | June 5, 2009 11:37 AM
It stuns me that Obama would appoint this woman to any kind of position that might have an impact on reproductive health.
I'm really disappointed that Obama seems to think that his outreach efforts have to be only to conservatives.
The Religious Coalitin for Reproductive Choice has been working in faith communities throughout the US for years on the questions of abortion and access to accurate sexuality education. Does Obama know about this? More importantly, has the White House made the calculation that they can blow off the people who elected them?
Posted by: prochildprofamilyprochoice | June 5, 2009 11:50 AM
The two important points that need to be remembered are: Obama has cut out of the budget all money for "abstinence education" and he appointed a solidlh pro choice woman to head HHS--both to the dismay of the culture warriors. I am willing to overlook this.
Posted by: stan | June 5, 2009 12:57 PM
My question about Ms. Kelly is whether she supports broad education about and availability of birth control, including or even especially, for teenagers. If so, she might be counted as interested in abortion reduction.
Otherwise, she's just interested in controlling women's bodies.
Posted by: janinsanfran | June 5, 2009 1:46 PM
In defining the Pregnant Women Support Acts goal as “making it (abortion) less accessible”, Ms. Posner, must have read the abortion supporters talking points rather than reading the actual legislative language.
The bill does not address the legality of abortion and solely focuses on providing support to pregnant women who wish to carry their child to term. I encourage readers to read the bills (S. 1032 and H.R. 2035, which were introduced by 2 Democratic legislators Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) and Congressman Lincoln Davis (D-TN) for themselves.
The legislation simply provides support pregnant women thru: ensuring access for childcare and other services are available for college-age women; ensuring that pregnancy is not considered a pre-existing condition and prohibiting heath insurance companies from deny coverage to pregnant women; providing information to women on where they can obtain support for job training, housing, legal assistance and other forms of assistance; and also grants to centers that will providing housing, clothing and other forms of support during and after pregnancies.
Posted by: Kristen Day | June 5, 2009 2:00 PM
You mentioned Catholics for Choice. There's no such thing, if you're pro-abortion, you not Catholic, or even Christian for that matter. The 2 are incompatable.
Posted by: Mike | June 5, 2009 2:05 PM
Mike, I suppose those who are pro-war are also not Christian. After all, murder is murder, right?
Posted by: Carol | June 5, 2009 2:24 PM
Mike - I get your "deep" meaning about Christianity and abortion being incompatible, but the researcher in me compels me to point out that Catholics for Choice can be visited at www.catholicsforchoice.org
Posted by: Sandy | June 5, 2009 3:23 PM
Anyone who supports waiting periods is an enemy of public health.
Posted by: gmanedit | June 5, 2009 3:40 PM
I'm a big supporter of Obama, but I was already angry and disappointed that he's continuing the faith based initiatives. Now I learn that he has even expanded them, and on top of that appointed an anti-abortion person leading his faith based office. I feel like I'm reading headlines about the Bush presidency.
Our forefather's knew that the separation of church and state were imperative for freedom, fairness, and democracy. I just wish Obama knew that.
Posted by: susan | June 5, 2009 5:06 PM
There is no need to get sassy with one another. I think it's good that people are trying to find a common ground. I'm pro-life. Regardless of religion, she is attempting to do good works. Sorry if she's trying to fund and help those who are pregnant and who can't even afford an abortion with a gift of life (funded by you guess it, TAXPAYERS!) and possible medical treatment, even after the child is born!
I wish people would shut up about the wrongs done by Obama or Bush. Honestly, I doubt any of you would do a better job...just get hung up on the money lobbyists are shoving in your face so you'll vote their way.
Posted by: Rachael | June 5, 2009 5:17 PM
It stuns me that Obama would appoint this woman to any kind of position that might have an impact on reproductive health.Anyone who supports waiting periods is an enemy of public health.
Posted by: anti aging cream | June 6, 2009 7:06 AM
It's not pro-life. It's pro-forced birth - forcing women to give birth. Any other way it's said is not to the point.
Pro-choice is just that, pro allowing women to make their own choice. You could say anti-forced-birth too.
Posted by: splashy | June 6, 2009 5:00 PM
Stan - - -
I think Obama has REDUCED
funding on abstinence-only education.It's still a lot of money.
Posted by: Ed-words | June 7, 2009 11:18 AM
Face it, Obama has a strong theocratic right wing vein or he simply does not see the problems this country is dealing with. He says one thing to placate those who elected him and he names people STRONLY opposed to what he claims are his goals. I've come to realize he is a lot of BS and more right wing than any dem candidate running in 08. He deceived us. If you think Sotomayor was the best choice to support the views Obama claims to hold, you aren't paying attention.
Here's an article about the "moderate" he named to be Sec. of the Army. You know, you have heard people shouting about how "moderate" his choice was. hahah Simply a pick that shows Obama to be a conman and or a theocrat but most certainly a deception peddler.
http://tinyurl.com/o3dawa
Posted by: Tad | June 7, 2009 12:03 PM
Longing for the good ol' days of Bushco already? Quelle surprise. And yes a great way to derail Dums is to keep up the anticatholic tirades, toots. Just keep em coming why don't you.
Posted by: Catholics in the Crosshairs | June 4, 2009 8:21 PM
Most Catholics I know are pro-choice. They get tired of seeing anti-choice Catholics act like they speak for everybody.
And being against anti-abortion talk is not "anti-Catholic", no matter how much Dobson acts like it is.
Ironic how many people on the right are professional victims.
Posted by: Whispers | June 8, 2009 12:49 AM
I too am a Tennesseean and can attest to the fact that Gov. Bredesen holds working people in contempt. Whether it is gutting TennCare or shredding the safety net or workers compensation, this man is a cheerleader for big insurance and big medicine.
Posted by: links of london | September 7, 2009 3:12 AM
Thanks for the great post.
Posted by: electronic cigarette | October 27, 2009 12:10 PM
Are you want to own the cheapest Battery Help?
Battery Help
Posted by: Battery Help | November 29, 2009 9:23 PM
Laptop Batteries
Laptop Batteries discount laptop battery
Posted by: Laptop Battery | December 3, 2009 1:25 AM
Laptop Batteries
Laptop Batteries discount laptop battery
Posted by: Laptop Battery | December 3, 2009 1:26 AM
everybody wants to be more fashion,but thats not easy to join,you most have the fashion world view first,then you could read the fashion news,Magazines and so on. through these you can be the fashion man.
Posted by: jewelry fashion review | December 21, 2009 3:18 AM
Fitch store in general abercrombie and fitch , everything a good matrimony before marriage have nothing to retain the preceding "female mad batch - abercrombie" part of the two is the first home in new york city a horde promotion sportswear for men and it is a successful lawyer, that is, ezra fitch.Ezra fitch in a charge over a very intricate to read from the abercrombie is obstinate to read and long abercrombie & fitch. He's also very good brand hollister, including abercrombie mens and abercrombie womens, abercrombie hollister, Ruehl No.925. Has become a fashionable personage's first choice, abercrombie outlet is all over the world, of course, is also expected to 2009 New Arrivals.
Posted by: abercrombie hollister | December 31, 2009 12:45 AM
Good post! Thank for your information!
Posted by: China Wholesale | January 21, 2010 10:33 PM
very truthful post.
Posted by: Bowtrol | January 24, 2010 11:46 AM
I can see a lot of sense in this post.
Posted by: Acnezine | February 9, 2010 1:49 PM