You often hear supporters of abortion say that they are not “pro-abortion” While this makes no sense when they do in fact support a women being able to choose abortion, it is true on one level.

If tomorrow a 100 percent perfect form of contraception became available and realistically the option for abortion was never needed they would not mourn the loss of chemical or surgical abortion. In fact what they would like is if each women had a switch where her fertility could be turned off and off as desired. Mostly they would want this switch in the off position and in fact to be comparable to a switch on a aircraft that launches rockets. That is lots of warning and break-wire to make sure it was not tripped accidentally. The culture of death would not be too concerned if this perfect form of contraception was not entirely free of side effects. This has never been too much of a concern for them, though no doubt they would prefer it to be so.

No what the supporters of abortion are is anti-child. A child should never result unless they have deemed the timing perfectly convenient and that the child is 100 percent willed. They are open to life only on their terms and a gift of a child is a gift that should be returned or best never received at all. The sexual act must be totally divorced from the natural consequences unless directly willed. The old “Every child a wanted child.” Of course they never take into account that this is not the fault of the child, but of their will. They should directly will that any child they have is wanted.

One of the greatest evils of our age is the promotion of sex as not being only in the context of marital relations and the related divorce of procreation from the marital act. So many errors flow from this. Once this attitude is taken then when a child naturally results it must be suppressed for the sin of inconvenience. The human child then becomes not a person, but an intrusion that must be eliminated if possible. Once the contraceptive mentality is accepted it will then go on to excuse any evil act. Children must be prevented by any means possible. But if you choose to have a child then it is often in the context of a family quota. Children are okay when you are ready, but not too many. I was certainly guilty of this attitude and thought after one boy and one girl, that’s it. It is pure selfishness and an act of control not love.

No surprise that family life is in such decline. Sin is in the will and we have willed wanting control and not giving of our selves. A child becomes a spreadsheet representing rows and columns of costs. A child will deprive me of doing or buying such and such. Can we be surprised at ramped divorce in a culture of selfishness? Abortion just means that we will murder the innocent to maintain our selfishness.

Caritas Christi Health Care, the financially challenged Catholic hospital system founded by the Archdiocese of Boston, is abruptly ending its joint venture with a Missouri-based health insurer at the insistence of Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley, who has decided that the relationship represented too much of an entanglement between Catholic hospitals and abortion providers.

The dramatic development, just days before the joint venture was scheduled to start providing care to low-income residents as part of the state’s efforts to establish near universal health coverage here, is a vindication of sorts for a variety of very conservative Catholic critics of the cardinal, who have been arguing angrily and loudly that it would be “evil” for Caritas to partner with a health provider that covers abortion services.

The newspaper had to get that bit in and blame critics who were quite upset with a cooperation with evil that I would certainly would not class as only remote material cooperation. I am quite thankful for those critics who held the Archdiocese’s feet to the fire and that Cardinal O’Malley did the right thing.

In keeping with the ethical directives that bind Catholic hospitals, Caritas hospitals will not provide abortion or sterilizations. Caritas already refers privately-insured patients who seek such services to their insurance providers, and will do the same with state-insured patients. (Caritas spelled out its practices for handling Catholic ethical teachings in a statement June 11.)

The previous statement contains this:

Dr. Ralphe de la Torre, President of Caritas Christ, stated that “when a a patient seeks such a procedure, Caritas health care professionals will be clear that (a) the hospital does not perform them and (b) the patient must turn to his or her insurer for further guidance. …”

Such an approach seems odd to me. “Hey we don’t abort or sterilize, buy hey talk to your insurer.” Yes the paramount of moral guidance the insurer. Though if only they would not shell out for such evil. They should really be on our side just to save some money. Maybe I am naive, but can’t a Catholic hospital give some moral guidance on this instead of shoving them off to the insurers? Or is this protection to keep from getting sued?

Regardless Cardinal O’Malley did what needed to be done.