I’ll include the entire email regarding this meeting with Rick Boucher and his belief in the murder of the pre-born. I know the men involved with this program, Fighting for Life in the Ninth, and they are all men of integrity and humility.
Reflections on the Meeting with
As many of you are aware, we were able to secure a meeting with Congressman Rick Boucher this past Tuesday (May 26, 2009). The nature of the meeting was primarily to address the issue of the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) and the congressman's support of this bill. Unfortunately, the meeting did not go as we had hoped. Mr. Boucher was very clear as it pertained to his stance on the abortion issue. Sadly, it is a stance that a godly minded individual cannot support. He made it abundantly clear that he is a pro-abortion congressman and one that is committed to upholding and defending the Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade (the 1973 decision that legalized abortion in the United States). He gave no denials as to his 100% pro-abortion voting record and also offered no apologies for it. This is something we deeply regret. The Scriptures clearly define life as beginning at the moment of conception (Exo. 21:22-23; Jer. 1:5; Luke 1:41, as well as others). Aborti on then is the taking of life after it has begun. This is a position that the congressman made clear he will not accept.
In all actuality, Mr. Boucher did not really want to address the abortion issue at all, but rather his attention was on one aspect of FOCA. It has been the contention of Fighting for Life in the 9th(FFL9) that one of the risks of FOCA is that it could potentially open the door for lawsuits to be filed against hospitals and health care workers that refuse to perform abortion services. Mr. Boucher expressed that he opposes and would oppose such measures and was concerned that he had been misrepresented on this particular point. It is not the goal of FFL9 to misrepresent anyone. Where we regret that Mr. Boucher feels this way we do not believe this has been the case. Mr. Boucher acknowledged that FOCA needed more specific language in order to protect health care workers and hospitals. Where we respect and agree with the congressman's position that federal funding should not be cut from those who refuse abortion services, one has to wonder if there is no risk for such happening if FOCA were to be passed (as the congressman asserted early in the meeting), why then is there a need for more specific language? If there is more specific language needed, does that not imply then that the potential is therefor such consequences?
In addition, the congressman attempted to lead us to believe that FFL9 is the only group making such an assertion as to the implications of FOCA. This is not true. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has also been very outspoken on this very issue. This is significant because not only has the USCCB performed extensive legal analysis but it also expresses the official view of the Catholic Church (something the congressman expressed was different from FFL9's interpretation of FOCA). Notice the following statement: "The combined impact of these various provisions is likely the invalidation of a broad range of state laws if challenged under FOCA, including. . .laws protecting the conscience rights of doctors, nurses and hospitals, if those create even minimal delay or inconvenience in obtaining an abortion or treat abortion differently than other medical procedures" (http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/ FOCA/analysis.pdf). Clearly, FFL9 i s not the only group concerned about FOCA's potential consequences.
This issue on health care workers and hospitals was the main thrust of the meeting due to the fact that the congressman was uninterested in having serious dialogue on abortion itself. We regret that more time could not be spent on this issue in particular. Again, it is not the goal of FFL9 to misrepresent anyone, only to present the facts as we (and others) understand them. I hope that through our conversation we have motivated the congressman to take steps to provide protection for health care workers and hospitals, but we would still oppose FOCA. The godly minded individual must oppose any measure that would further and expand abortions in this nation (which is what FOCA will do if re-introduced and passed).
Certainly, we wish the meeting would have gone differently but the battle is not lost. We must keep pressing forward. It is clear where Congressman Boucher stands and that he needs to be reminded that he is to represent the views of the 9th district of Virginia, not his own personal feelings. As Americans we are guaranteed by our Constitution the right to hold an opinion; however, it is the opinion of the Almighty God that matters most. It is His will that we must strive to keep promoting in an age of godlessness. It does seem at times that we are fighting an uphill battle, but let us be motivated by the words of the great Apostle Paul when he wrote: "And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not" (Gal.6:9).
Another reason that Rick Boucher does not deserve to represent the Ninth District of Virginia. The only reason why he continues to do so is that he is in the back pocket of Cecil “I Own Rick Boucher” Roberts and the UMWA. These creeps only care about lining their own pockets, not the hard working men and women they purport to represent. Shame on you Rick Boucher, shame on you indeed for believing in the murder of innocent life.