http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/27/conscience.rollback/

I read this story with some sort of amusement. There have been laws in place for decades that protect health workers from performing duties that violate their conscience. I couldn’t believe something so fundamental would be left up to the whims of the current president, whoever that might be.

But the headlines, as always, deceive in order to get the reader interested. Why were there no similar headlines when Bush created the rule that Obama is overturning?

The problem here is that, on his last day in office, Bush issued an order that changed some wording on how health care workers are protected from harassment or job loss if they refuse to perform a procedure they disagree with. But there was no need to issue such an edict, since medical professionals have had such protections for decades.

What is more interesting is this: if Bush were so concerned with protecting people in their jobs because of moral objections, then why did he not issue the order when he FIRST took office rather than as he LEFT office? The answer is simple, of course. He intended to trap Obama. Now hear me out. If Bush really cared about these issues, he could have issued the order eight years ago. So we have to ask, why did he wait to do it in his last day of office knowing that Obama would overturn it?

One answer suffices: Bush, playing for his party, established the rule so that Obama would get bad press over the abortion issue. This is simply another trick by the GOP to make Obama lose the next election. It’s rather ingenious. On the other hand, we should recognize the insincerity with which the GOP uses the abortion issue purely to win votes. They don’t really care about the unborn or about protecting people’s privacy. If they did, Bush would have passed the rule early on. Rather, they use these issues to drive a wedge into people to split them over “moral” issues as if the failing economy, the lack of oversight, and the unjust war were not moral issues.

In this time of lent, we should commit ourselves as Christians to look at the whole picture, not to vote with our hearts only, and to consider the ways the major parties try to divide and conquer.

Tags: Bush, Abortion, Politics, GOP

De Mello writes in the way to love that those things which delight us and grip our souls can lead us to God. What does that have to do with Lent?

Lent is about sacrifice, but it isn't about just any old sacrifice. Giving up coca-cola or candy is sacrifice, but the question is why ought one to sacrifice them? It's not because they are necessary for life. Nor are they necessary for living well. We sacrifice such sweets becuase, in the end, they aren't good for us, and they lead us toward evil, not towards good.

Lenten sacrifice is about giving up those things which drag our souls down. It is an opportunity to recommit ourselves to life. That is why itis just as valid -- perhaps more so -- to commit one's self to something rather than denying one's self something. Several years ago, I committed myself to writing for one hour a night, at least 500 words. I want to be a writer. I want to express myself, but I was approaching this goal in an ad hoc fashion. I let inspiration drive me. But ay Bradbury points out that inspiration doesn't come if it doesn't know where you're at. You have to sit yourself in the seat everyday at the same time, so the muse knows where to find you. So I committed myself. In the end, this meant I sacrificed something -- television. But had I given up television, I would have gone back to it after lent. Committing myself to writing helped me stay away from television after lent and helped me follow a path that brings me peace and love -- which in the end is God.

This year, I am committing myself to writing 500 words of philosophy per day. I am also committing myself to spening more time with my eight year old. In the end, this will require sacrifice, but it will also require growth. Christ's resurrection is about growth, more than about death.

Tags: Lent, DeMello, Love

Well, it's interesting that Obama's address was at the end of Mardi Gras, for what Obama did was call an end to the party days that this country has been caught up in. But it's also true that Obama calls us to spend -- and to spend on things that will make us better -- education, health care, and energy. So it was surprising to see how many Republicans remained seated how many times during the speech.

Just as with any lenten sacrifice, we cannot sacrifice those things necessary for life. Similarly, the government cannot ask the people to sacrifice what will make this nation stronger. Education will make this nation stronger, especially if we meet Obama's goal for college graduates in 2020. We will have a better citizenry and people able to offer more to the world with creativity and knowledge. Of course, big business and big government would oppose this. Education means people won't be as susceptible to the lies of big business and the propaganda that the Republican party has spouted since Reagan about business watching themselves.

Better health care will make us stronger. How can we continue to pour billions into a system that does not work and pretend that it is better than everywhere else. We have the highest infant mortality of anyindustrialized nation. Why aren't the pro-lifers concerned about that?! Doctors are deprived of their autonomy because the insurers determine what treatments are allowed. This can no longer continue. A better health care system means a better America.

Finally, we have the opportunity to become the leaders in alternative renewable energy sources. Why are we so far behind everyone? Because of big oil and big auto. Clean energy is the road to more jobs that cannot be shipped overseas. Clean energy is the means to saving our planet. Nothing else matters if we don't embrace solar cells and wind turbines.

So spend -- but spen wisely, and cut wisely. Obama has a vision, and his big plan is, not only workable, but necessary.

Tags: Lent, Sacrifice