Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Nun: Abortion-funding stimulus is ‘the faithful answer’ to COVID-19
Nun: Abortion-funding stimulus is ‘the faithful answer’ to COVID-19
Jan 15, 2026 8:46 AM

The Senate passed the “American Rescue Plan” on Saturday without the Hyde Amendment, a legislative rider that protects taxpayers from having to fund abortion-on-demand. However, a prominent Roman Catholic nun has celebrated the $1.9 trillion stimulus package, calling on “every single member of Congress” to vote for it and saying the abortion-funding measure makes strides toward “ending child poverty.”

The current version of the American Rescue Plan contains $414 billion in taxpayer dollars not subject to Hyde Amendment protections, possibly subjecting them to use on elective abortions or insurance plans that cover elective abortions in, e.g., COBRA insurance plans.

“The American Rescue Plan is the faithful answer to those in need,” said Sr. Simone Campbell, executive director of Network Lobby for Catholic Social Justice. She also described the bill as mon good legislation.”

In addition to the domestic abortion funding, the bill “breaks with 47 years of congressional precedent by appropriating over $700 million of global health funds not subject to the Helms amendment, which prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion abroad,” according to the Family Research Council.

It also boosts Title X funding by $50 million which, if Biden repeals the Trump-era Protecting Life in Global Health Assistancepolicy, will e another revenue stream for Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.

Sr. Campbell’s organization, Network, posted a message on Twitter on Monday to “celebrate” the bill’s passage. “This legislation protects vulnerable people,” Sr. Campbell said.

“I’m so proud of what we plished together,” Sr. Campbell added on Twitter.

Passing the #AmericanRescuePlan is just the beginning of what we must do to #BuildAnew. Child poverty will be cut in half, struggling families will be able to pay their bills and put food on the table, vaccines will reach everyone. I'm so proud of what we plished together

— Sr. Simone Campbell (@sr_simone) March 8, 2021

In addition to being morally and ethically illicit, funding the violation of an unborn child’s unalienable right to life is (thankfully) politically unpopular. More than three-quarters of Americans, including 55% of Democrats, oppose taxpayer-funded abortions overseas, a recent Marist poll found. A majority of Americans, including one-third of Democrats, also oppose government funding of abortions in the U.S., as well.

The Hyde Amendment has guided U.S. abortion policy for more than four decades. Republican- and Democratic-controlled Congresses alike passed the measure, introduced by the late Republican Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois, each year since 1976. Commonsense restrictions on government spending have attracted a broad bipartisan coalition that has included President Jimmy Carter and, until June 2019, Joe Biden.

“The government should not tell those with strong convictions against abortion, such as you and I [sic], that we must pay for them [sic],” then-Senator Joe Biden once wrote to a constituent. “Those of us who are opposed to abortion[s] should not pelled to pay for them.”

Not only does government funding of abortion force taxpayers to subsidize the intrinsically immoral action of the taking the life of a separate, distinct human being, it also increases the number of abortions performed annually. The laws of economics hold that government subsidies create perverse incentives. When the subject is abortion, taxpayer funds increase abortions.

“The Hyde Amendment has saved a total of 2,409,311 lives” between 1976 and 2020, according to the scholarship of pro-life scholar Michael J. New, visiting assistant professor of political science and social research at the Catholic University of America.

After Hyde, the birthrate among women on Medicaid increased by 13% in states where taxpayers no longer funded abortion. “[O]ne of every nine people born to a mother on Medicaid in a state not funding abortions through Medicaid owes his or her life to the Hyde Amendment,” writes New.

However, Sr. Campbell does not support the American Rescue Plan without reservation. “One critical piece failed to make it to the final version of this bill,” she said on Monday.

Unfortunately, she did not mean the Hyde Amendment; she meant the $15 minimum wage.

“Our Catholic faith calls us to insist that workers be able to support their families adequately on their salaries,” she said.

Yet “employment would be reduced by 1.4 million workers” if the minimum wage reaches $15 an hour, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released on February 8.

That’s a lower calculation than a 2019 CBO report on the same legislation, which found a $15 minimum wage would throw up to 3.7 million people out of work by 2025. Those millions would not be able to support their families at all, increasing government dependence – and contradicting Campbell’s stated reason for backing the policy.

Sr. Campbell suffers from mon misconception that the government can simply legislate economic reality. Yet the laws of economics do not yield to legislators’ intentions, whether good or ill. If the cost of labor increases to the point that it erases the employer’s profit margin, he will fire (or not hire new) employees.

Even if the American Rescue Plan lifted people out of poverty, rather than spending future generations further into debt, it would not merit the support of faithful Christians because of its abortion funding.

The Vatican made the moral calculus clear in a 2004 document titled Worthiness to Receive. “Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia,” says the guidance, written by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who is now Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI.

It goes so far as to say that a priest or Eucharistic minister “must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone” who votes for or “take[s] part in a propaganda campaign in favour” of “civil laws that authorize or promote abortion.” Supporting publicly funded abortions will demonstrably increase the number of abortions.

Sr. Campbell’s proffered reason for supporting the bill is that the legislation offers a way to “take meaningful action to care for our struggling families by raising wages and ending child poverty.” She justifies her support of this legislation, as she did her advocacy for the Affordable Care Act, by saying that government economic interventions benefit “the least of these” – the same passage from Matthew 25 that government-expanding members of both parties invoked when expanding Obamacare coverage.

Her celebration of a bill that funds abortion-on-demand proves that church authorities who do not understand the laws of economics may e willing to sacrifice the least of these in the name of “the least of these.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
No size or space in subsidiarity
When thinking and talking about principle of subsidiarity I’ve tended to resort to using metaphors of size and space (i.e.,nothing should be done by a higher orlargerorganization which can be done as well by a smalleror lower organization). But philosopher Brandon Watson explains why that is not really what subsidiarity is all about: The subsidiarity principle is often paired with the principle of solidarity, and there is a real connection between the two. Solidarity is the active sense of responsibility...
Do we have rights we can’t give away?
If inalienable rights are, as many people seem to believe, rights which the government cannot take away, does it follow that government can then take away rights that are alienable? As James Rogers explains, it is no less wrong for the government to take away an “alienable” right than it is for the government to take away an “inalienable” right. The difference between the two isn’t that one can be taken away while the other cannot but that an inalienable...
What would life be like without free enterprise?
The Fund for American Studies has a superb It’s a Wonderful Life-style video about life without capitalism. The video not only shows what life would be like if we banned free enterprise (i.e., a lot like Soviet Russia) but also makes the point that when you lose economic freedom you lose other freedoms too. As the angel says, “When you take away the carrot, all you’re left with is the stick. My favorite part of the video: Anti-capitalist activist: “I...
What you need to know about the world’s youngest ruler
Sebastian Kurz made history when Austrian voters elected him the world’s youngest leader on October 15 at the age of 31. His ascent has been met with jubilation or trepidation across the transatlantic space. Some European media say paint him as dangerously far-Right. For instance, the satirical Titanic magazine in neighboring Germany, has repeatedly called Kurz “Baby Hitler” and depicted his assassination. On the other hand, the Catholic Herald of London dubbed Kurz “Europe’s Christian Chancellor.” Where does the young...
Brexit: Leaving EUtopia
History’s worst tyrannies began as attempts to create utopia. This longing to inaugurate the heavenly kingdom on earth – to “immanentize the eschaton,” in William F. Buckley Jr.’s memorable phrase – empowers politicians who promise peace and prosperity in exchange for power. The Brexit vote shattered one such imitation kingdom, according to Stephen F. Copp in an insightful and scholarly new essay for the Religion & Liberty Transatlantic website. “Brexit has profound implications for those who care about religion and...
Video: Globalization, Justice, and the Economy: The Jesuit Contribution
In the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries, Catholic theologians, many of whom were members of the Society of Jesus, studied the intersection of morality and merce. Jesuits includingJuan de Mariana, Luis de Molina, and Leonardus Lessius explored the ethics of money, economics, and trade.In his famousHistory of Economic Analysis, the distinguished economist and historian of economic ideas, Joseph Schumpeter, described many of these Jesuits’ insights as anticipating similar ideas expressed by Adam Smith two centuries later. The Jesuits contributed greatly...
Do unions raise wages?
Note: This is post #59 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. Do unions raise wages for workers as a whole? If not, can unions raise the wages of some workers? The answer, says economist Alex Tabarrok, is . . . it depends. Unions have the ability to restrict the supply of labor to a job, which can increase wages for some workers. However, unions can also lower wages. For example, work stoppages and strikes supported by unions can...
When it comes to work-life balance, women know better than government
A series of governments across the West have crafted policies designed to help women achieve their goals. However, they failed to ask women what those goals might be. Economic interventions designed to nudge women into careers they don’t want, or to enter the workforce full-time even if they prefer to work in the home, uniquely disempower the women they are intended to help. Juan A. Soto, executive director of the Barcelona-based think tankFundación Arete, tackles the issue in a new...
Rome conference on Jesuits, globalization reaps record attendance
On November 29 the Acton Institute filled the Pontifical Gregorian University’s aula magna to maximum capacity with at least 380 participants, a record attendance during Acton’s 17 years of academic programming in Rome. The international mix of students, professors, diplomats, journalists and lay professionals representing all continents came in droves for the afternoon conferenceGlobalization, Justice, and the Economy: The Jesuit Contribution which was co-sponsored by Acton and the Gregorian’s Faculty of History and Cultural Heritage of the Church. The discussion,...
Christian freedom isn’t about choice
As supporters of economic freedom, we frequently find ourselves in vigorous defense of personal choice, whether in business, trade, consumer goods, education, or otherwise. But while the elevation of economic choice is based on plenty of principle, not to mention historical and empirical analysis, we ought to be careful that our views about freedom aren’t confused or conflated in the process. Given our cultural appetite for turning choice into an idol above all else, it’s a risk we’d do well...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved