Republicans in House vote to abolish Okhrana's Death Panel; Senate Dems sure to restore it.

From the Nation Journal via Yahoo! News:

House Votes to Abolish Medicare Payment Board

Dang, that is one Orwellian bureaucratic title.

The House voted to abolish the Independent Payment Advisory Board on Thursday – a board that Republicans once derided as a “death panel” and that even some Democrats don’t like because it could bigfoot Congress. But the repeal is likely to die in the Senate.

The vote was 223 to 181. While the repeal bill isn’t going anywhere – President Obama has threatened to veto it – it’s another chance for some political theater.

Seven Democrats voted with the Republicans even though some legislation that Democrats normally won’t support was attached. And 10 Republicans voted against it.

The IPAB was created in the 2010 health care overhaul law as a last line of defense against out-of-control Medicare costs. The 15-member board of experts from across the health-care field has the power to step in and cut Medicare payments to doctors and hospitals if they seem to be spiraling too high.

It would take some power out of the hands of Congress, so some Democrats have joined Republicans in opposing it. The Congressional Budget Office has said abolishing IPAB would raise the deficit by $3.1 billion over 10 years, so Republicans have tacked on medical malpractice reform legislation to pay for it.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the medical-malpractice legislation would save the federal government $57 billion, meaning it would easily cover the cost of the IPAB repeal. After the first $3 billion is used to cover IPAB, the next $54 billion would go directly toward the deficit.

Democrats complain that is an unrelated issue. And they are accusing Republican leaders of intentionally undermining Democratic support and Senate passage because they want to keep the IPAB issue alive as a political attack theme this election year.

Fyodor's Headlinks

Just another day in Obamastan..

• John Edwards denies prostitution report

• 5 found dead in central Arkansas duplex
• Do record high temps mean a scorching summer is ahead?
• Boy named Sue: Baby-name regret is on the rise, expert says

• Too many jobs?! A look ahead at the next labor market crisis
• Cure for baldness? Researchers identify promising scalp chemical

PRAY THE ROSARY, SAVE OUR NATION! THIS FRIDAY AT NOON!

Rosary for Religious Freedom

Friday, March 23 at 12:00 Noon Eastern time

All are encouraged to join with Bishop Joseph P. McFadden of the Diocese of Harrisburg, PA in a recitation of the Rosary for the intention of preserving and defending the constitutionally guaranteed right to Religious Liberty on Friday, March 23 at noon .

This will be done live from the studios of WHYF AM 720 in Shiremanstown. All are invited to tune into the station for the live broadcast at 12 Noon.

For those not able to hear the station over the air, WHYF is simulcast on the web at www.YourHolyFamilyRadio.com

A Dialogue on the Harmony of Church Teaching and Women’s Health

Courtesy of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Harrisburg, PA:

A recent roundtable discussion that included obstetricians and gynecologist at Holy Spirit Hospital's Center for Women's Health along with clergy and lay specialists, provides both insightful and informative in the living out of the faith in such important matters. The discussion relates the core of the Church's instruction on artificial contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs to the care and treatment of women patients and their partners.

A Dialogue on the Harmony of Church Teaching and Women’s Health

On March 8, Msgr. William King, Diocesan Vicar General, sat down with Dr. Faith Daggs and Dr. Damon Cudihy at The Birthplace, the OB/GYN floor at Holy Spirit Hospital in Camp Hill, to discuss the relationship between the Church’s moral teachings and women’s health. Mrs. Victoria Laskowski, Diocesan Director of Marriage and Family Ministries, and Fr. Paul CB Schenck, Diocesan Director of the Respect Life Office, joined in the conversation.

The purpose of the discussion was to relate the core of the Church’s instruction on artificial contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs to the care and treatment of women patients and their partners. Dr. Daggs and Dr. Cudihy were very informative and insightful in their discussions about the positive application of their faith as practicing Catholics to their effective practice as physicians dedicated to providing their women patients with the best of care and therapies.

What does the Church teach about contraception?
Is contraception, or sterilization or abortion-inducing drugs necessary and essential to women’s health?

Dr. Daggs: I would not say that these are essential and necessary to women’s health care. Certainly, they have been incorporated as treatments for a variety of gynecologic disorders. In particular, oral contraceptives have been used as a medical panacea for many women’s health conditions – painful periods, irregular cycles, ovarian cysts, endometriosis – when actually there’s not great data that this therapy is effective for all of those conditions.
Sterilization doesn’t serve any purpose other than destroying the tubes and disrupting one’s fertility. It doesn’t treat any known medical conditions, and there is some research that shows it actually may produce problems for a woman. It can potentially lead to adhesions or scar tissue within the abdomen and pelvis, and in some cases may even be related to future disruptions of a woman’s cycle and/or pain.
Abortion generally is not used as a treatment – therapeutically, so to speak – for a pregnancy. There may be some very rare medical conditions in a woman where there may be a consideration to terminate a pregnancy because of her failing health. The main one that comes to mind is cardiomyopathy or primary pulmonary hypertension. However, even in that realm in the last ten years, there are small case series, particularly in England, of other therapeutics being able to be used to manage those women medically to carry them through pregnancy, at least to viability.
I don’t see them as essential and necessary, particularly since there are a variety of medical and surgical therapies that are alternatives and available, and that were used even prior to the advent of contraceptives or have been developed subsequent to the availability of contraceptives.

Dr. Cudihy: The short answer is no, I don’t see that contraceptives are ever an actual form of women’s health care. When it comes to contraception, a woman’s fertility is actually a healthy condition. If a woman is able to conceive, that means there is something working right with her reproductive system. There’s not a malady in need of treatment. … Our first approach is not to do harm. If I make a decision to destroy a woman’s reproductive system, I’m actually doing harm to her normally functioning system.
Unfortunately, contraception is treated like a panacea. I think it’s more of the snake oil of modern medicine. … If I thought it was an effective treatment for endometriosis, for polycystic ovarian syndrome or for irregular cycles, I would use it. But there are much better ways to treat those conditions that actually get to the heart of the problem.
When it comes to abortion, there are some situations where a continued pregnancy may pose a significant risk to a woman’s health. There are other situations where a woman’s health may be endangered, for example uterine cancer or an ectopic pregnancy. These are situations where there may be a procedure necessary, but the action in these situations is not a direct abortion. The child’s unfortunate, unavoidable death is a secondary effect. But I want to be clear that I don’t believe that direct abortion is ever necessary for a woman’s health. …

Is contraception ever a threat to a woman’s life or health?

Dr. Cudihy: Very much so. Few people are aware that the World Health Organization, as of 2005, has included hormonal contraceptives as what they define as a Group I carcinogen. [Emphasis mine. F.G.] Carcinogens are those things that we know cause cancer. Some examples of other carcinogens in this category would be asbestos, radioactive phosphorus, tobacco products and radon. For the World Health Organization to make that statement was pretty striking. That means that they looked at the evidence and saw that there was really no debate anymore about whether or not this is a cancer-causing agent.
The types of cancer that are most associated with the birth control pill would be breast cancer, cervical cancer and liver cancer. One of the unfortunate things that has been promoted is the idea that birth control pills are actually preventive against cancer. It’s important to understand that although there are studies showing it probably does decrease the rate of ovarian cancer and potentially uterine cancer, when you look at the net effect – because breast cancer is so much more common in particular – it is an increased risk of cancer.
We’re hearing that contraception is basic preventative health care. I’ve said more than once that it is preventative, but not in the sense that people think. When it’s used to apparently treat endometriosis, irregular cycles or pelvic pain, many times it’s preventing the woman from ever receiving a proper diagnosis and preventing her from having a treatment that will cure the disease. Contraception is not preventing a disease – it’s preventing diagnosis, treatment and cure of the disease. It’s an easy way out for us physicians to avoid having to address it. … An approach that actually seeks to diagnose the problem and treat it requires more work. It requires some imaging studies, some blood work, even surgery. And while it’s more work, it’s what the woman deserves if we are really concerned about her health.

In the delivery room, immediately after delivery, some physicians will ask a woman what type of birth control she would like to start, or if she would like to have a tubal ligation. Is that a necessary follow up to delivery?

Dr. Daggs: No. Certainly, there are situations where undertaking another pregnancy and another delivery is a particular concern to a woman’s health. However, the delivery room is not the most appropriate place to enter that discussion, even if the woman has no risk factors. There’s quite a bit of study looking at women who were counseled regarding tubal ligation during pregnancy and shortly after delivery and who accepted those procedures. Afterward, they showed a particular amount of regret.
Family planning is an important discussion to have. We’re truly called to be responsible parents. For some families, it may be that they can be open to many children; for some families, it may not mean that for a variety of reasons. If a woman has post-partum depression, she might not be ready to entertain another pregnancy.
It takes two people to conceive, and so the responsibility is shared. Ideally, it’s a shared decision – not just one person has to take a medication, wear a device or have a surgical procedure.

Dr. Cudihy: There tends to be an attitude that women are somehow hapless victims of their own fertility, that somehow the potential for them to conceive is a disease state. It breaks my heart to hear a woman tell me about how she was pressured into having a sterilization the day of her delivery. She delivers and then is convinced to be sterilized the same day.

Pope John Paul II taught that there may be reasons for a woman to delay pregnancy, where it may be morally incumbent upon her to do that for her health and her family’s sake. Would you say at that time that oral contraceptives would be appropriate?

Dr. Daggs: I would not say that oral contraceptives would be appropriate because we have legitimate medical means for a woman to know and understand her body, and for she and her partner to work together to use that in order to space or avoid pregnancy altogether.
Natural Family Planning has many names: fertility awareness, Billings Ovulation Method, Sympto-Thermal Method, the Creighton Model. All of these are based on a 50-year science of knowing what’s going on in a woman’s body hormonally, and using the biological indicators of that can be readily taught and observed regardless of the amount of education or training a woman has. Often, these methods are an aid to their health. We use Creighton Model in our practice. That’s been medically adapted to help us manage a whole host of gynecologic conditions.

Dr. Cudihy: Unfortunately, in those rare situations that we have a patient that we may need to advise them to avoid having children again, there is no reason why we should feel that we have to put them on some kind of birth control pill or sterilization when there are more effective or equally effective methods that do no harm to her body.

Knowing the harm that contraception, sterilization and abortion cause, and knowing that there are safe, moral and effective methods regarding family planning, why are women still choosing the former?

Dr. Daggs: It’s ease. It’s the almighty dollar. In general, Natural Family Planning is not a moneymaker so it’s not well known to people. Also, I think there may be a sense that women feel like it is totally their responsibility in a relationship, that society has shifted this responsibility totally to women. Particularly with the legalization of abortion, it’s really allowed men to abdicate in a significant way their responsibility as partner in this decision for a family. Certainly there are contraceptives that men use and men can be sterilized, but we’ve really allowed men as a society to abdicate their responsibility.
I think women maybe feel that they have no other choice, particularly if their spouse or their partner is not participating in this very important part of their relationship. I’m sure they participate on other levels in terms of finances and child-rearing, but often this is pushed off onto the woman. The women’s movement said to women, “You need to grab what’s yours in terms of education and career,” and that’s all good. But how incredibly sad – from a woman who is a career woman and a mother and a wife – that a woman would assume that she had to deny her ability to be a mother and to destroy what’s part of her feminine genius in order to have a career. I have been blessed with more than the usual number of children, but I don’t feel like that’s been a hindrance to my career. [Emphasis mine. - F.G.]

Is the Church’s teaching as it addresses contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs in conflict with good health practices for women?

Dr. Daggs: I do not believe so. What we do day-in and day-out is take care of women, and we do it in a manner that is consistent with our faith but medically cogent and scientifically sound, without using sterilization procedures, contraceptives or referring for termination of pregnancy. It allows us to be better physicians. … From a medical standpoint, I feel like I am really managing women’s health care in terms of using investigatory tools and then treating in ways that are complementary to their body that aren’t going to mask something that’s going to cause further damage.

So it’s not a matter of Church against medicine, or medicine against Church?

Dr. Cudihy: Not at all. The teachings of the Church encourage us to want to provide the very best medicine and the very best health care for women. It’s such a false argument to suggest somehow that the Church’s teachings on this matter are in conflict with good women’s health. In fact, it’s the Church’s teachings on the matter that keep us on track in seeking to provide the very best for women. The Church’s positions on this in no way are harmful to women. It’s not because the Church doesn’t care about women that she teaches that contraception violates her human dignity; it’s actually precisely because the Church does care about women that she teaches that. Because of the guidance of the Church on this issue, it’s helped us to be better physicians. In no way do I feel constrained somehow that this is holding me back from providing the best care.
Even though I know this is impossible, if somehow the Pope came out tomorrow with a statement that contraception was now acceptable, it wouldn’t change the way I practice. I see through and through the medical and scientific side that it’s just not good medicine. The Church is helping point us in the direction of good medicine.

Medicine, with the application of Catholic moral principles, is not pure science, but human science. We treat the human person with the dignity of a creature of God, but also with solid scientific principles.

Dr. Daggs: I’d have to say that it’s allowed me to flourish. I was not always of this mind. When I was in my professional education, I had a very different viewpoint that I was kind of saving my fertility and I had a plan. Fortunately, I had a conversion and it profoundly affected my personal life, my marriage and the bounty of life that my husband and I have been blessed with. But also, it profoundly affected by professional life and the way that God has been able to use me to work with women and to be continually humbled by the human body and its complexities, and the gift of fertility. It’s allowed me to achieve more than I could ever do on my own, and even push my own limits in terms of being a professional and being a wife and mother.

Dr. Cudihy: I see the truth of these things being affirmed every day in the office. Most of our patients aren’t Catholic. They come to us not because they know that we don’t prescribe contraception and we don’t recommend In Vitro Fertilization, but because they hear in the community that they’re going to be treated with respect and care. It’s consistent with good science. Good science means we really care about the person. The longer I do this, the more I see the truth being reinforced. Never do I feel that the Catholic Church is holding me back from being a doctor. The teachings of the Church and the guidance of the Church have helped me to be a better doctor.

He's right. He wouldn't be the same wearing anything but black and gold.

Yet another guy who'll never have to buy a beer in any Steeler bar anywhere in the world. We'll see you in Canton, Mr. Ward.

From the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Tearful Ward calls it a career

Wide receiver Hines Ward, one of the most beloved and decorated players in Steelers history, announced his retirement during a tearful goodbye today at team headquarters.

Ward, who turned 36 earlier this month, had been adamant on continuing his career after the Steelers released him. He had a change of heart, Ward said, because he can't "fathom" putting on another team's uniform.

The decision allows Ward to retire as a Steeler, 14 years after the team took him in the third round of the NFL draft. He finishes his career with 1,000 career catches, 12,083 receiving yards, two Super Bowl championships and a Super Bowl MVP award.

"To me it's not about going out and playing one or two more years for another organization," Ward said. "Deep down I know my heart wouldn't be in it."

Ward said he still has a passion for the game and a belief that he can play it. He said he drew some interest from other teams, but he decided to call it a career after consulting former Steelers running back and good friend Jerome Bettis and reading countless messages from fans who didn't want to see him in another uniform.

"You guys have given me the best years of my life and I will never forget that," Ward said of Steelers fans. "I'm happy with my decision. I don't have any regrets."

Bettis, outside linebacker James Harrison and defensive ends Brett Keisel and Aaron Smith were among Ward's former teammates who attended his emotional farewell. Steelers president Art Rooney II, general manager Kevin Colbert and coach Mike Tomlin also watched as Ward labored through tears at the outset of the 25-minute news conference, one that he opened by reading from prepared notes.

Ward raised the bar for all Steelers receivers after he made four consecutive Pro Bowls (2002-05) and put up the kind of numbers that may never be surpassed in Pittsburgh.

Ward caught his 1,000th career pass in the Steelers regular-season finale, making him one of eight players in NFL history to accomplish that feat. Ward also is one of just 19 NFL players to achieve the 12,000-yard milestone.

His 86 touchdowns are second in Steelers history to Franco Harris. That total matches the only number he wore during his NFL career.

Ward's value to the Steelers extended beyond sheer numbers.

He is widely considered one of the best blocking wide receivers of all time, and he served as an offensive captain for seven consecutive seasons.

"I don't have to prove nothing to anybody," Ward said.

We know how faithful and observant Jews feel...

...or, the Catholic crackup continues apace.

Let's call it "Cultural Catholicism". In other words, it's an empty sham designed to lead souls to perdition and corrupt the One, True Church.

From the Joplin Globe:

Terry Mattingly: 'Secular Catholics' continue to rise in numbers

As a rule, opinion polls are not as important to bishops as they are to politicians.

Nevertheless, CNN anchor Kyra Phillips recently asked Bishop Joseph Malone, of Maine, if he realized just how out of step he is with current doctrinal trends in his own flock.

“So, Bishop, times are changing,” she said. “Views are changing É So, why not get on board with the 43 percent of Catholics?”

The puzzled bishop replied: “The 43 percent who?”

“Who have no problem with gay marriage,” said Phillips.

“Well, their thinking is outside the realm of Catholic teaching for 2,000 years,” the bishop responded.

The bishop, of course, was talking about how traditional Catholics wrestle with moral issues, while the CNN anchor was describing views now common with a completely different kind of Catholic.

But in the polls, these days, a Catholic is a Catholic.

“I don’t know of anyone who thinks religious identity should be based on polling,” said theologian Tom Beaudoin, who teaches at the Jesuit-run Fordham University in New York City.

Nevertheless, he said, it’s time to note what researchers are learning about the lives and beliefs of what he called “secular Catholics.” For starters, bishops need to admit that they exist and that some of them want to stay in the church while practicing their own personalized approaches to faith.

“Secular Catholics are people who were baptized as Catholics, but they find it impossible to make Catholicism the center of (their) lives, by which I mean Catholicism as defined by the official teachings of the church,” said Beaudoin.

For these believers, there are “things that they learned about faith from Catholicism. Then there are things they learned from their jobs, from school experiences, from their music and from their favorite movies.

“They are hybrid believers and their faith comes from all over the place.”

This is precisely the audience of “liberal” and “nominal” Catholics who were targeted recently with a blunt New York Times advertisement that urged them to quit the Catholic church altogether.

“If you imagine you can change the church from within Ñ get it to lighten up on birth control, gay rights, marriage equality, embryonic stem-cell research Ñ you’re deluding yourself,” argued leaders of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. “By remaining a ‘good Catholic,’ you are doing ‘bad’ to women’s rights É Apparently, you’re like the battered women who, after being beaten down every Sunday, feels she has no place else to go.”

This advertisement probably says more about critics of Catholicism than it does about Catholic life, noted Beaudoin. Still, it could inspire constructive conversations about how “deconversions” are affecting church life.

After all, a 2009 survey from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that 1 in 10 Catholic adults in America has left the faith. Four Americans exit Catholicism for every one that converts to the faith, Pew found.

These numbers matter, said Beaudoin, but it’s more important to see the larger picture, which is the growing number of Catholics who are living their spiritual lives in a kind of tense Catholic limbo.

Some never go to Mass, while others do so occasionally. The vast majority of them have no idea what they would confess, if they ever went to confession, because they disagree with church authorities on what constitutes sin in the modern world.

In the end, it’s impossible to ignore this mass of “secular Catholics” because it’s such a large chunk of today’s church, he said.

In some parts of America, various kinds of “secular Catholics” now constitute a clear majority, while those who affirm traditional dogmas and doctrines are a minority.

Some of these “secular Catholics” eventually leave the church. Others choose to remain on membership rolls, on their own terms, because they find it hard to walk away, said Beaudoin. After all, there are parts of Catholicism that they affirm and they know they can ignore the parts that they reject. They have changed the church for themselves.

From his perspective, Beaudoin said it’s important to believe that this trend is “not the result of lethargy, laziness, relativism, heresy or apostasy. There will be Catholics who insist on saying that these secular Catholics are falling away from traditional Catholic norms. But I think it would be more helpful to talk about them not as having fallen away from the Catholic faith, but as having created new, evolving spiritual lives for themselves.”

Fyodor's faith in technology is restored!

Meet Olly & Molly, who make tweeting worthwhile.

Olly let's you smell tweets...

Olly - The Web Connected Smelly Robot

...and Molly will give you a treat if you get enough retweets!

Molly

March 30, 2012: Day of Prayer, Fasting, Abstinence for Religious Liberty

Help stop the left-fascist perverts, criminals, babykillers, and traitors. Change your life and change their hearts.

PA Bishops Call Day of Prayer, Fasting, Abstinence for Religious Liberty

The Catholic Bishops of Pennsylvania have called for Friday, March 30, 2012, to be a day of prayer, fasting and abstinence for religious liberty.

Click here to send a message in support of religious liberty.

Below is their letter to the faithful:

Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

The assault by the federal government on constitutionally guaranteed religious liberty continues. Our concern and alarm flows from a mandate of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which punishes the Church for its firmly held beliefs and consistent teaching. This mandate – published in the federal register without change, despite claims of “accommodations” – would force Catholic employers to pay for abortion-causing drugs, sterilization and contraception.

Some falsely suggest that the HHS mandate is about contraception. This is primarily about religious liberty and our First Amendment rights to the free exercise of our religion. Make no mistake about it – this government mandate is a step which will inevitably lead to other mandates that continue to strike at the heart of our Faith and the constitutional liberties we have been guaranteed. The mandate cannot stand – it must not stand!

This same mandate also, alarmingly, purports to tell churches what type of activities the government thinks are religious. Catholic schools, hospitals, nursing homes and Catholic charities do not qualify for a religious exemption. Why? Because they serve non-Catholics. Under the government’s view, Jesus and his disciples would have been deemed not religious enough. We have entered dangerous territory – the government is defining religion and limiting its practice. This is an unprecedented and gross infringement on our religious freedom. We did not pick this fight, but neither will we run from it.

Religious liberty does not belong to the Democrats or Republicans, it belongs to all Americans. Long before these mandates were issued, the bishops in the United States worked for health care reform and universal coverage that respects all human life from conception to natural death and includes language to protect religious conscience and practice of all citizens. Our fervent entreaties were answered with promises that we had nothing to fear. We cannot now sit idly by and let this happen. We cannot, as a Church, be silent because some have sought to politicize our plight. Please visit www.pacatholic.org to send a message to your legislators in support of conscience rights. Our voices and yours must be heard. The mandate must be rescinded. Our freedom and liberty must be preserved. And in this effort, we must remain steadfast.

Throughout history, Catholics in times of need have turned to God through prayer and fasting, as these practices allow us to grow closer to the Lord, inspire us to do His will and invoke His protection in answer to our prayers. During the Fridays of Lent, the faithful are obliged to abstain from eating meat. On Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, Catholics are also asked to fast – eating only one full meal, and, if necessary, two much smaller meals – to aid our spiritual life. Recognizing the efficacy of prayer and fasting as well as the challenges we face in overcoming the recent attack on our religious freedom, we, the Bishops of Pennsylvania, request that all Catholics dedicate the regular Lenten Friday practice of prayer and abstinence as well as the additional practice of fasting on Friday, March 30, to the preservation of religious liberty. On that day, offer your sacrifice for the cause of religious liberty, that the Church may be granted the basic right to practice what she preaches, and for our political leaders, that their eyes may be opened to the rights of all Americans, including those of faith. We will join with the over 3 million Catholics in Pennsylvania to mark this day of prayer, fasting and abstinence for religious liberty.

As we continue on our Lenten journey, we know the Lord walks with us during times of trial and concern. Let us do all that we are able – prayer, fasting, abstinence and the exercise of faithful citizenship – to uphold the freedoms of Christ’s Church and to grow closer to Him.

Here is a printable version of the Pennsylvania Bishops’ Letter on Religious Liberty.

More ultra-violence from the women-hating Opervma, who loves only death and power.

Talk about a war on women! Half the victims of the commiefag redefinition of "women's healthcare" are women. Where's the Geneva Convention when we need it?

From LifeNews.com:

Obama Admin Finalizes Rules: $1 Abortions in ObamaCare ...

It’s official. The concern pro-life organizations had about the ObamaCare legislation funding abortions has been confirmed, as the Obama administration has issued the final rules on abortion funding governing the controversial health care law.

Nestled within the “individual mandate” in the Obamacare act — that portion of the Act requiring every American to purchase government — approved insurance or pay a penalty — is an “abortion premium mandate.” This mandate requires all persons enrolled in insurance plans that include elective abortion coverage to pay a separate premium from their own pockets to fund abortion. As a result, many pro-life Americans will have to decide between a plan that violates their consciences by funding abortion, or a plan that may not meet their health needs.

The Department of Health and Human Services has issued a final rule regarding establishment of the state health care exchanges required under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

As a knowledgeable pro-life source on Capitol Hill informed LifeNews, as authorized by Obamacare, “The final rule provides for taxpayer funding of insurance coverage that includes elective abortion” and the change to longstanding law prohibiting virtually all direct taxpayer funding of abortions (the Hyde Amendment) is accomplished through an accounting arrangement described in the Affordable Care Act and reiterated in the final rule issued today.

“To comply with the accounting requirement, plans will collect a $1 abortion surcharge from each premium payer,” the pro-life source informed LifeNews. “The enrollee will make two payments, $1 per month for abortion and another payment for the rest of the services covered. As described in the rule, the surcharge can only be disclosed to the enrollee at the time of enrollment. Furthermore, insurance plans may only advertise the total cost of the premiums without disclosing that enrollees will be charged a $1 per month fee to pay directly subsidize abortions.”

The pro-life advocate told LifeNews that the final HHS rule mentions, but does not address concerns about abortion coverage in “multi-state” plans administered by the Federal Government’s Office of Personell Management (OPM).

“There is nothing in the Affordable Care Act to prevent some OPM (government administered) plans from covering elective abortion, and questions remain about whether OPM multi-state plans will include elective abortion,” the pro-life source said. “If such plans do include abortion, there are concerns that the abortion coverage will even be offered in states that have prohibited abortion coverage in their state exchanges.”

The final rule indicates: “Specific standards for multi-state plans will be described in future rulemaking published by OPM…”

Set to go into effect in 2014, the unconstitutional provisions found in Section 1303 of the Obamacare Act compel enrollees in certain health plans to pay a separate abortion premium from their own pocket, without the ability to decline abortion coverage based on religious or moral objection.

That provision was the subject of a legal document that Bioethics Defense Fund’s Dorinda C. Bordlee, lead counsel for the group, submitted to the Supreme Court in February.

“This violates the Free Exercise Clause because religious exemptions are made for groups such as the Amish who morally object to purchasing any insurance, but no exemptions are made for Americans who have religious or moral objections to abortion,” Bordlee said.

“President Obama’s healthcare overhaul includes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ that blatantly violates the conscience rights and First Amendment religious rights of millions of Americans,” AUL president Charmaine Yoest said. “Nowhere in the Constitution does it require Americans to violate their beliefs and pay for abortions.”

ADF Senior Counsel Steven Aden says Americans should not be compelled to pay for other people’s elective abortions.

“No one should be forced to violate their conscience by paying for abortions, but that’s precisely what ObamaCare does,” he explained. “ObamaCare requires that employees enrolled in certain health plans pay a separate insurance premium specifically to pay for other people’s elective abortions and offers no opt-out for religious or moral reasons. Such a mandate cannot survive constitutional scrutiny.”

BDF president and general counsel Nikolas Nikas said the individual mandate not only forces individuals into private purchases, it also effectively mandates personal payments for surgical abortion coverage, without exemption for an individual’s religious or moral objections.

He told LifeNews in an email, “Like a Russian nesting doll, the individual mandate has nestled within it a hidden, but equally unconstitutional scheme that effectively imposes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ that violates the free exercise rights of millions of Americans who have religious objections to abortion.”

GET YOUR WOMBS OUT OF MY WALLET!

The latest from the frontlines of the Women's War on the Constitution. First, five stories on the activities of Generalissima Subversivus, behind whose skirts Benito cowers...

Sebelius: Decrease in Human Beings Will Cover Cost of ...

1. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius ... sterilization, contraception or abortion are ... the controversy over whether the mandate is constitutional, Sebelius ...

   - cnsnews.com
   

2. HHS Secretary Sebelius: Church Groups Must Provide ...

   Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said ... go beyond the questions of contraception and abortion ... robust exemption for the HHS contraception mandate ...

   - ncregister.com
   

3. Sebelius: Didn't Talk to Bishops About Obama Mandate ...

   During questioning today before a U.S. Senate panel, pro-abortion HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted she did not contact the nation’s Catholic bishops before ...

   - lifenews.com
   

4. Sebelius: Fewer Babies Born Will Save Health Care Costs ...

   ... of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Secretary of HHS Kathleen Sebelius ... whim of the Administration, there is no statute preventing an abortion mandate.

   - lifenews.com
   

5. Kathleen Sebelius: Reducing Pregnancies Will Cut Healthcare Costs

   Kathleen Sebelius alleged that reducing ... health plans to cover elective abortion ... this in mind, the contraception mandate, combined with the assertions by Sibelius ...

   - thenewamerican.com

Here's three on the helpless little law student who has been greatly oppressed by penile-Americans:


Sandra Fluke on Her Role in the Contraception Controversy: 'I Would Do This Again'

Last week Sandra Fluke became famous overnight. But the cascading sequence of events leading to Rush Limbaugh's tirade against the 30-year-old Georgetown law student began two months ago. At a Republican presidential debate on Jan. 7, moderator George Stephanopoulus mystified Mitt Romney -- and many observers -- by pressing Romney about his views on contraception. Two weeks later, the Obama ...

- Time.com via Yahoo! News


Sandra Fluke: I Won't Be Silenced
- National Journal via Yahoo! News

That's too bad. If she'd just shut up for a couple of minutes, she might hear the cries of her wounded womb.


Ann Coulter takes time off from pimping Mittens the Pompadoured Pussy to whack the Flukey One upside her dessicated uterus...

THE VAGINA DIATRIBES - Ann Coulter via Yahoo! News

Did I miss the deadline for alternative opinions on Sandra Fluke?

What with liberal women constantly talking about their vaginas suddenly pretending to be offended by the word "slut," and conservatives pretending to be as pussified as liberals about the nasty names they've been called, I never got an answer to the most pressing question about Sandra Fluke: Who are you again?

Was Fluke dragged out of obscurity after the women of America took a vote and chose her as our spokeswoman? (BEGIN ITAL)Please, Sandra, we know how deeply private, publicity-shy and terribly busy with law school you are, but we need you to speak for us!(END ITAL)

I don't think that happened. Rather, Fluke is the latest in a long line of my absolute favorite liberal typology: hysterical drama queens.

From Murphy Brown to the Jersey Girls, Cindy Sheehan, Joe Wilson and the New School's Jean Rohe, these fantasists inject themselves into a boiling-hot public debate and then claim victim status when anyone criticizes them.

At least since I've been keeping score, liberals had their first brush with the dark night of fascism in 1992, when Dan Quayle said of a fictional TV character: "It doesn't help matters when prime-time TV has Murphy Brown ... mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice."

Suddenly, it was 1939 Germany and multimillionaire Hollywood elites were the Jews.

At the Emmy Awards ceremony that year, the creator of "Murphy Brown," Diane English, took the occasion to say: "I would like to thank our sponsors for hanging in there when it was getting really dangerous."

Really dangerous? You want "really dangerous"? Try being a pedestrian crossing Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica when Diane English is being driven to the airport! (A year earlier, English's husband mowed down the matriarch of Santa Monica's Chez Jay, killing her, while driving his wife to the airport.)

Marge Tabankin, executive director of the Hollywood Women's Political Committee, said: "The community feels targeted. It's created a chill and fear reminiscent of the '50s. Let's face it: We feel we're being used as whipping boys."

Yes, Hollywood liberals have got balls to spare, and that's why I admire them so much.

But the Academy Award winners of liberal martyrdom are the Dixie Chicks. In 2003, Chick Natalie Maines sucked up to a Bush-hating London audience by saying, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."

What an odd coincidence that the only city Maines attacked Bush in was London! In a way, it was lucky for the band that, in their entire 60-city world tour, Maines claimed to be embarrassed by Bush only in London and not, say, Lubbock, Texas.

But at least we had heard of Murphy Brown and the Dixie Chicks before they demanded we all stand in awe of their raw courage.

Fluke was an absolute nobody who simply thrust herself into the limelight. She's more the Jean Rohe iteration of the liberal drama queen.

Rohe, you will recall, was the student speaker at the 2006 New School commencement proceedings, who bravely insulted the official speaker, Sen. John McCain.

As Rohe described her decision to attack the invited speaker, every person she talked to the day before the ceremony hated McCain with blind fury. At two graduation ceremonies a day earlier, attacks on McCain brought wild cheers from the audience.

Rohe's resolve to tell the audience what it wanted to hear was only hardened when she was told there would be media at the event.

Sensing that fake heroism was within her grasp, Rohe explained: "It was something I didn't want to do, but knew I had to out of an obligation to my own values" -- such as the value of being popular, of getting a standing ovation and of being praised for her courage.

Liberals' idea of questioning authority is to check with the authorities to see if a "Question Authority" bumper sticker would be popular.

So, back to Fluke: Who is she, and how did she become the spokesperson for American womanhood? If we're allowed to submit names, I think we can do better than a Georgetown law student whose claim to fame is that she belongs to a college club on "reproductive justice."

Pursuing a typical path to liberal heroics, Fluke was an utter nobody whom the Democrats substituted in a last-minute witness-switch to testify about contraception -- as if her haircut isn't birth control enough -- at a hearing on "religious liberty."

Despite her credentials as a heretofore unheard-of "birth control activist," the Oversight and Government Reform Committee declined to accept this 11th-hour witness on the grounds that Fluke did not have appropriate credentials for any congressional hearing, much less one on religious liberty.

That was the Republicans' first foray into "silencing" Fluke's "voice."

Nancy Pelosi used an even less appropriate committee to ensure that Fluke's "voice" would be heard -- the Democrats' Steering and Policy Committee, the normal function of which is to give House Democrats committee assignments.

One longtime Democratic operative admitted privately that Fluke was the least-qualified witness ever to appear before a congressional committee.

As a result of the huge commotion the Democrats' made of Fluke's "testimony," she was ridiculed the same way people in ridiculous situations often are. She was called some mean names: "slut," "prostitute," "law student" ...

In full indignation, Fluke said her critics were trying "to silence women's voices." She said this on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and a number of other national media outlets.

Thus, Fluke became a liberal hero even braver than an actress standing up for abortion rights in front of a Bill Maher audience.

President Obama called Fluke and told her that her parents should be proud of her and to make sure she was OK. Hillary Clinton said conservatives were trying to control women. Bill Clinton called her to see if she had any plans for the weekend.

(Fluke seems to be holding up wonderfully under the nightmare of constant TV appearances. In fact, if I didn't know better, I'd think she's enjoying herself tremendously.)

I don't care what liberals believe. Just please stop telling me they're courageous for saying exactly what every non-Fox media outlet in America is dying to hear, or I'll throw up harder than Rick Santorum did when he read John F. Kennedy's speech.

The Mini Me-Lie Massacre: Watch them try to pin this one on Bush.

Afghan Massacre: Army Docs Say Brain Injury Could Have Sparked Attack

So the still-unnamed U.S. Army perpetrator of the Sunday slaughter in Afghanistan apparently suffered a traumatic brain injury two years ago. Could this have triggered what by all accounts was an irrational act? You better believe it, current and former Army mental-health professionals say.

- Time.com via Yahoo! New


The Afghan massacre: Should the suspected killer be executed?

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta promises justice, saying a U.S. soldier could face capital murder charges for allegedly killing 16 Afghan civilians

- The Week via Yahoo! New


Obama seeks to calm Afghan massacre fallout

President Barack Obama Tuesday sought to calm outrage over a shooting massacre by a US soldier in Afghanistan, saying he took the tragedy as seriously as if Americans had been slaughtered.

- AFP via Yahoo! News

RICK SANTORUM FOR PRESIDENT!

1. Santorum For President - Elect The True Conservative

2. PLEASE DONATE NOW
   

TWO MORE WINS FOR SANTORUM; TIME FOR NEWT TO DROP OUT AND RELEASE HIS DELEGATES

It looks like conservative protestants are beginning to realize Santorum is the only conservative in the race and that is more important to them than his Catholicism. That's progress, kiddies.


Santorum wins big in South, grabs conservative banner

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama - Republican Rick Santorum won a pair of crucial Deep South primaries on Tuesday, taking control of the party's conservative wing in the presidential race and dealing a severe setback to rival Newt Gingrich. Santorum narrowly defeated Gingrich and front-runner Mitt Romney in three-way battles that shook up a volatile Republican presidential race that has already ...

- Roto-Reuters via Yahoo! News

Santorum AL edge from voters motivated by religion

People favoring a candidate who shares their religious beliefs helped Rick Santorum capture Tuesday's Republican presidential primary in Alabama, exit polls of voters showed. He also won among women and younger voters.

- Associated Press via Yahoo! News

• Santorum wins Ala., Miss.; Romney takes Hawaii... - Associated Press via Yahoo! News
• Santorum's Southern Sweep Sets Up Long Showdown With Romney... - Time.com via Yahoo! News
• all 82 news articles…

Eternal life grant unto them, O Lord.

From AP via Yahoo! News:

5 Irish immigrants re-buried in PA cemetery

BALA CYNWYD, Pa. (AP) — The remains of five Irish laborers who researchers believe were murdered in 1832 while building a Pennsylvania railroad received a dignified re-interment Friday, more than 3,000 miles from their homeland and nearly two centuries after their first anonymous burials.

People lined up to pay their respects before five wooden caskets at West Laurel Hill Cemetery in Bala Cynwyd, just outside Philadelphia. The sounds of bagpipes and gunshot salutes filled the air as more than 100 mourners paid tribute, including Kevin Conmy, deputy ambassador for the Irish embassy in Washington.

"What this does is it just reminds us that the story of Irish in America has many strands," Conmy said. "You do get a sense that justice has been done to these people."

The immigrants were among 57 hired to help build a stretch of the Philadelphia and Columbia Railroad known as Duffy's Cut. They lived in a shantytown by the rails in current-day Malvern, about 20 miles west of Philadelphia.

Historian Bill Watson and his twin brother Frank Watson, also a historian, led a team that set out nearly a decade ago to find out what happened to the workers from Donegal, Tyrone and Derry. They believe many died of cholera and were dumped in a mass grave at Duffy's Cut.

But they also theorized — based on mortality statistics, newspaper accounts and internal railroad company documents — that some were killed. Railroad officials never notified the workers' relatives of their deaths, and they later burned the shantytown.

The burial services on Friday marked the end of a long quest for the Watsons.

"It's a 10-year pilgrimage for us," Frank Watson said afterward. "It's a pilgrimage for truth and for justice."

When the Watsons' team first began excavating in woods behind a manicured subdivision, they unearthed items such as glass buttons, forks and smoking pipes, including one stamped "Derry." Many artifacts are now on permanent display at nearby Immaculata University, where Bill Watson is chairman of the history department.

In 2009, they found human bones. The team uncovered six skeletons in all, and forensic experts found evidence of skull trauma. The brothers speculate that when cholera swept through the camp, these immigrants tried to escape the deadly epidemic but were killed by local vigilantes, who were driven by anti-Irish prejudice and fear of the extremely contagious disease.

Those remains were found apart from the main ossuary, commingled with coffin nails. One set of bones was tentatively identified based on size and the passenger list of a ship that sailed from Ireland to Philadelphia four months before the men died. If DNA tests prove a match to descendants in Donegal, the remains of John Ruddy will be returned to Ireland.

The other sets of bones — four men and a washerwoman — were interred at West Laurel Hill. Identification proved nearly impossible, in part because the remains were so badly decomposed.

Their grave was marked with a 10-foot-high Celtic cross made of limestone quarried in County Kilkenny, Ireland, and paid for by Immaculata.

"It's just the right thing to do, to give these men a Christian burial," said university spokeswoman Marie Moughan.

The cemetery donated the plot for the same reason, said Kevin McCormick, a liaison to the Duffy's Cut Project from West Laurel Hill. Some might argue the dead should rest in peace in their original graves, but disposing of bodies is not the same as burying them, he said.

"Who put them there?" said McCormick. "Was it people who had their best interests in mind?"

The Watsons' ultimate goal had been to find, unearth, identify and repatriate the remains of all 57 workers using DNA analysis, the ship's passenger list and other documents. But ground-penetrating radar indicates the mass grave is too close to active train tracks for the bones to be exhumed.

Still, the evidence and artifacts the team did uncover are valuable, said Kurt Bell, an archivist with the state Historical and Museum Commission.

"It really speaks volumes about the social history of railroads. We don't know a whole lot about the men who built the railroads in Pennsylvania from early in the 19th century," said Bell, a railroad historian. "The Watson brothers have really shed light on a little-known subject."

More data will be coming. Scientists at the University of Pennsylvania and elsewhere are studying bone samples for additional information about the workers' lives.

And the Watsons plan to look into another reported potters' field of Irish railway workers in Downingtown, 10 miles up the tracks. Research shows cholera made its way to that camp, Bill Watson said, and he wonders if murder did as well.

"It happened here," Watson said. "Why not there?"

Why we preach Christ crucified.

1 Corinthians 1:21-25

[21] For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world, by wisdom, knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of our preaching, to save them that believe. [22] For both the Jews require signs, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: [23] But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness: [24] But unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. [25] For the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

If the AmericaLasters admit his poll numbers are this bad, Okhrana's real numbers must be much, much worse.

Another Poll Shows Obama Approval Rating Sinking

A new CBS News/New York Times poll released on Monday confirms what an earlier poll showed: As gas prices have risen, President Obama's approval rating has slipped.

- National Journal via Yahoo! News

Polling 101: Why Obama's Sagging Approval Is Tied to Gas Prices

First, the all-important lesson when it comes to polling: don’t ever read too much into one poll. Instead, look at the trend. Here are polls that have tracked President Obama’s approval rating and were published between March 7 and March 11. Poll Date Sample Approve Disapprove...

- ABC OTUS News via Yahoo! News

Obama polls tumble as gas prices rise

US President Barack Obama Monday sought to contain fallout from rising gasoline prices, but polls showed his approval rating slumping as pain at the pump raised new doubts over his reelection hopes.

- AFP via Yahoo! News

Left-fascist media: AMERICANS HATE OBAMA MORE THAN THEY HATE BEING CALLED SLUTS AND WHORES!

The Weekly Standard reports on the panic running rampant among the chattering classes:

By 21-Point Margin, Americans Oppose Birth Control Mandate

The latest New York Times/CBS poll shows President Obama's approval rating hitting an all-time low. One month ago, 50% of Americans approved of his job performance and 43% disapproved. The new NYT/CBS poll shows Obama's approval rating dropping to 41% and his disapproval rating climbing to 47%.

The new poll also shows Americans strongly support an exemption to the "birth control mandate" by 57% to 36% for religiously-affiliated employers. By a 51% to 40% margin, Americans support a religious/moral exemption for all employers:

There's a lot of talk that Obama's dive in in the CBS/NYT and the ABC/Washington Post polls is due to high gas prices. That seems plausible. But why couldn't the contraception/abortifacient mandate--the biggest news story for the past month--also play a part in Obama's sinking numbers?

Comrade! The poor in Obamastan have clean clothes!

From Yahoo! News:

Theft of Tide detergent rampant across U.S.

Tide laundry detergent is meant to be used for household cleaning purposes, but thieves are turning it into something dirty. Authorities are reporting a spike in thefts of Tide, and in some cities they are setting up task forces where the detergent is sold to track the number of bottles in stores. Police believe thieves are using the soap on the black market, which retails for $10-$20, to buy drugs. On the black market, Tide is often referred to as "liquid gold" and can go for $5-$10 per bottle.

Last year, in St. Paul, Minnesota, a man is alleged to have stolen $25,000 worth of Tide over 15 months before authorities captured him. Stores such as CVS have amped up security measures to prevent theft; at some locations the detergent is kept in a locked container and an employee must retrieve it for customers.

So why is Tide the only detergent being targeted? Authorities list several reasons: Tide is instantly recognizable because of its Day-Glo orange bottle; it is one of the most expensive brands of laundry detergent; and it does not have serial numbers, so it cannot be tracked.

On social media, people are calling the theft trend "bizarre" and many are blaming it on the tough economy and rising gas prices. One person tweeted that the thefts are "a result of inflation."

A spokesperson for Procter & Gamble, the manufacturer of Tide, called the thefts "unfortunate."

Guess which party wants us to be dependent on unreliable foreign oil.

That's an easy one.

From Roto-Reuters via Yahoo! News:

Democrats block Keystone oil pipeline bill in Senate

Senate Democrats on Thursday defeated a Republican proposal to give a permit to the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline in a vote that will give Republicans more ammunition to criticize President Barack Obama's energy policies on the campaign trail.

Republicans argue the pipeline, which would ship oil from Canada and northern states to Texas, would create jobs and improve energy security at a time of surging gasoline prices.

Obama put TransCanada's $7 billion project on hold earlier this year pending further environmental review. He took the unusual step of calling some senators personally ahead of the vote, asking them to reject the proposal.

"He understood that a majority of the American public, a majority at least in the Senate, are strongly in favor of this project," said Senator Richard Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations committee, who sponsored the bill to take control of the pipeline decision away from Obama.

The Republicans tried to advance their plan as an amendment to a highway funding bill. It failed on a vote of 56-42, four short of the 60 needed to pass, although 11 Democratic senators voted with the Republicans.

Republicans are using the proposal to highlight Obama's delay of the project ahead of November presidential and congressional elections, linking his decision to rising gasoline prices.

"We're going to continue this fight," said Republican Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota, who championed the bill.

He told reporters he hoped the measure might still be attached to the highway funding package when the Senate and House of Representatives work on a final version.

"With gas prices going up every day, with what's going on in the Middle East, I'll tell you what: the pressure is just going to increase on the administration to get this project done," Hoeven said.

Obama has supported construction of the southern leg of the pipeline, and his administration will assess a new route around an environmentally sensitive area of Nebraska once it has been identified, said White House spokesman Clark Stevens.

"Once again, Republicans are trying to play politics with a pipeline project whose route has yet to be proposed," Stevens said. The entire project will take more than two years to build once permits are granted.

GREEN GROUP: 'TEMPORARY VICTORY'

The Keystone amendment was among 30 measures - many of them energy-related - being voted on as the Senate pushes in coming days to renew funding for highways and other infrastructure projects, slated to run out at the end of March.

Earlier, the Senate defeated proposals to expand the area available for offshore oil drilling and extend the time for manufacturers to phase in new pollution regulations set by the Environmental Protection Agency for industrial boilers.

But the Keystone amendment attracted the most attention. The pipeline would carry crude from Canadian oil sands to Texas refineries and would also pick up U.S. crude from North Dakota and Montana along the way.

Environmental groups have fought the project, staging large protests last year that pressured the Obama administration to block approval.

"Today's vote was a temporary victory and there's no guarantee that it holds for the long run," Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, said in a statement.

"We're grateful to the administration for denying the permit and for Senate leadership for holding the line."

With a 34-64 vote, senators also defeated a proposal from Democratic Senator Ron Wyden that would have blocked exports of oil from the pipeline, as well as refined products made from that oil.

Wyden said lawmakers need to carefully think through projects that would increase exports of oil, fuel and natural gas, lest the exports end up boosting prices for Americans.

"This is just a step in what is clearly going to be an extensive debate," Wyden told Reuters after the vote.

Democratic senators who voted for the Republican Keystone plan included Max Baucus and Jon Tester of Montana, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Jim Webb of Virginia.

As election day approaches, Senator Patrimony of PA pretends to be less of a criminal.

Two Republican senators were absent, and all the 45 who were present voted for the amendment.

Crazy from the heat...

...or, Hey President Tong, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn your countrymen would love.

From AP via Yahoo! News:

Entire country may pick up and move

Fearing that climate change could wipe out their entire Pacific archipelago, the leaders of Kiribati are considering an unusual backup plan: moving the populace to Fiji.

Kiribati President Anote Tong told The Associated Press on Friday that his Cabinet this week endorsed a plan to buy nearly 6,000 acres on Fiji's main island, Viti Levu. He said the fertile land, being sold by a church group for about $9.6 million, could provide an insurance policy for Kiribati's entire population of 103,000, though he hopes it will never be necessary for everyone to leave.

"We would hope not to put everyone on one piece of land, but if it became absolutely necessary, yes, we could do it," Tong said. "It wouldn't be for me, personally, but would apply more to a younger generation. For them, moving won't be a matter of choice. It's basically going to be a matter of survival."

Kiribati, which straddles the equator near the international date line, has found itself at the leading edge of the debate on climate change because many of its atolls rise just a few feet above sea level.

Tong said some villages have already moved and there have been increasing instances of sea water contaminating the island's underground fresh water, which remains vital for trees and crops. He said changing rainfall, tidal and storm patterns pose as least as much threat as ocean levels, which so far have risen only slightly.

Some scientists have estimated the current level of sea rise in the Pacific at about 2 millimeters (0.1 inches) per year. Many scientists expect that rate to accelerate due to climate change.

Fiji, home to about 850,000 people, is about 1,400 miles south of Kiribati. But just what people there think about potentially providing a home for thousands of their neighbors remains unclear. Tong said he's awaiting full parliamentary approval for the land purchase, which he expects in April, before discussing the plan formally with Fijian officials.

Sharon Smith-Johns, a spokeswoman for the Fijian government, said several agencies are studying Kiribati's plans and the government will release a formal statement next week.

Kiribati, which was known as the Gilbert Islands when it was a British colony, has been an independent nation since 1979.

Tong has been considering other unusual options to combat climate change, including shoring up some Kiribati islands with sea walls and even building a floating island. He said this week that the latter option would likely prove too expensive, but that he hopes reinforcing some islands will ensure that Kiribati continues to exist in some form even in a worst-case scenario.

"We're trying to secure the future of our people," he said. "The international community needs to be addressing this problem more."

Tong said he hopes that the Fiji land will represent just one of several options for relocating people. He pointed out that the land is three times larger than the atoll of Tarawa, currently home to more than half of Kiribati's population.

Although like much of the Pacific, Kiribati is poor — its annual GDP per person is just $1,600 — Tong said the country has plenty of foreign reserves to draw from for the land purchase. The money, he said, comes from phosphate mining on the archipelago in the 1970s.