Women’s Health Protection Act

Archbishop Decries Abortion ‘Legislation one would expect from devout Satanist’

Mary Burke on September 28, 2021

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed, on a near party line vote, a bill codifying a right to abortion-on-demand. Troublingly, Members of Congress who claim a Roman Catholic faith were among them.

Titled “Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021 [WHPA]” (H.R. 3755), the bill is sponsored by Representative Judy Chu (D-CA) and co-sponsored by 211 House Democrats. No House Republicans supported the legislation, now moving before the U.S. Senate.

The legislation is among the most radical expansions of abortion rights ever proposed in the U.S. Congress, channeling federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. 

H.R. 3755 would allow for pre-viability abortions under every circumstance. It would allow post-viability abortions with a meaningless “good faith restriction.” 

The bill also seeks to remove conscience protections, codified under federal law, for healthcare workers unwilling to participate in abortion procedures on moral or religious grounds (p. 23 lines 1-6).

State laws restraining the most radical aspects of the pro-abortion agenda will be repealed if this bill becomes law.

Numerous self-described Catholic politicians co-sponsored, promoted, and promised to help codify the bill into federal law. President Joe Biden and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) did just that last week.

Shamefully, one-quarter of House co-sponsors claim a Roman Catholic faith and just under one-third of the co-sponsors of the Senate version, S. 1975, identify as Catholic.

In a statement of administration policy on H.R. 3755, Biden said last week,

“The administration strongly supports House passage of H.R. 3755…The administration looks forward to working with Congress as the [WHPA] advances through the legislative process…”

Pelosi’s remarks on the bill were especially egregious. In a September 23 press conference, the House Speaker fielded a question about how she reconciled her Catholic faith and her support for the bill.

“I believe that God has given us free will to honor our responsibilities,” Pelosi stated.

Similarly, in her speech on the House floor during the debate on H.R. 3755, Pelosi said, 

“I come to this [abortion debate] as a Catholic mother of five in six years…We should not, in this body, or Court, be making decisions for the women of America.”

Conversely, Catholics who abide by Church teachings on abortion, informed by Scripture, church documents, and the Catechism, have condemned both the bill and the support of self-proclaimed Catholics for it. 

San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone seemingly hinted at an ongoing dispute with Pelosi and her support for abortion rights in a statement last week that support for this particular bill was:

“Especially shameful that any self-professed Catholic would be implicated in such evil, let alone advocate for it…WHPA is surely the type of legislation one would expect from a devout Satanist, not a devout Catholic.”

Cordileone noted the bill amounted to “child sacrifice.”

In a statement condemning the bill, Archbishop Joseph Naumann, Chair of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), called upon members of Congress to, “not advance a radical ‘abortion on demand until birth’ policy….”

Biden and Pelosi claim to be both Roman Catholic and Pro-Choice, but this doesn’t mean that they are faithful or doctrinally sound. The two elected officials not only advocate for passage of the most radical abortion bill in U.S. history, they also aid and abet its passage. 

Pelosi, and other government figures like her with the power of to change public policies, twist Church teachings and in doing so perpetuate a culture of death.

The House official claims that God has given people free will to honor their responsibilities. 

God has bestowed humanity with free will — but that doesn’t mean He sanctions and supports the murder of the unborn without consequence. It doesn’t mean that it is moral or acceptable in the Catholic faith to do so. 

Pelosi and Biden should view all children, not just their own children, as Jesus did – “in His own image” (Gen 1:27, RSV).

This dignity that God has given every person, in the womb, and outside of it, doesn’t go away when abortion is labeled as healthcare by Pro-Choice politicians. Human dignity given by God is neither circumstantial nor is it to be discarded for political purposes. Human beings are incapable of deciding which lives have dignity and are worth protection and which do not. It certainly is not the place of those who present themselves as Catholics to infringe upon religious healthcare workers’ conscience rights.

  1. Comment by David on September 28, 2021 at 7:38 am

    “In His own image” is human hubris as we consider ourselves so important. We know early humans had an ape-like appearance. Should the Sistine ceiling show a long hairy arm reaching out to Adam?

    As I have pointed out in the past, the human reproductive system is quite wasteful with many, if not a majority, of conceptions, failing to reach term. If there was a divine concern for these, this would not happen. Indeed, one could argue from this that God favors fetal death. There are times when science can tell us more about God than religion.

    There are very few biblical verses regarding abortion. Striking a woman so that she miscarries was considered a property crime with a fine when death was always applied to murder. Should the struck woman die, then death was the penalty. There are also ghastly references to pregnant women being ripped open apparently with divine approval.

    If you are against abortion or same sex marriage, then do not have an abortion or marry someone of the same sex, but do not force your religious views on others. This is a violation of their religious freedom.

  2. Comment by Steve on September 28, 2021 at 10:14 am

    To extend David’s reasoning a little further:
    “If you are against murder or slavery, then do not murder or have a slave, but do not force your religious views on others. This is a violation of their religious freedom.”
    What a great argument. Not.

  3. Comment by Pastor Mike on September 28, 2021 at 4:07 pm

    David: I don’t see how an atheist’s view of the Bible and scripture have much relevance to Christians, do you?

  4. Comment by p on September 28, 2021 at 4:41 pm


    So you’re saying that this bill is not forcing views on others? Take, for example, that right now medical personnel can decline taking part in abortion procedures for moral or religious reasons. This bill would take that away. Isn’t that violating their religious freedom?

    Plus it would allow taxpayer dollars to be used to fund abortions. You don’t think that besides a number of people in this country of various faiths, there are very likely some agnostics and atheists who would rather not have their money spent on someone else’s elective abortion procedure?

  5. Comment by Hi David, have a question. on September 29, 2021 at 10:25 am

    Nicely worded statement of your position, though it’s not really new or ground-breaking. But I do have two questions:

    1. When does life begin as you understand it?
    2. Once life begins, who should make life or death decisions about it?

    Thanks for your answers.

  6. Comment by John E on September 30, 2021 at 9:26 am

    Taking David’s “reasoning” to its logical conclusion: It is my understanding that 100% of human life ends in death. That must mean God does not care about human life, since he allows all of us to die at some point. That must also mean God approves of murder.

  7. Comment by David on October 1, 2021 at 6:50 am

    Rember that both the Methodist and Southern Baptists came out in favor of abortion rights prior to Roe, so this can easily be considered a religious belief that should not be infringed.

    As far as the start of life, some would point out that what is translated into English as “soul” or “spirit” is related to breathing. Therefore, one’s life begins at birth according to this belief.

    We know that 99.9% of known species have gone extinct. This is after they were biblically seen to be “good” and “blessed.” Humans may well suffer a similar fate with changes in the planet, warfare, disease, and famine. His eye may be on the fall of the sparrow, but it falls anyway, so what difference does it make? We are told we are more important than the birds, but that may just be more human hubris.

  8. Comment by Thank You David on October 1, 2021 at 12:58 pm

    As far as the start of life, some would point out that what is translated into English as “soul” or “spirit” is related to breathing. Therefore, one’s life begins at birth according to this belief.

    With all due respect, that is not how many ancients understood this, and certainly the Scriptures did not see it that way all the time either. Certainly Greek thought expanded the definition of soul much further than you do.

    Using you definition, it seems you are assuming that a fetus has no characteristics of a living human being before birth. If you accept this premise then you are open to supporting infanticide as well as abortion, because one can easily make certain criteria that must be met for a newborn to be defined as ‘alive’, both physical and mental.

    With all due respect, your words about species going extinct, etc., is rather puzzling. the sparrow may fall, but then Jesus says 2 verses later: “… you are worth more than many sparrows.” (Mt. 10:29-31). We can also refer to the birds of the air in the Sermon if you wish to continue the thread. So obviously human beings are not on the level you consign us to.

    Certainly it seems that you have a very low opinion of homo sapiens, though it is hard to understand why. You call it hubris, but humans have the ability to manipulate and use their environment to make moral and other decisions, and not act purely on instinct as lower beings do. In fact, you accept this point because it is you who say that humanity may make itself extinct by our moral and ethical choices, something no other specie can do.

    I have not heard of a sparrow, dolphin, or guerilla make moral decisions that alter their environment. But I do know many humans that have big egos that proclaim they have the intellectual knowledge and moral right to proclaim that have the absolute right answers to all moral questions. I also know of many humans who set certain moral laws as universal for everyone else but themselves.

    Thanks for your answers, I am sorry we have to use the internet for such such discussion. There is much more to talk about, but in summation you naturalistic arguments to support almost all abortions is flawed and not worthy of someone like you buying into them.

  9. Comment by Margaret on October 12, 2021 at 11:14 pm

    I read two or three of your articles monthly. I read varying opinions based on writers’ views before forming personal stances on issues. Often, I agree with your articles, but not always. Some of your articles make me rethink my views on a particular issue. Based on my experiences and knowledge, however, I respectfully disagree with your policy on abortion. Here are the reasons why.

    — I believe that abortion is a moral issue, not a legislative issue.
    — I believe if women were coffered contraceptive tools, abortions would significantly decline.
    — Churches need once again to address the CAUSE and PROBLEMATIC results of out-of-marriage and financially tricky pregnancies.
    — Government can not legislate the passion between men and women. Anyone who believes that it can is short-sighted.
    — Legislation against abortion is primarily against poor women of all colors. Women with financial means will obtain one in another state or Europe.

    The reason I feel strongly about this issue is personal. In 1963, I witnessed a 19-year-old girl die a painful death from an alleyway abortionist in my college dorm. We asked her why she did it, and she responded, “My Daddy is a Baptist Minister, and I don’t want to shame him and my family.” Back then, it was an all-girls dorm, and her boyfriend waited downstairs in the lobby on word of her condition. After six or seven hours of his waiting, the Floor Monitor told him she had died. It was sad to see his excruciating pain, but the worst was when he called her family to tell them. She did not need to die!

    In 1965, a fifteen-year-old neighbor girl committed suicide because she could not cope with the situation. We cannot turn back to unsanitary alley abortions.

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.