The doctor is in … the Court

Nothing closes a legislator’s mind to a pro-life argument quite like pro-abortion testimony from a medical professional. Funny thing: abortion advocacy groups coined the term “gynotician” in derisive reference to politicians who allegedly meddle in health care by respecting the right to life. There’s no corresponding term for a medical professional who politicizes science in the service of abortion advocacy. “Shill,” maybe, though perhaps that’s harsh.

This comes to mind as I’ve found an outstanding essay by Richard Doerflinger, published on the Witherspoon Institute web site. It’s worth posting verbatim, but with “all rights reserved,” I’ll refer you to this link: The HHS Mandate, Unborn Life, and the Professionals: a Cog in the Political Machine.

Doerflinger casts a sharp eye on the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which in its most recent foray into public policy has submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, opposing Hobby Lobby’s claim that it should be exempt from Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate. Medications like Plan B and Ella and devices like the IUD, according to the ACOG, are not really abortion-inducing even though Hobby Lobby’s owners think otherwise, so the mandate shouldn’t be suspended in this case.

This is the same ACOG that declares its opposition to personhood bills because they might make certain forms of birth control, like Ella and Plan B and IUDs, illegal – since they might induce abortion.

Remember this the next time a Court decision turns on medical advice from the ACOG.