New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy appears ready to force health insurance companies doing business in the state to cover abortions.
But that’s not exactly right. And a quick study reveals a lot about Murphy’s ugly move, and some of the news coverage of it.
One of the earliest reports on Murphy’s Executive Branch “regulatory” attack appeared November 30, at NJ.com, was written by Susan K Livio, and opened with:
“Gov. Phil Murphy’s administration will soon require state-regulated health plans to provide coverage for abortions — a move recommended by the state’s top insurance regulator who found the cost of the procedures may prevent some people from exercising their right under New Jersey law to end a pregnancy.”
Which, of course, requires anyone with a modicum of morals to address some of the nonsense packed inside that single sentence.
First, one does not have a “right” to take the life of an innocent human being. We all have equal rights to live, from the moment our lives begin: the moment of conception. This is logically, philosophically, and religiously manifest and easily comprehended – unless one is intensely obtuse, like Murphy often seems to be.
After all, Phil Murphy is the man who, when Fox News’ Tucker Carlson asked him how he could square his COVID-19 lockdown edicts with the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, blithely responded that the Constitution was “above my pay-grade.”
At that time, Murphy seemed ready to ignore the fact that the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights explicitly prohibited his lockdowns.
And now, in her opening, Livio leaves out something important as well, by implying that Murphy is mandating this on all insurance companies being “regulated” in NJ.
Related: Bill of Rights Still Above His Pay Grade? NJ Gov Phil Murphy BANS Indoor Sports | MRCTV
If that were the case, it would be important to note that -- just like he had no constitutional or moral authority for his lockdowns -- Murphy has no constitutional or moral authority to mandate ANY kind of coverage from insurance companies doing business in the state, regardless of the statements from NJ’s “top insurance regulator.”
But that’s not exactly what Murphy and his coercive cohorts are doing.
LifeNews’ Micaiah Bilger offers a clearer view of the abortion “coverage” mandate:
“It will apply to groups that sell insurance through the New Jersey health insurance marketplace Get Covered New Jersey, a spokeswoman for department Commissioner Marlene Caride told NJ Advance Media.”
Which lets readers see that this isn’t an unconstitutional move to force all health insurance companies doing business in NJ to cover abortions. It’s a change to the unconstitutional and immoral, Obamacare-predicated, state-run “insurance marketplace” – which isn’t a marketplace at all. It’s a tax-subsidized welfare system that allows residents to sign up for the below-market-rate NJ “coverage” and allows corporations to expand their business’s scope by offering policies through this government-created, tax subsidized, fake “marketplace.”
So, technically, the coercion is not being applied to the insurance companies, the boards of which freely choose to offer policies through the “Get Covered New Jersey” insurance-welfare scheme. The coercion is being applied to taxpayers, who will be forced to subsidize the insurance coverage that others get. That underlying assumption is bad enough, and now, it’s going to be worse, because the “coverage” will include the taking of unborn lives.
Of course, Ms. Livio, author of the NJ.com piece, doesn’t describe it with that kind of precision. She describes the act of killing a baby as “ending a pregnancy.”
The emptiness and lack of moral comprehension in that description echo like thunder in the Valley of Death. And the lack of moral comprehension exhibited by Phil Murphy is even more disturbing.
Murphy and his bureaucrats appear to be responding to the June, 2022 “Dobbs” decision in the US Supreme Court, which overturned nearly five decades of mistaken jurisprudential “Pro-Choice” grandstanding and which turned the question of abortion prohibition back to the states and their requisite application of the Fourteenth Amendment’s “equal protection” clause.
Murphy, et al, exposes not only the immorality of calling the extermination of a human being a “choice,” and they expose not just the vile act of claiming such murder is a part of “health care” coverage, they reveal the fact that the taxpayers will be subsidizing the destruction of human life.
Perhaps comprehending that is above Murphy’s pay-grade.