Life’s Silver Linings, Inc.

Chapter 4, Part VI: Conning the Clergy to Collaborate With Comprehensive Health

Unfortunately, HB564Â? became law due to the support ofÂ? Missouri Catholic Conference.Â? The week prior to the passage of Missouri’s universal health care reform bill, an abortionÂ? advocate who helped author the bill stated “Missouri Catholic ConferenceÂ? supports HB564–we did a divide and conquer, and it was a success.” [1]Â? The May 28, 1993 issue of the St. Louis Post Dispatch, in an article titled Schools’ Health Services May Grow quoted Missouri Catholic Conference’sÂ? executive director in regards to the effects of HB564 as statingÂ? “–Those parents who choose contraceptive referral are free to do so.”

In an effort to obtain more health care for those in need, good people who meant well, stepped into the trap of the population controllers.Â? It is my opinion that Missouri Catholic ConferenceÂ? sacrificed our fertility to the god of Medicaid on the altar of universal health care.

or the most part, pastors are among the most compassionate persons in a community.Â? Pastors only support programs and services that are positive.Â? A community depends on its pastors for guidance, leadership, and direction.Â? If the religious community supports an endeavor, one can rest assured they will not be “led astray”… or can they?

Churches are being used to funnel children and families into socialistic, government-funded health and education programs which are designed to meet the goals and outcomesÂ? contained in Healthy People 2000Â? and Goals 2000.

Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn EldersÂ? spoke of the importance of involving churches in partnershipsÂ? with the government.

Much of what SIECUS� (Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S.) supports is in opposition to the Judeo-Christian ethic.� � SIECUS’ book titled Winning the Battle: Developing Support for Sexuality and HIV/AIDS� Education states, “Religious leaders can be called upon for their help.� Ask the clergy� of your community to develop a letter of support for your program.� This letter can be widely circulated to their members, the school board, and the local newspaper.” [2]

School districts create community partnerships, collaborating with state agencies, community churches, and organizations for referralsÂ? and the provision of prevention, intervention, aftercare programs, and/or services, implementing the MOSAPÂ? model.

The Missouri Department of Mental Health, Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse� funded the writing of Missouri’s Student Assistance Program (MOSAP� model).

The chapter in the MOSAP Handbook titled� “Preparing the Community” says to “enlist churches to promote and distribute Student Assistance Program information.”� The MO SAP Handbook� states that issues to be addressed include “prejudice, violence, death, and teen pregnancy.”

The question is:Â? Are pregnant teens being referred to agencies like Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Birthright, or to Planned Parenthood, abortionÂ? clinics, and government-funded family planningÂ? clinics which provide contraceptivesÂ? to minorsÂ? without parental consentÂ? and which refer for abortion?

Women who have experienced abortionÂ? speak of turning to drugs, alcohol, and suicideÂ? attempts as an escape from the emotional and psychological consequences of their abortion(s).

When we send children to contraceptive clinics, we may be contributing to the drug problem.

The summary of U.S. H.R. 1800 written by the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues states that the law “will expand the list of preferred uses for funding under the Drug-Free Schools and CommunitiesÂ? Act–.”

Section III of the Drug Free Schools and CommunitiesÂ? Grant Application is titled “Assurances.”Â? It states that “the applying school district assures that–This program is part of a comprehensive healthÂ? education curriculum.”

See the chapter titled “Lexicon Is Lingo” for the BROAD definition of comprehensive health� for adolescents.� It includes “family planning� services” and “reproductive health� care” which may include contraception, abortion, and sterilization.

Federal grants, such as the Drug-Free Schools and Communities, and Title I, mandate that public schools assure they “provide services to eligible children attending private elementary and secondary schools, and timely and meaningful consultation with private school officials regarding those services (except in those districts where the By-Pass exists). Services include health and social services.”[3]

Federal programs offered to nonpublic (parochial) schools through local public school districts “hoodwink” clergy� and private schools into participating in prevention� programs which may promote contraception.� This happens because prevention programs, including substance abuse� prevention programs like the Drug-Free Schools and Communities� Grant, have been re-allocated to include “broad-brushed prevention” which is defined to include pregnancy prevention� (i.e. contraception).

It would be wise if parochial� agencies would not become dependent on federal funds.� There’s no such thing as a free lunch.� Federal “strings” are always attached to federal dollars, but the strings are not always obvious.

The administration of a public school district recommended that its school board authorize the superintendent to increase the total compensation to a parochialÂ? family services agency for consulting services from $6,500 to $16,900 with fundsÂ? from the Drug-Free Schools and CommunitiesÂ? Grant.Â? The number of nonpublicÂ? students served by the parochial family service agency within this particular public school district was only 51.Â? The purpose of the large increase in compensation was for the expansion of services. However, based on the number of children served the previous year, the average amount collected per child would increase from $127.45 to approximately $331.37.

The system works like this: Â? When a student aged kindergartenÂ? through high school who attends a parochialÂ? school within the boundaries of the public school district, or a member of their family, has been identified (screened) as being in need of counseling, the child or family is referred to the parochial family service agency.Â? The parochial family service agency provides the counseling services and bills the local public school district.Â? The local public school district pays the parochial family service agency from Drug-Free Schools and CommunitiesÂ? Grant funds.

Article 5 of the agreement between the public school district and the parochialÂ? family services agency is titled Ownership of Documents. It states, “All reports and other documents prepared by the consultant [parochial family service agency]–shall be the property of the District.Â? The consultant shall not release such reports and other documents to others without written permission of the District”[4] (emphasis added). The following year it was learned that the standard consultant contract had been used which was not correctly worded. The wording in the consultant contract was then amended to read “–shall be the property of the non-public school–.”

The lure of services and funding gains government access to children, families, and information (data) from the parochialÂ? segment of society.Â? Such partnerships are used to assist in implementing government health and education reform goals.

The district’s compensation to the parochial family services agency was at the rate of $45 per hour for counseling� and assessment� services, and $150 per inservice� and orientation with staff.� The parochial family services agency has similar agreements for additional Drug-Free Schools and Communities� Grant funds� from various other public school districts for services to nonpublic.

Private schools and churches may also become Medicaid� providers, or may become partners with local hospitals and health providers who are Medicaid providers.� The state Medicaid agency is REQUIRED to provide or refer for ALL MANDATORY Medicaid services, including “family planning� services and supplies.”� EVERY Medicaid recipient has a case manager� who is OBLIGATED, regardless of personal beliefs to make sure the Medicaid recipient is referred for ALL services available through Medicaid.� Medicaid includes coverage for Norplant� as well as abortions for rape and incest without the proof of a police report.

Population controllers used the clergy� to pass the state health reform bill which allows the government to use schools to reach children and families in order to implement government health goals.� Remember that one such goal is to have 90 percent of “sexually active” teens on combination contraceptives.

During the hearing on HB564, Judith Widdicombe� (a key author of the bill,) testified that� “this is a good bill, it’s not only for public schools but private and parochial� schools.”� During this hearing she stated that she supported parental involvement.� When a member of the committee asked her if she supported parental consent, she simply responded, “No.”

A number of Catholic� clergy� traveled to the state capitol and successfully lobbied for the passage of this bill.� It was no surprise when a representative of the Archdiocese� appeared before a public school board with members of the district’s Medicaid panel to encourage the board to vote in favor of being a Medicaid provider.

The reason the government and the population controllers are so eager for the church� and its schools to become a Medicaid provider is because the government has something to gain:� a vehicle through which to gain access to the grassroots people in order to implement socialized medicine and its goals of reducing unintended pregnancies� as defined by the government.� See the chapter titled “Every Child a Planned and Wanted Child By Whom???”� When the church becomes an extension of the state, one no longer hears the cry “separation of church and state” from the government nor its consortium� of non-governmental agencies.

Once a churchÂ? is dependent on government fundsÂ? and programs, its freedom and autonomy are compromised.Â? Look at how being tax-exempt has neutralized the activity of our churches.Â? Churches become timid about doing or saying that which politically and spiritually needs to be said and done, in order to be obedient to government regulations so as to retain their tax-exempt status.

Pastors become “bent out of shape” when they find pro-life fliers on car windshields in their church� parking lots which inform voters of who the good guys are before going to the polls.� Since the media is so biased, and postage is more expensive than can be afforded, putting fliers on cars in church parking lots is an excellent way to reach God’s people.� Pastors whose churches are tax exempt may not give direct permission for this activity, but they can surely ALLOW it to happen by not running people off!� What happened to free speech?

Generally speaking, there is great danger of being blinded by government money which may cause “weak knees” at least, and at worst an erosion of commitment� to principle.