Chaput the Great's
column this week. He's still right...
and still incomplete, I think. Curtsy to James Kushiner
who adds:
Was the real intention what David Leonhardt seems to say in the New York Times, "wealth redistribution"? Who knows--it's such a massive bill with multiple personalities. It's for the poor, It's for the uninsured, It's for fining free citizens for not buying coverage, It's Life Affirming, It's for financial efficiency, It's for driving down the cost of health care, It's for driving down the abortion rate. Whatever you're for, that's what it's for.
How we got it was through Chicago-style politics, which is to say, say whatever you have to say to get it done.
Update: In re the "incompleteness" of the argument.
Ahem. And:
all the ways HCR violates Catholic social teaching...beyond abortion.
