Pros and cons

Jann Armantrout, coordinator of life issues for the Diocese of Rochester, continues to be a breath of fresh air in the Catholic officialdom of my hometown. In Mike Latona's June 26 piece on healthcare reform in the Catholic Courier, she rightly raises a flag or two about the risks of a greater federal role. While she ultimately comes down in favor of universal coverage, she at least pauses to ask tough questions. (Unsurprisingly, Sister Patricia Schoelles, SSJ, president and associate professor of ethics at the notorious St. Bernard's School of Theology and Ministry, more or less equates Obama's objectives with Catholic social teaching.)

In addition, Armantrout questions how well reform will line up with the teachings of the Catholic Church, given Obama's support for embryonic stem-cell research and abortion rights.

"I am not real confident that the dignity of all human beings is a priority," she said. She said she also wonders whether another practice the church opposes -- euthanasia -- might become a way to trim costs, considering that end-of-life medical expenses run so high.

Nonetheless, Armantrout -- a Catholic Charities staff representative on the diocesan Public Policy Committee -- added that Obama's basic premises of driving reform toward universal coverage "are laudable goals. I'm happy that somebody is trying to take the bull by the horns."

"Comprehensive health care is seen by the Catholics as a goal," Sister Schoelles added. "On that score, Catholic teaching on health care would be in alignment with (Obama's objectives)."