NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of The Illinois Federation for Right to Life. They are presented only for your information.
Remarkable Pro-Life Women Share Their Stories
Feminists for Life (FFL), which counts Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin among its members, is rolling out a series of seven videos featuring Remarkable Pro-Life Women.
The videos will premiere one by one during the coming school year on FFL's Web site.
The first video features Melissa Ohden, who survived an abortion at just 5 months' gestation. Today, she works for a social welfare agency in the Midwest.
Click here to read the entire article online
Congress Renews Federal Funding for Abstinence Education
The U.S. Senate passed a bill Saturday that extends Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE) through September 2009.
Recipients of CBAE funds — the largest funding stream for abstinence education — include pregnancy centers throughout the country and charitable organizations.
Ashley Horne, federal policy analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said this is good news for U.S. students.
Click here to read the entire article online
Open letter asks King of Spain not to sign decree allowing aborted babies to be ground up
Father Joan Manuel Serra, a priest of the Diocese of Sant Feliu de Llobregat, has asked King Juan Carlos of Spain not to sign a royal decree that would modify mortuary policies and would make it legal to use “baby crushing machines” that would be used on the remains of babies aborted up to the seventh month of pregnancy in abortion clinics.
In an open letter, Father Serra recalled that current policy “obliges abortion ‘clinics’ to consider the remains of an abortion as cadavers, when they are human remains ‘of a sufficient entity,’ that is, at eleven or twelve weeks of pregnancy, and transfer them to a cemetery for their posterior dignified incineration or burial.”
Click here to read the entire article online
Justices Simply Refuse to Hear Pro-Life Free Speech Case
The Supreme Court has rejected for the third time an appeal by anti-abortion activists to undo a multimillion-dollar verdict for their use of "wanted" posters to identify abortion clinic doctors. The justices did not comment Monday in turning down a dozen individuals and two groups that oppose abortion. The court turned down similar appeals in 2003 and 2006. Four "physicians" and abortion clinics sued in 1995 after the activists released a Wild West-style poster that named a dozen abortion doctors underneath the headline, "Wanted."
In 1999, a jury awarded the "doctors" and clinics more than $100 million under racketeering laws and a 1994 federal law that makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors. Courts reduced the judgment to more than $16 million. The activists say the verdict violated their free speech rights under the Constitution. The case is American Coalition of Life Activists v. Planned Parenthood, 07-1546.
Click here to read the entire article online
Pro-Lifers Fear Libel Suit Fees
Last month, a Kane County judge dismissed two counts of a libel lawsuit filed against Planned Parenthood by local pro-life activists. Now, those activists might have to pay more than $300,000 in Planned Parenthood's legal fees associated with the suit. And Eric Scheidler, communications director of the Pro-Life Action League, says that amount may "bankrupt us and shut us down." The lawsuit alleges that Planned Parenthood of Illinois, and its president and CEO, Steve Trombley, libeled local anti-abortion activists in a letter to elected officials, and in subsequent newspaper ads. Trombley's letter, the suit says, painted local activists as violent, despite peaceful protests at Planned Parenthood's new facility on Aurora's New York Street. Lawyers for Planned Parenthood successfully argued that those letters and ads were protected speech under the Citizens Participation Act.
Click here to read the entire article online
Exceptions In Abortion Ban Proposal Key, Scholars Say
If the abortion measure fails in South Dakota, it might be defeated by voters who are angry the issue is on the ballot again, a political science professor says. An important group of voters will be those who might lean toward abortion limits, but "they're mad that it's back again," said Northern State University political science professor Ken Blanchard. Those voters, he said, "may be the ones who sink the initiative this time if it fails."
Click here to read the entire article online
October 7, 2008
Wisconsin Offers “FREE” Birth Control with Your Money
Wisconsin Offers "FREE" Birth Control with Your Money
"Free birth control is only a phone call away," assures a sunny female radio voice. "Total bill: zero. It's not a mistake. It's the Waiver!"
So asserts the web site of Wisconsin's Family Planning Health Services (FPHS), a federally funded "reproductive health" group that offers contraception and STD testing to low-income women and minors. The "Waiver" that the radio voice refers to is the Family Planning Waiver Program, a tax-funded service.
According to its web site FPHS, this "not for profit" organization is dedicated to providing "high quality, affordable and accessible reproductive and nutritional services to women and their families." FPHS insists that "knowledge of sexuality is preferable to ignorance and that prevention and health promotion are the means of achieving our purposes for people of all ages and incomes." While they do not offer abortions, they advertise "birth control supplies, STI testing, Pap smears, exams and more . . . "
According to a puff piece published in the Marquette Tribune, the federally-funded FPHS has "saved" the state of Wisconsin $487 million in the state health budget between 2003 and 2007. The article quotes Lon Newman, the executive director of the Wisconsin FPHS, praising the program because "on average, women spend $260 on reproductive care a year," and that "free birth control is more effective than condoms or crossing your fingers."
So, not only are underage and low-income women being given free birth control, but this means that Wisconsin has successfully passed the buck from its own taxpayers to the greater taxpaying public. In other words, you and I are paying for this program, while Wisconsin residents get off essentially scot-free.
Although the program is touted as being geared toward low-income women, its focus seems almost explicitly to extend no-cost birth control toward a promiscuous college scene. According to the Marquette Tribune article, Lon Newman himself was swift to point out that "all full-time students automatically qualify for the program that pays for all reproductive services except abortions," saying that "you can enroll presumptively and then you have three months to prove eligibility . . . Once you're enrolled you are active for a year."
On a troubling side note, Newman's claim that FPHS does not offer abortions is also false because FPHS does offer "emergency contraceptive pills," or ECPs. ECPs work by preventing the newly conceived human being from implanting in the uterine wall in the days following sexual intercourse, and are thus a form of abortion. FPHS predictably touts the well-worn 1960's-era statement by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that redefines pregnancy as beginning at implantation, rather than at conception. Thus, they assert, ECPs "work before fertilization and not after a woman is already pregnant. When a woman is already pregnant, emergency contraception does not work."
ECPs in particular are presented in such a way that seems like a direct appeal to college students. According to the web site, "each year, millions of women have unprotected intercourse and are left, in the days that follow, with the fear of pregnancy and the feeling that nothing can be done. Emergency contraception gives these women an option to avoid pregnancy." The site goes on to encourage youth to stock up on ECPs, saying that "since ECPs are more effective the earlier after unprotected intercourse they are taken, obtaining emergency contraceptive pills from a clinician before they are needed is a terrific idea. Then if the need arises, ECPs can be used without delay [emphasis original]."
Even more troubling, though, is the fact that the Unintended Pregnancy Reduction Act, sponsored by none other than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, would mandate this particular form of taxpayer-funded abuse in the remaining states and territories. Operating on the assumption that these programs save the States money, shortsighted politicians and leaders forget that children are not diseases to be "prevented." Rather, aside from the philosophical and theological value of each human life, each of these "averted" children is an unfathomable loss to the state's economic, social, and political well-being.
In short, while it may be expensive to raise a child, it is even more expensive, in the long run, to prevent one from being raised. Children are the world's ultimate resource. If taxpayers pay for the destruction of children, they are ultimately funding their own economic, social, and spiritual collapse.
Contact: Colin Mason
Source: Population Research Institute
Source URL: http://www.pop.org
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
"Free birth control is only a phone call away," assures a sunny female radio voice. "Total bill: zero. It's not a mistake. It's the Waiver!"
So asserts the web site of Wisconsin's Family Planning Health Services (FPHS), a federally funded "reproductive health" group that offers contraception and STD testing to low-income women and minors. The "Waiver" that the radio voice refers to is the Family Planning Waiver Program, a tax-funded service.
According to its web site FPHS, this "not for profit" organization is dedicated to providing "high quality, affordable and accessible reproductive and nutritional services to women and their families." FPHS insists that "knowledge of sexuality is preferable to ignorance and that prevention and health promotion are the means of achieving our purposes for people of all ages and incomes." While they do not offer abortions, they advertise "birth control supplies, STI testing, Pap smears, exams and more . . . "
According to a puff piece published in the Marquette Tribune, the federally-funded FPHS has "saved" the state of Wisconsin $487 million in the state health budget between 2003 and 2007. The article quotes Lon Newman, the executive director of the Wisconsin FPHS, praising the program because "on average, women spend $260 on reproductive care a year," and that "free birth control is more effective than condoms or crossing your fingers."
So, not only are underage and low-income women being given free birth control, but this means that Wisconsin has successfully passed the buck from its own taxpayers to the greater taxpaying public. In other words, you and I are paying for this program, while Wisconsin residents get off essentially scot-free.
Although the program is touted as being geared toward low-income women, its focus seems almost explicitly to extend no-cost birth control toward a promiscuous college scene. According to the Marquette Tribune article, Lon Newman himself was swift to point out that "all full-time students automatically qualify for the program that pays for all reproductive services except abortions," saying that "you can enroll presumptively and then you have three months to prove eligibility . . . Once you're enrolled you are active for a year."
On a troubling side note, Newman's claim that FPHS does not offer abortions is also false because FPHS does offer "emergency contraceptive pills," or ECPs. ECPs work by preventing the newly conceived human being from implanting in the uterine wall in the days following sexual intercourse, and are thus a form of abortion. FPHS predictably touts the well-worn 1960's-era statement by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that redefines pregnancy as beginning at implantation, rather than at conception. Thus, they assert, ECPs "work before fertilization and not after a woman is already pregnant. When a woman is already pregnant, emergency contraception does not work."
ECPs in particular are presented in such a way that seems like a direct appeal to college students. According to the web site, "each year, millions of women have unprotected intercourse and are left, in the days that follow, with the fear of pregnancy and the feeling that nothing can be done. Emergency contraception gives these women an option to avoid pregnancy." The site goes on to encourage youth to stock up on ECPs, saying that "since ECPs are more effective the earlier after unprotected intercourse they are taken, obtaining emergency contraceptive pills from a clinician before they are needed is a terrific idea. Then if the need arises, ECPs can be used without delay [emphasis original]."
Even more troubling, though, is the fact that the Unintended Pregnancy Reduction Act, sponsored by none other than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, would mandate this particular form of taxpayer-funded abuse in the remaining states and territories. Operating on the assumption that these programs save the States money, shortsighted politicians and leaders forget that children are not diseases to be "prevented." Rather, aside from the philosophical and theological value of each human life, each of these "averted" children is an unfathomable loss to the state's economic, social, and political well-being.
In short, while it may be expensive to raise a child, it is even more expensive, in the long run, to prevent one from being raised. Children are the world's ultimate resource. If taxpayers pay for the destruction of children, they are ultimately funding their own economic, social, and spiritual collapse.
Contact: Colin Mason
Source: Population Research Institute
Source URL: http://www.pop.org
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Video Catches Planned Parenthood Covering Up Statutory Rape
Video Catches Planned Parenthood Covering Up Statutory Rape
Students for Life of America (SFLA) has released a video exposing two Planned Parenthood clinics in Winston-Salem and Charlotte, North Carolina covering up statutory rape of young girls.
In June of 2008, two college women volunteering for Students for Life of America entered two clinics in North Carolina posing as underage girls, 15 and 14, who just had unprotected sex with their mother's live-in boyfriend who was in his 30s. Each girl told the clinic workers that he suggested she come get the morning the Morning After Pill. According to N.C. Gen. Statue 7B-301 and 7B-101, this information was enough to trigger North Carolina statutory rape reporting laws, obligating any person who learned of this story to report the crime to authorities.
In both visits, Planned Parenthood staffers acknowledged that what was happening to the girls was statutory rape and in one case even repeatedly admitted that they were required to report the incident.
However, after the visits, Students for Life of America filed North Carolina Public Records Requests to find out if the Planned Parenthood locations had reported the crimes. SFLA has obtained and posted documents, which show that the crimes were not reported to authorities in either Charlotte or Winston-Salem. To view the reports from police department authorities, go here: http://www.studentsforlife.org/index.php/plannedparenthoodin...
In addition to covering up the statutory rape of these young girls by failing to report, both Planned Parenthoods were willing to help them get on birth control without their parents' knowledge, which would prolong the abuse while covering evidence. One staffer in Charlotte even said to the girl, "You can do it now," and set an appointment for the minor to obtain birth control the following week.
Further, both clinics told the girls that anyone over the age of 18 could simply go to a drug store and buy the Morning After Pill for them, giving the girls' rapists a tool to further cover their crime of rape.
SFLA's Executive Director, Kristan Hawkins commented on the videos today saying, "These videos are simply shocking. That Planned Parenthood staffers acknowledged the girls were being raped and then did not report the crime is horrific. They allowed these girls to go home to their rapists and even confirmed that their rapists could get the Morning After Pill for them to cover their crimes."
Tom McClusky, Vice President of Government Affairs for the Family Research Council, responded to the investigation, "As long as Planned Parenthood puts their fealty to abortion on demand above protecting young girls from statutory rapists then investigations such as the ones done by SFL will be needed."
Click here to view the video
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Source URL: www.LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Students for Life of America (SFLA) has released a video exposing two Planned Parenthood clinics in Winston-Salem and Charlotte, North Carolina covering up statutory rape of young girls.
In June of 2008, two college women volunteering for Students for Life of America entered two clinics in North Carolina posing as underage girls, 15 and 14, who just had unprotected sex with their mother's live-in boyfriend who was in his 30s. Each girl told the clinic workers that he suggested she come get the morning the Morning After Pill. According to N.C. Gen. Statue 7B-301 and 7B-101, this information was enough to trigger North Carolina statutory rape reporting laws, obligating any person who learned of this story to report the crime to authorities.
In both visits, Planned Parenthood staffers acknowledged that what was happening to the girls was statutory rape and in one case even repeatedly admitted that they were required to report the incident.
However, after the visits, Students for Life of America filed North Carolina Public Records Requests to find out if the Planned Parenthood locations had reported the crimes. SFLA has obtained and posted documents, which show that the crimes were not reported to authorities in either Charlotte or Winston-Salem. To view the reports from police department authorities, go here: http://www.studentsforlife.org/index.php/plannedparenthoodin...
In addition to covering up the statutory rape of these young girls by failing to report, both Planned Parenthoods were willing to help them get on birth control without their parents' knowledge, which would prolong the abuse while covering evidence. One staffer in Charlotte even said to the girl, "You can do it now," and set an appointment for the minor to obtain birth control the following week.
Further, both clinics told the girls that anyone over the age of 18 could simply go to a drug store and buy the Morning After Pill for them, giving the girls' rapists a tool to further cover their crime of rape.
SFLA's Executive Director, Kristan Hawkins commented on the videos today saying, "These videos are simply shocking. That Planned Parenthood staffers acknowledged the girls were being raped and then did not report the crime is horrific. They allowed these girls to go home to their rapists and even confirmed that their rapists could get the Morning After Pill for them to cover their crimes."
Tom McClusky, Vice President of Government Affairs for the Family Research Council, responded to the investigation, "As long as Planned Parenthood puts their fealty to abortion on demand above protecting young girls from statutory rapists then investigations such as the ones done by SFL will be needed."
Click here to view the video
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Source URL: www.LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Law to Protect Disabled Children Awaits President’s Signature
Law to Protect Disabled Children Awaits President's Signature
An amendment to the Public Health Service Act that will provide support and resources for parents whose children have been pre-natally or post-natally diagnosed with Down syndrome or other genetic conditions could become law, if President Bush signs it, or if Congress remains in session so the legislation does not expire from constitutional limits.
The Pre-natally and Post-natally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act, introduced by Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), was passed by Congress on Sept. 25 and delivered to the president on Sept. 29.
According to the Constitution, the bill will become law in 10 days, with or without the president's signature, unless Congress adjourns, resulting in a pocket veto of the act.
But Brownback's Washington staff told CNSNews.com they are confident that Bush will sign the bill sometime this week, and even if doesn't, it probably won't fall victim to a pocket veto status because Congress is likely to continue its pro forma sessions – meeting briefly to avert such legislative losses – over the coming weeks.
The law would require that families who receive a diagnosis of Down Syndrome, spina bifida, cystic fibrosis or another disability, pre-natally or up to one year after birth, receive the most accurate information about the disability and be connected with support services and networks.
It also would generate grant money to facilitate adherence to the law, with an emphasis on funding partnerships between health care professionals and disability advocacy groups.
"As a society, we must offer as much protection as we can to 'the least of these,'" Brownback said when he and Kennedy introduced the legislation in July.
"When a mother receives the news that her unborn child may be born with a disability, she should be supplied with current and reliable information about the many options available for caring for children with disabilities," he added.
The bill also would provide for the development of a national clearinghouse on information for parents of children with disabilities, further develop national and local support systems, and create a registry of families willing to adopt children with disabilities.
"One of the hardest moments in the life of an expectant mother is when she receives news that she is going to have a child with special needs," Kennedy said. "Access to the best support and information about the condition and the quality of life for a child born with that condition can make all the difference to a woman trying to make an informed and difficult decision."
The cost of the bill is estimated to be less than $1 per taxpayer over the 2009-2013 period.
Calls to the White House to inquire about the president's plans for signing the bill were not returned by press time.
Contact: Penny Starr
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 7, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
An amendment to the Public Health Service Act that will provide support and resources for parents whose children have been pre-natally or post-natally diagnosed with Down syndrome or other genetic conditions could become law, if President Bush signs it, or if Congress remains in session so the legislation does not expire from constitutional limits.
The Pre-natally and Post-natally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act, introduced by Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), was passed by Congress on Sept. 25 and delivered to the president on Sept. 29.
According to the Constitution, the bill will become law in 10 days, with or without the president's signature, unless Congress adjourns, resulting in a pocket veto of the act.
But Brownback's Washington staff told CNSNews.com they are confident that Bush will sign the bill sometime this week, and even if doesn't, it probably won't fall victim to a pocket veto status because Congress is likely to continue its pro forma sessions – meeting briefly to avert such legislative losses – over the coming weeks.
The law would require that families who receive a diagnosis of Down Syndrome, spina bifida, cystic fibrosis or another disability, pre-natally or up to one year after birth, receive the most accurate information about the disability and be connected with support services and networks.
It also would generate grant money to facilitate adherence to the law, with an emphasis on funding partnerships between health care professionals and disability advocacy groups.
"As a society, we must offer as much protection as we can to 'the least of these,'" Brownback said when he and Kennedy introduced the legislation in July.
"When a mother receives the news that her unborn child may be born with a disability, she should be supplied with current and reliable information about the many options available for caring for children with disabilities," he added.
The bill also would provide for the development of a national clearinghouse on information for parents of children with disabilities, further develop national and local support systems, and create a registry of families willing to adopt children with disabilities.
"One of the hardest moments in the life of an expectant mother is when she receives news that she is going to have a child with special needs," Kennedy said. "Access to the best support and information about the condition and the quality of life for a child born with that condition can make all the difference to a woman trying to make an informed and difficult decision."
The cost of the bill is estimated to be less than $1 per taxpayer over the 2009-2013 period.
Calls to the White House to inquire about the president's plans for signing the bill were not returned by press time.
Contact: Penny Starr
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 7, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Dueling Petitions on Abortion Target the UN
Dueling Petitions on Abortion Target the UN
Almost a year after one of the world’s biggest private abortion providers launched a global “safe abortion” drive, an online petition intended to be handed to the United Nations in two months’ time has been signed by fewer than 600 people.
Another petition, launched by pro-lifers as a counter-move, obtained more than 17,400 signatures in its first week.
Both initiatives have their sights set on the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the bedrock of international human rights.
The organizers of the two petitions plan to present them when world governments gather for a special U.N. General Assembly session to mark the anniversary, on December 10.
But the similarity ends there.
The “Global Call to Action” advanced by Marie Stopes International (MSI) and partner non-governmental organizations calls for “women’s access to legal, safe abortion to be recognized as a fundamental human right.”
The “U.N. Petition for the Unborn Child” being promoted by the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), urges U.N. member states to interpret article three of the UDHR – which upholds “the right to life” – as protecting the unborn child from abortion.
The MSI-led campaign originated from a “global safe abortion conference” which it organized in London last October, and was attended by 800 public health experts, government representatives and activists from more than 60 countries.
MSI, which describes itself as “the world’s leading provider of safe abortion services,” launched the petition at the conference, and many of the signatories were conference participants.
“Organizers plan to continue to collect signatures online and will also seek institutional endorsement of the Call to Action, which will then be introduced at key inter-governmental meetings as a tool to influence policy and generate funding to tackle the issue of unsafe abortion,” it says on a Web site dedicated to the drive.
Invitations to MSI to comment on the number of signatures its initiative has garnered – 585 as of Tuesday – drew no response. MSI was also asked about the extent of support received to date via non-electronic, paper copies of the petition.
C-FAM president Austin Ruse was upbeat Monday on the progress of the pro-life petition.
“The pro-life world internationally is very tuned in to the dangers to the unborn child coming from the United Nations and its attendant agencies, committees, and non-governmental organizations,” he said.
“We have known all along that our message is supported by the people on the ground. The pro-abortion message is supported by and large by elites. This is why our petition is doing better than theirs.”
Ruse is urging more and ongoing support for the petition, which has been translated into French, Spanish and Dutch and will shortly be available in other language versions too.
’When do human rights begin?
C-FAM and other pro-life campaigners have long voiced concern about attempts by U.N. agencies, reproductive rights NGOs and academics to inject a “right” to abortion into the UDHR and other international rights instruments.
The debate effectively pits the “human rights begin at birth” argument against one that maintains that “human rights begin in the womb,” and arises from the dispute over when human life begins.
The issue emerged in the U.S. presidential campaign in August when Saddleback pastor Rick Warren asked the candidates at what point each believed a baby is entitled to human rights.
“At the moment of conception,” replied Republican Sen. John McCain, adding that “this presidency will have pro-life policies.” Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said that “answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade,” and went on to say that he was “pro-choice” and that his goal would be to reduce the number of abortions.
Reproductive rights advocates say that, since the UDHR begins with the words, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” and does not explicitly refer to life in the womb, it applies therefore only to individuals once born.
A woman’s right to life, as well as other human rights, are at risk in situations where restrictive abortion laws are in place, they argue.
Other U.N. treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), are similarly interpreted as not clearly attaching human rights to an individual prior to birth.
And, they contend, a reference in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women to the right of women to “decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights” presumes the right to choose abortion.
Among the counter argument is that none of these treaties explicitly refers to abortion as a right, and that “the right to life” enshrined in the UDHR should apply to the unborn baby’s life as well.
Moreover, pro-lifers note that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, which invokes the UDHR, states that “the child … needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.”
The Bush administration has on several occasion clashed with other parties at the U.N. over vague terms like “reproductive rights,” “sexual rights,” and “reproductive health services” in international documents – terms interpreted by some to refer to abortion.
In some cases, despite supporting the broader measure under consideration, the U.S. has opposed resolutions after failing in a bid to have such wording amended or removed.
“There is no fundamental right to abortion,” U.S. ambassador Ellen Sauerbrey told a press conference in New York in 2005. “And yet it keeps coming up, largely driven by NGOs trying to hijack the term [“sexual rights”] and trying to make it into a definition.”
In internal memos not intended for public consumption – but introduced onto the Congressional Record by a pro-life lawmaker – the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) in 2003 said, “We are achieving incremental recognition of values without a huge amount of scrutiny from the [pro-life] opposition.”
“These lower profile victories will gradually put us in a strong position to assert a broad consensus around our assertions,” CRR said. “[The] overarching goal is to ensure that governments worldwide guarantee reproductive rights out of an understanding that they are bound to do so.”
Contact: Patrick Goodenough
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 7, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Almost a year after one of the world’s biggest private abortion providers launched a global “safe abortion” drive, an online petition intended to be handed to the United Nations in two months’ time has been signed by fewer than 600 people.
Another petition, launched by pro-lifers as a counter-move, obtained more than 17,400 signatures in its first week.
Both initiatives have their sights set on the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the bedrock of international human rights.
The organizers of the two petitions plan to present them when world governments gather for a special U.N. General Assembly session to mark the anniversary, on December 10.
But the similarity ends there.
The “Global Call to Action” advanced by Marie Stopes International (MSI) and partner non-governmental organizations calls for “women’s access to legal, safe abortion to be recognized as a fundamental human right.”
The “U.N. Petition for the Unborn Child” being promoted by the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), urges U.N. member states to interpret article three of the UDHR – which upholds “the right to life” – as protecting the unborn child from abortion.
The MSI-led campaign originated from a “global safe abortion conference” which it organized in London last October, and was attended by 800 public health experts, government representatives and activists from more than 60 countries.
MSI, which describes itself as “the world’s leading provider of safe abortion services,” launched the petition at the conference, and many of the signatories were conference participants.
“Organizers plan to continue to collect signatures online and will also seek institutional endorsement of the Call to Action, which will then be introduced at key inter-governmental meetings as a tool to influence policy and generate funding to tackle the issue of unsafe abortion,” it says on a Web site dedicated to the drive.
Invitations to MSI to comment on the number of signatures its initiative has garnered – 585 as of Tuesday – drew no response. MSI was also asked about the extent of support received to date via non-electronic, paper copies of the petition.
C-FAM president Austin Ruse was upbeat Monday on the progress of the pro-life petition.
“The pro-life world internationally is very tuned in to the dangers to the unborn child coming from the United Nations and its attendant agencies, committees, and non-governmental organizations,” he said.
“We have known all along that our message is supported by the people on the ground. The pro-abortion message is supported by and large by elites. This is why our petition is doing better than theirs.”
Ruse is urging more and ongoing support for the petition, which has been translated into French, Spanish and Dutch and will shortly be available in other language versions too.
’When do human rights begin?
C-FAM and other pro-life campaigners have long voiced concern about attempts by U.N. agencies, reproductive rights NGOs and academics to inject a “right” to abortion into the UDHR and other international rights instruments.
The debate effectively pits the “human rights begin at birth” argument against one that maintains that “human rights begin in the womb,” and arises from the dispute over when human life begins.
The issue emerged in the U.S. presidential campaign in August when Saddleback pastor Rick Warren asked the candidates at what point each believed a baby is entitled to human rights.
“At the moment of conception,” replied Republican Sen. John McCain, adding that “this presidency will have pro-life policies.” Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said that “answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade,” and went on to say that he was “pro-choice” and that his goal would be to reduce the number of abortions.
Reproductive rights advocates say that, since the UDHR begins with the words, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” and does not explicitly refer to life in the womb, it applies therefore only to individuals once born.
A woman’s right to life, as well as other human rights, are at risk in situations where restrictive abortion laws are in place, they argue.
Other U.N. treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), are similarly interpreted as not clearly attaching human rights to an individual prior to birth.
And, they contend, a reference in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women to the right of women to “decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights” presumes the right to choose abortion.
Among the counter argument is that none of these treaties explicitly refers to abortion as a right, and that “the right to life” enshrined in the UDHR should apply to the unborn baby’s life as well.
Moreover, pro-lifers note that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, which invokes the UDHR, states that “the child … needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.”
The Bush administration has on several occasion clashed with other parties at the U.N. over vague terms like “reproductive rights,” “sexual rights,” and “reproductive health services” in international documents – terms interpreted by some to refer to abortion.
In some cases, despite supporting the broader measure under consideration, the U.S. has opposed resolutions after failing in a bid to have such wording amended or removed.
“There is no fundamental right to abortion,” U.S. ambassador Ellen Sauerbrey told a press conference in New York in 2005. “And yet it keeps coming up, largely driven by NGOs trying to hijack the term [“sexual rights”] and trying to make it into a definition.”
In internal memos not intended for public consumption – but introduced onto the Congressional Record by a pro-life lawmaker – the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) in 2003 said, “We are achieving incremental recognition of values without a huge amount of scrutiny from the [pro-life] opposition.”
“These lower profile victories will gradually put us in a strong position to assert a broad consensus around our assertions,” CRR said. “[The] overarching goal is to ensure that governments worldwide guarantee reproductive rights out of an understanding that they are bound to do so.”
Contact: Patrick Goodenough
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 7, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Knights of Columbus airs pro-life ‘heartbeat’ radio ad
Knights of Columbus airs pro-life 'heartbeat' radio ad
A new Knights of Columbus radio spot featuring the heartbeat of a 10-week-old unborn child and urging listeners to vote pro-life has begun airing on radio stations around the U.S.
As the heartbeat plays, a woman's voice says: "Listening to this makes me wonder – why would anyone question that her life has begun?"
"Vote your heart. Vote Pro-Life," it concludes.
"The fact that the child whose heartbeat we hear is alive is simply a matter of science," Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson said in announcing the beginning of the ad campaign.
"We believe that it is vital that America's pro-life community make it clear that they will reserve their votes for candidates of either party who are committed to protecting life from conception to natural death," he continued.
The ad will be broadcast until the November 4 U.S. elections. A similar ad is planned for broadcast in Canada before the country's October 14 election.
Click here to read the press release.
Contact: None
Source: Catholic News Agency
Source URL: www.catholicna.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
A new Knights of Columbus radio spot featuring the heartbeat of a 10-week-old unborn child and urging listeners to vote pro-life has begun airing on radio stations around the U.S.
As the heartbeat plays, a woman's voice says: "Listening to this makes me wonder – why would anyone question that her life has begun?"
"Vote your heart. Vote Pro-Life," it concludes.
"The fact that the child whose heartbeat we hear is alive is simply a matter of science," Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson said in announcing the beginning of the ad campaign.
"We believe that it is vital that America's pro-life community make it clear that they will reserve their votes for candidates of either party who are committed to protecting life from conception to natural death," he continued.
The ad will be broadcast until the November 4 U.S. elections. A similar ad is planned for broadcast in Canada before the country's October 14 election.
Click here to read the press release.
Contact: None
Source: Catholic News Agency
Source URL: www.catholicna.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Obama's "brazen scam" on abortion exposed by NRLC
Obama's "brazen scam" on abortion exposed by NRLC
Barack Obama's sweeping agenda for pro-abortion policy changes examined by NRLC's Douglas Johnson in National Review Online
The Obama campaign and its allies have adopted an extensive "messaging strategy" that seeks to persuade religiously committed Americans that Obama has a middle-of-the-road position on abortion policy and will promote "abortion reduction."
Douglas Johnson, longtime legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and author of an article published today on National Review Online, titled "Unholy Messaging," calls the Obama effort "a brazen scam."
"The scam depends on the Obama campaign, with cooperation from the mainstream news media, deflecting attention away from Obama's actual record, and from his extensive commitments to pro-abortion interest groups," Johnson said. "Barack Obama is firmly committed to an agenda of sweeping pro-abortion policy changes that, if implemented, will surely greatly increase the number of abortions performed."
Johnson noted that a few short months ago, during his primary contest, Obama and his advocates were boasting about his record of leadership in opposition to legislation to ban partial-birth abortions, to protect infants born alive during abortions, and to require parental notification for minors seeking abortions, among other pro-life bills. "Those boasts were well-founded, and the current effort to re-package Obama as a moderate is a brazen scam," Johnson said.
The Obama "messaging" campaign includes a recently launched "Faith, Family & Values Tour" that will visit Colorado, Indiana, North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Florida, New Mexico, Virginia, and Wisconsin. In addition, various independent groups are disseminating advertising and literature that advances the same strategy.
Among the specific Obama positions documented in Johnson's article (which contains extensive hyperlinks to documentation):
-- Obama is a cosponsor of the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA, S. 1173), which Johnson calls "the most sweeping piece of pro-abortion legislation ever proposed in Congress." The FOCA is a bill that would make partial-birth abortion legal again, strike down restrictions on taxpayer funding of abortion, and nullify virtually every state and federal law or policy that would in any way "interfere with" access to abortion, including parental notification laws. In a letter sent to every member of Congress by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on September 19, Cardinal Justin Rigali wrote, "No one who sponsors or supports legislation like FOCA can credibly claim to be part of a good-faith discussion on how to reduce abortions.” In a speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund on July 17, 2007, Obama said, "The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."
-- Obama advocates the nullification of state laws requiring parental notification or consent for a minor daughter's abortion, which would be one of the effects of the FOCA. Moreover, since entering the U.S. Senate, Obama has had two opportunities to vote directly on the question of parental notification for interstate abortions on minors, and he voted "no" on both occasions.
-- Obama advocates repeal of the Hyde Amendment, the law that since 1976 has blocked almost all federal funding of abortion, even though both pro-life and pro-abortion analysts agree that this law has prevented many abortions. By even the most conservative estimate, there are more than one million Americans alive today because of the Hyde Amendment. "Because the Hyde Amendment must be renewed annually, a new president hostile to the Hyde Amendment could quickly place it in jeopardy," Johnson observed. The FOCA would also nullify all state laws restricting state funding of elective abortion.
-- In a written response to a pro-abortion advocacy group, the Obama campaign said that Obama is opposed to continuing current federal funding for "crisis pregnancy centers," which provide needed assistance to many thousands of pregnant women.
-- NRLC has thoroughly documented that in the Illinois state Senate, Obama led the opposition to legislation to protect babies who are born alive during abortions, and persisted in his opposition even after Congress had enacted a virtually identical federal bill without a single dissenting vote. Obama has in numerous ways actively misrepresented the content of this legislation, and his actions on it, but even when such misrepresentations were proved by NRLC and others, the major media simply let Obama abandon them and fall back to a different set of equally misleading claims.
In his article, Johnson criticizes recent coverage in the "mainstream news media," which, he writes, "have, with few exceptions, been very compliant with Obama's recent efforts to downplay his hard-line pro-abortion history and policy commitments, for the purpose of winning the general election." Typically, journalists simply describe Obama's position as "supports abortion rights," without giving details regarding his advocacy of federal funding of abortion, invalidation of parental notification laws, and the rest.
Contact: None
Source: National Right to Life
Source URL: www.nrlc.org
Publish Date: October 7, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Barack Obama's sweeping agenda for pro-abortion policy changes examined by NRLC's Douglas Johnson in National Review Online
The Obama campaign and its allies have adopted an extensive "messaging strategy" that seeks to persuade religiously committed Americans that Obama has a middle-of-the-road position on abortion policy and will promote "abortion reduction."
Douglas Johnson, longtime legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and author of an article published today on National Review Online, titled "Unholy Messaging," calls the Obama effort "a brazen scam."
"The scam depends on the Obama campaign, with cooperation from the mainstream news media, deflecting attention away from Obama's actual record, and from his extensive commitments to pro-abortion interest groups," Johnson said. "Barack Obama is firmly committed to an agenda of sweeping pro-abortion policy changes that, if implemented, will surely greatly increase the number of abortions performed."
Johnson noted that a few short months ago, during his primary contest, Obama and his advocates were boasting about his record of leadership in opposition to legislation to ban partial-birth abortions, to protect infants born alive during abortions, and to require parental notification for minors seeking abortions, among other pro-life bills. "Those boasts were well-founded, and the current effort to re-package Obama as a moderate is a brazen scam," Johnson said.
The Obama "messaging" campaign includes a recently launched "Faith, Family & Values Tour" that will visit Colorado, Indiana, North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Florida, New Mexico, Virginia, and Wisconsin. In addition, various independent groups are disseminating advertising and literature that advances the same strategy.
Among the specific Obama positions documented in Johnson's article (which contains extensive hyperlinks to documentation):
-- Obama is a cosponsor of the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA, S. 1173), which Johnson calls "the most sweeping piece of pro-abortion legislation ever proposed in Congress." The FOCA is a bill that would make partial-birth abortion legal again, strike down restrictions on taxpayer funding of abortion, and nullify virtually every state and federal law or policy that would in any way "interfere with" access to abortion, including parental notification laws. In a letter sent to every member of Congress by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on September 19, Cardinal Justin Rigali wrote, "No one who sponsors or supports legislation like FOCA can credibly claim to be part of a good-faith discussion on how to reduce abortions.” In a speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund on July 17, 2007, Obama said, "The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."
-- Obama advocates the nullification of state laws requiring parental notification or consent for a minor daughter's abortion, which would be one of the effects of the FOCA. Moreover, since entering the U.S. Senate, Obama has had two opportunities to vote directly on the question of parental notification for interstate abortions on minors, and he voted "no" on both occasions.
-- Obama advocates repeal of the Hyde Amendment, the law that since 1976 has blocked almost all federal funding of abortion, even though both pro-life and pro-abortion analysts agree that this law has prevented many abortions. By even the most conservative estimate, there are more than one million Americans alive today because of the Hyde Amendment. "Because the Hyde Amendment must be renewed annually, a new president hostile to the Hyde Amendment could quickly place it in jeopardy," Johnson observed. The FOCA would also nullify all state laws restricting state funding of elective abortion.
-- In a written response to a pro-abortion advocacy group, the Obama campaign said that Obama is opposed to continuing current federal funding for "crisis pregnancy centers," which provide needed assistance to many thousands of pregnant women.
-- NRLC has thoroughly documented that in the Illinois state Senate, Obama led the opposition to legislation to protect babies who are born alive during abortions, and persisted in his opposition even after Congress had enacted a virtually identical federal bill without a single dissenting vote. Obama has in numerous ways actively misrepresented the content of this legislation, and his actions on it, but even when such misrepresentations were proved by NRLC and others, the major media simply let Obama abandon them and fall back to a different set of equally misleading claims.
In his article, Johnson criticizes recent coverage in the "mainstream news media," which, he writes, "have, with few exceptions, been very compliant with Obama's recent efforts to downplay his hard-line pro-abortion history and policy commitments, for the purpose of winning the general election." Typically, journalists simply describe Obama's position as "supports abortion rights," without giving details regarding his advocacy of federal funding of abortion, invalidation of parental notification laws, and the rest.
Contact: None
Source: National Right to Life
Source URL: www.nrlc.org
Publish Date: October 7, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
October 6, 2008
PRO-LIFE EVENTS
PRO-LIFE EVENTS
Right to Life of Adams County Respect Life Dinner
Right to Life of Adams County cordially invites you to our RESPECT LIFE DINNER
Where: Knights of Columbus/Fr. McGivney Hall
700 South 36th Street
Quincy, Illinois
When: Monday, October 20, 2008 - Reception: 6:00 p.m. - Dinner: 6:30 p.m.
Keynote Speaker: Scott Klusendorf, President of Life Training Institute presents: “The Art of Pro-Life Persuasion”
This year's dinner promises to be an evening of good food and camaraderie, coupled with a very valuable pro-life presentation by our guest speaker. We are proud to announce that we have booked Scott Klusendorf of Atlanta, GA, President of the Life Training Institute, as our main speaker. Acknowledged to be one of the best pro-life presenters in the United States, Mr. Klusendorf has a long and successful record of challenging all in his audiences to defend the sanctity of human life, and of preparing them to persuasively defend their views to others.
$10.00 per person $17.00 2 persons $65.00 table of 8
All proceeds to benefit Right to Life Programs
For more information, please call: 217-224-5483
Arms of Love Pregnancy Resource Center Walk for Life
The Arms of Love Pregnancy Resource Center in Alton, IL is having their Walk for Life event on Sat. Oct. 25 beginning at 9 a.m. at Haskell Park on Henry and 12 Streets.
For more information, please call Ron Wenzel (Walk Director) at 618-466-1690
Pro-Life Pastors Dinner
Knox County Right to Life will honor Pro-Life Pastors and other dedicated pro-lifers at this dinner on October 25.
It will be at 7:00 p.m. at the Corpus Christi Parish Center. The evening will include a dinner and a short presentation by Kenneth McCaughey, who is the father of the Iowa Septuplets. Many pro-life materials and information will be available that evening.
Reservations are necessary for this dinner. For more information, please call Pat at 309-343-2852 or Helen at 309-342-4383.
Festival of Life featuring Kenneth McCaughey
Father of the Iowa Septuplets “The Seven from Heaven”
Come early to see the presentation by the
Galesburg Christian School at 6:30 p.m.
Sunday October 26, 2008
Bethel Baptist Chruch
1196 N. Academy St., Galesburg, IL
*Admission is Free and Refreshments will be served
Sponsored by Knox County Right to Life
Click here to download a flyer
If you know of, or are part of a pro-life organization having an event or attending an event including county fairs, please let us know about it and we will post in this newsletter and our website reaching over 250,000 people a month. Just click here to e-mail us
Right to Life of Adams County Respect Life Dinner
Right to Life of Adams County cordially invites you to our RESPECT LIFE DINNER
Where: Knights of Columbus/Fr. McGivney Hall
700 South 36th Street
Quincy, Illinois
When: Monday, October 20, 2008 - Reception: 6:00 p.m. - Dinner: 6:30 p.m.
Keynote Speaker: Scott Klusendorf, President of Life Training Institute presents: “The Art of Pro-Life Persuasion”
This year's dinner promises to be an evening of good food and camaraderie, coupled with a very valuable pro-life presentation by our guest speaker. We are proud to announce that we have booked Scott Klusendorf of Atlanta, GA, President of the Life Training Institute, as our main speaker. Acknowledged to be one of the best pro-life presenters in the United States, Mr. Klusendorf has a long and successful record of challenging all in his audiences to defend the sanctity of human life, and of preparing them to persuasively defend their views to others.
$10.00 per person $17.00 2 persons $65.00 table of 8
All proceeds to benefit Right to Life Programs
For more information, please call: 217-224-5483
Arms of Love Pregnancy Resource Center Walk for Life
The Arms of Love Pregnancy Resource Center in Alton, IL is having their Walk for Life event on Sat. Oct. 25 beginning at 9 a.m. at Haskell Park on Henry and 12 Streets.
For more information, please call Ron Wenzel (Walk Director) at 618-466-1690
Pro-Life Pastors Dinner
Knox County Right to Life will honor Pro-Life Pastors and other dedicated pro-lifers at this dinner on October 25.
It will be at 7:00 p.m. at the Corpus Christi Parish Center. The evening will include a dinner and a short presentation by Kenneth McCaughey, who is the father of the Iowa Septuplets. Many pro-life materials and information will be available that evening.
Reservations are necessary for this dinner. For more information, please call Pat at 309-343-2852 or Helen at 309-342-4383.
Festival of Life featuring Kenneth McCaughey
Father of the Iowa Septuplets “The Seven from Heaven”
Come early to see the presentation by the
Galesburg Christian School at 6:30 p.m.
Sunday October 26, 2008
Bethel Baptist Chruch
1196 N. Academy St., Galesburg, IL
*Admission is Free and Refreshments will be served
Sponsored by Knox County Right to Life
Click here to download a flyer
If you know of, or are part of a pro-life organization having an event or attending an event including county fairs, please let us know about it and we will post in this newsletter and our website reaching over 250,000 people a month. Just click here to e-mail us
NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY
NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY
Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of The Illinois Federation for Right to Life. They are presented only for your information.
Aurora Planned Parenthood Clinic Open A Year
It's been a year since Planned Parenthood opened a clinic in Aurora, and people on both sides of the abortion debate say they have seen success in that time. Planned Parenthood of Illinois CEO Steve Trombley says demand for medical services has been greater than expected, and less than 10 percent of those services are abortion-related. On the other side, Pro-Life Action League spokesman Eric Scheidler says "sidewalk counselors" offering information have succeeded by sustaining protests for more than a year.
Click here to read the entire article online
Taxpayers Could Pay the Bill for Abortion Ban Fight, Even if State Gets Pro-Bono Legal Team
Without an agreement to cover the state's legal fees, even Representative Carl Wimmer admits an abortion ban he'll sponsor next session is doomed to fail. "Well let's put it this way, I don't think we can get the bill passed in a time where we are seeing budget cuts," he says. "I don't' think we can get the bill passed unless we have a provision in there that says it will be funded from an outside source." However, Wimmer says a contract won't be necessary to protect taxpayers from footing the bill to fight challenges to the law. Wimmer also says a Washington DC organization has agreed to fight the case pro-bono. However, Walter Weber with DC-based-American Center for Law and Justice says consulting is a more typical arrangement. And he says even consulting is usually formalized in a contract.
Click here to read the entire article online
`Designer Babies' Raise The Spectre of Genetic Manipulation
Two cases of parents claiming the right to choose the genetic makeup of their babies before birth raise serious ethical issues according to a British doctor. Dr Paul Veys, a consultant at London's Great Ormond Street Hospital voiced his fears over the case of an American couple who used genetic screening to give birth to a "genetically designed" baby with the characteristics to provide cells to help his sick older sister.
Click here to read the entire article online
Does Speech Law Trample On Rights?
Citizen Participation Act being misused, some say
It was meant to protect the little guy, the resident speaking out at a town hall meeting against a corporate giant. But some say the Citizen Participation Act—signed into law in Illinois last year—goes too far, trampling on the rights of people to protect themselves from defamation. Just ask Eric Scheidler and the Pro-Life Action League of Aurora. Scheidler sued Steve Trombley, president of Planned Parenthood of Illinois, alleging libel for saying to the Aurora City Council, and in an ad in a local newspaper, that the league has "a well-documented history of violence." Planned Parenthood used the Citizen articipation Act as its defense, saying the statements were made in a political context and therefore protected by law.
Click here to read the entire article online
Pope Commends Knights of Columbus for their Pro-Life Work
Pope Benedict XVI expressed his thanks and appreciation to the Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus, on the occasion of their recent pilgrimage to Rome, for their tireless efforts in promoting the culture of life.
"I express my appreciation of your efforts to provide a solid formation in the faith for young people, and to defend the moral truths necessary for a free and humane society, including the fundamental right to life of every human being," said the Holy Father.
Pro-life initiatives launched by the Knights of Columbus during election campaigning in both Canada and the US include a radio ad that features the sound of a 10-week-old unborn child's heartbeat. The voice of a woman muses, "Listening to this makes me wonder - why would anyone question that her life has begun?"
Click here to read the entire article online
Legislators Seek Abortion-on-Demand for Every State in Mexico
Liberals seek to legalize abortion throughout country; conservatives propose stronger pro-life legislation
In the wake of a Supreme Court ruling affirming the constitutionality of Mexico City's abortion law, which allows a woman to kill her unborn baby for any reason during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy, liberal lawmakers are seeking to extend abortion-on-demand to every state in Mexico.
The Social Democratic Party (PSD) recently announced that it will be introducing legislation to legalize abortion in 28 different legislatures, and urged federal lawmakers to legalize the practice at the national level, something they have thus far refused to consider.
Parroting the rhetoric of the international pro-abortion movement, Nuevo Leon state party president Juan Gamboa said that the measure isn't "a promotion of abortion, it's a promotion of the right of women to decide."
Click here to read the entire article online
Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of The Illinois Federation for Right to Life. They are presented only for your information.
Aurora Planned Parenthood Clinic Open A Year
It's been a year since Planned Parenthood opened a clinic in Aurora, and people on both sides of the abortion debate say they have seen success in that time. Planned Parenthood of Illinois CEO Steve Trombley says demand for medical services has been greater than expected, and less than 10 percent of those services are abortion-related. On the other side, Pro-Life Action League spokesman Eric Scheidler says "sidewalk counselors" offering information have succeeded by sustaining protests for more than a year.
Click here to read the entire article online
Taxpayers Could Pay the Bill for Abortion Ban Fight, Even if State Gets Pro-Bono Legal Team
Without an agreement to cover the state's legal fees, even Representative Carl Wimmer admits an abortion ban he'll sponsor next session is doomed to fail. "Well let's put it this way, I don't think we can get the bill passed in a time where we are seeing budget cuts," he says. "I don't' think we can get the bill passed unless we have a provision in there that says it will be funded from an outside source." However, Wimmer says a contract won't be necessary to protect taxpayers from footing the bill to fight challenges to the law. Wimmer also says a Washington DC organization has agreed to fight the case pro-bono. However, Walter Weber with DC-based-American Center for Law and Justice says consulting is a more typical arrangement. And he says even consulting is usually formalized in a contract.
Click here to read the entire article online
`Designer Babies' Raise The Spectre of Genetic Manipulation
Two cases of parents claiming the right to choose the genetic makeup of their babies before birth raise serious ethical issues according to a British doctor. Dr Paul Veys, a consultant at London's Great Ormond Street Hospital voiced his fears over the case of an American couple who used genetic screening to give birth to a "genetically designed" baby with the characteristics to provide cells to help his sick older sister.
Click here to read the entire article online
Does Speech Law Trample On Rights?
Citizen Participation Act being misused, some say
It was meant to protect the little guy, the resident speaking out at a town hall meeting against a corporate giant. But some say the Citizen Participation Act—signed into law in Illinois last year—goes too far, trampling on the rights of people to protect themselves from defamation. Just ask Eric Scheidler and the Pro-Life Action League of Aurora. Scheidler sued Steve Trombley, president of Planned Parenthood of Illinois, alleging libel for saying to the Aurora City Council, and in an ad in a local newspaper, that the league has "a well-documented history of violence." Planned Parenthood used the Citizen articipation Act as its defense, saying the statements were made in a political context and therefore protected by law.
Click here to read the entire article online
Pope Commends Knights of Columbus for their Pro-Life Work
Pope Benedict XVI expressed his thanks and appreciation to the Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus, on the occasion of their recent pilgrimage to Rome, for their tireless efforts in promoting the culture of life.
"I express my appreciation of your efforts to provide a solid formation in the faith for young people, and to defend the moral truths necessary for a free and humane society, including the fundamental right to life of every human being," said the Holy Father.
Pro-life initiatives launched by the Knights of Columbus during election campaigning in both Canada and the US include a radio ad that features the sound of a 10-week-old unborn child's heartbeat. The voice of a woman muses, "Listening to this makes me wonder - why would anyone question that her life has begun?"
Click here to read the entire article online
Legislators Seek Abortion-on-Demand for Every State in Mexico
Liberals seek to legalize abortion throughout country; conservatives propose stronger pro-life legislation
In the wake of a Supreme Court ruling affirming the constitutionality of Mexico City's abortion law, which allows a woman to kill her unborn baby for any reason during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy, liberal lawmakers are seeking to extend abortion-on-demand to every state in Mexico.
The Social Democratic Party (PSD) recently announced that it will be introducing legislation to legalize abortion in 28 different legislatures, and urged federal lawmakers to legalize the practice at the national level, something they have thus far refused to consider.
Parroting the rhetoric of the international pro-abortion movement, Nuevo Leon state party president Juan Gamboa said that the measure isn't "a promotion of abortion, it's a promotion of the right of women to decide."
Click here to read the entire article online
USAID denies funding to international abortion group
USAID denies funding to international abortion group complicit in coercive abortions
Assistant Administrator for Global Health Dr. Kent Hill with the U.S. Agency for International Development has denied funding to the UK-based abortion organization Marie Stopes International (MSI) on the grounds that it is complicit in “coercive abortion and involuntary sterilizations” in China.
MSI has denied the accusations, the Population Research Institute (PRI) reports in its weekly briefing.
PRI president Steven W. Mosher applauded the decision, saying MSI’s “aggressive promotion of abortion, and its longstanding collaboration with China's coercive program leave little doubt that it is not only aware of the massive human rights abuses that have resulted in that country, but is actively collaborating with it.”
According to Mosher, the USAID decision will cut back MSI’s population control programs in a number of African countries, including Ghana, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe, and Kenya.
MSI claimed that the lack of funding would leave African women few options besides abortion.
Mosher responded to this claim, calling it “particularly risible, coming as it does from the very agency that is responsible for many of the abortions that are performed in Africa in the first place.”
He also claimed that PRI investigations have revealed that MSI is “one of the biggest abortion actors in Kenya.”
Mosher praised USAID’s decision, saying:
“The Bush Administration is to be congratulated for its consistent enforcement of a policy that is supported by the vast majority of the American people--a policy in which PRI is proud to have played a part--and which benefits women and girls by defunding predatory agencies which seek to rob them of their fertility. Marie Stopes International needs to decide what its purpose is: performing abortions, often in violation of national laws, or providing legitimate health care to women.”
Mosher explained that the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, passed during the Reagan presidential administration, prohibits U.S. foreign aid from funding any organization that “supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”
President Ronald Reagan first invoked the law to deny funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNPFA) because of its complicity with China’s one-child policies, Mosher said in the PRI briefing.
The George W. Bush Administration reviewed UNFPA’s activities in 2001 and determined they did not violate the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, granting it $21.5 million. In 2002, the Bush Administration canceled $34 million, repeating the prohibition each year after, because of evidence provided by PRI showing that the organization was involved in forced abortions and forced sterilizations.
Source: Catholic News Agency
Source URL: www.catholicna.com
Publish Date: October 4, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Assistant Administrator for Global Health Dr. Kent Hill with the U.S. Agency for International Development has denied funding to the UK-based abortion organization Marie Stopes International (MSI) on the grounds that it is complicit in “coercive abortion and involuntary sterilizations” in China.
MSI has denied the accusations, the Population Research Institute (PRI) reports in its weekly briefing.
PRI president Steven W. Mosher applauded the decision, saying MSI’s “aggressive promotion of abortion, and its longstanding collaboration with China's coercive program leave little doubt that it is not only aware of the massive human rights abuses that have resulted in that country, but is actively collaborating with it.”
According to Mosher, the USAID decision will cut back MSI’s population control programs in a number of African countries, including Ghana, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe, and Kenya.
MSI claimed that the lack of funding would leave African women few options besides abortion.
Mosher responded to this claim, calling it “particularly risible, coming as it does from the very agency that is responsible for many of the abortions that are performed in Africa in the first place.”
He also claimed that PRI investigations have revealed that MSI is “one of the biggest abortion actors in Kenya.”
Mosher praised USAID’s decision, saying:
“The Bush Administration is to be congratulated for its consistent enforcement of a policy that is supported by the vast majority of the American people--a policy in which PRI is proud to have played a part--and which benefits women and girls by defunding predatory agencies which seek to rob them of their fertility. Marie Stopes International needs to decide what its purpose is: performing abortions, often in violation of national laws, or providing legitimate health care to women.”
Mosher explained that the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, passed during the Reagan presidential administration, prohibits U.S. foreign aid from funding any organization that “supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”
President Ronald Reagan first invoked the law to deny funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNPFA) because of its complicity with China’s one-child policies, Mosher said in the PRI briefing.
The George W. Bush Administration reviewed UNFPA’s activities in 2001 and determined they did not violate the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, granting it $21.5 million. In 2002, the Bush Administration canceled $34 million, repeating the prohibition each year after, because of evidence provided by PRI showing that the organization was involved in forced abortions and forced sterilizations.
Source: Catholic News Agency
Source URL: www.catholicna.com
Publish Date: October 4, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
California Gov. Signs Assisted Suicide Information Bill into Law
California Gov. Signs Assisted Suicide Information Bill into Law
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into law a bill that opponents say could open the door to the eventuality of physician-assisted suicide in the nation’s most populous state.
AB 2747 mandates that physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants provide patients diagnosed with a terminal illness – or who have been given a diagnosis of one year or less to live – with “comprehensive information and counseling regarding legal end-of-life options, as specified.”
Specifically the law obligates doctors to inform the patient about the option of “withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments” – including food and water.
Health care providers will be required to refer or transfer the patient if they can not, in good conscience, comply with the request.
Randy Thomasson of the Sacramento-based Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) called the law “a backdoor way” of bringing assisted suicide to a state that has already rejected the practice by referendum.
Saying the issue should be up to the voters, not the Legislature, Thomasson said Schwarzenegger had given his assent to physician- and nurse-assisted suicide by means of starvation and dehydration.
"AB 2747 allows a physician assistant or a nurse to opine that a patient is 'terminal,' and then recommend an unnatural death via 'palliative sedation,'" Thomasson said.
"Depressed patients who succumb to this pressure will be drugged unconscious and die from dehydration, usually within five to 10 days. Nothing in AB 2747 prohibits this horror," he added.
Kathi Hamlon, a spokeswoman for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, said even if the bill does not actually legalize assisted suicide, it could open the doors to it.
“I think the potential for this bill is dangerous, and I think the intent of the bill was, in fact, to push the assisted suicide agenda. But it did not legalize it … so you can’t sit and say this is stealth-assisted suicide. It has the potential to be.”
Hamlon said two organizations that openly promote assisted suicide – Compassion & Choice (which helped draft the bill) and the Final Exit Network – will benefit from the law because they currently provide information to people about assisted suicide.
“Now what will happen,” Hamlon continued, “is that after this bill is established as practice in California, (the groups) will argue, ‘Hey look, it’s far more humane to do what Oregon does instead of having to wait 12-16 days watching a loved one suffer without food and water. It’s far more humane to offer them a legal prescription.’”
Oregon became the first state to legalize physician-assisted suicide when the Oregon Legislature put an initiative on the ballot in 1994 – and Oregon voters approved it, with 51 of the vote.
Hamlon, meanwhile, said California already has legislation solidifying the patient’s right to medical information at the end of life.
“Why introduce this bill in the first place if it doesn’t have an agenda towards legalization of assisted suicide?” she asked.
Steve Hopcraft of Compassion & Choice defended the bill saying that patients “have the right to know all possible options” when they have been diagnosed with a terminal illness.
Contact: Matt Hadro
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into law a bill that opponents say could open the door to the eventuality of physician-assisted suicide in the nation’s most populous state.
AB 2747 mandates that physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants provide patients diagnosed with a terminal illness – or who have been given a diagnosis of one year or less to live – with “comprehensive information and counseling regarding legal end-of-life options, as specified.”
Specifically the law obligates doctors to inform the patient about the option of “withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments” – including food and water.
Health care providers will be required to refer or transfer the patient if they can not, in good conscience, comply with the request.
Randy Thomasson of the Sacramento-based Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) called the law “a backdoor way” of bringing assisted suicide to a state that has already rejected the practice by referendum.
Saying the issue should be up to the voters, not the Legislature, Thomasson said Schwarzenegger had given his assent to physician- and nurse-assisted suicide by means of starvation and dehydration.
"AB 2747 allows a physician assistant or a nurse to opine that a patient is 'terminal,' and then recommend an unnatural death via 'palliative sedation,'" Thomasson said.
"Depressed patients who succumb to this pressure will be drugged unconscious and die from dehydration, usually within five to 10 days. Nothing in AB 2747 prohibits this horror," he added.
Kathi Hamlon, a spokeswoman for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, said even if the bill does not actually legalize assisted suicide, it could open the doors to it.
“I think the potential for this bill is dangerous, and I think the intent of the bill was, in fact, to push the assisted suicide agenda. But it did not legalize it … so you can’t sit and say this is stealth-assisted suicide. It has the potential to be.”
Hamlon said two organizations that openly promote assisted suicide – Compassion & Choice (which helped draft the bill) and the Final Exit Network – will benefit from the law because they currently provide information to people about assisted suicide.
“Now what will happen,” Hamlon continued, “is that after this bill is established as practice in California, (the groups) will argue, ‘Hey look, it’s far more humane to do what Oregon does instead of having to wait 12-16 days watching a loved one suffer without food and water. It’s far more humane to offer them a legal prescription.’”
Oregon became the first state to legalize physician-assisted suicide when the Oregon Legislature put an initiative on the ballot in 1994 – and Oregon voters approved it, with 51 of the vote.
Hamlon, meanwhile, said California already has legislation solidifying the patient’s right to medical information at the end of life.
“Why introduce this bill in the first place if it doesn’t have an agenda towards legalization of assisted suicide?” she asked.
Steve Hopcraft of Compassion & Choice defended the bill saying that patients “have the right to know all possible options” when they have been diagnosed with a terminal illness.
Contact: Matt Hadro
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Biden Fails to Grasp Impact of Roe v. Wade
Biden Fails to Grasp Impact of Roe v. Wade
When Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden spoke with CBS' Katie Couric recently, she asked him why he believed Roe. v. Wade was a good decision.
"Because it's as close to a consensus that can exist in a society as heterogeneous as ours. What does it say? It says in the first three months that decision should be left to the woman. And the second three months… the state, the government has a role. … And the third three months, they say the weight of the government's input is on the fetus being carried."
Tony Perkins, president of FRC Action, said Biden left out some key details.
"The senator fails to point out the same-day ruling of Doe v. Bolton that (provided) broad health exceptions for women seeking abortions, (including) physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman's age — thus allowing abortionists carte blanche to nullify any abortion restriction they so please.
"When the full extent of the Supreme Court's decision is brought to light," Perkins said, "it clearly shows there is no 'consensus' on Roe v. Wade."
Biden, along with his running mate, Sen. Barack Obama, supports the so-called Freedom of Choice Act, which could wipe away every federal and state law limiting abortion, undoing decades of legal work and educational successes.
Contact: Jennifer Mesko
Source: CitizenLink
Source URL: www.citizenlink.org
Publish Date: October 3, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
When Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden spoke with CBS' Katie Couric recently, she asked him why he believed Roe. v. Wade was a good decision.
"Because it's as close to a consensus that can exist in a society as heterogeneous as ours. What does it say? It says in the first three months that decision should be left to the woman. And the second three months… the state, the government has a role. … And the third three months, they say the weight of the government's input is on the fetus being carried."
Tony Perkins, president of FRC Action, said Biden left out some key details.
"The senator fails to point out the same-day ruling of Doe v. Bolton that (provided) broad health exceptions for women seeking abortions, (including) physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman's age — thus allowing abortionists carte blanche to nullify any abortion restriction they so please.
"When the full extent of the Supreme Court's decision is brought to light," Perkins said, "it clearly shows there is no 'consensus' on Roe v. Wade."
Biden, along with his running mate, Sen. Barack Obama, supports the so-called Freedom of Choice Act, which could wipe away every federal and state law limiting abortion, undoing decades of legal work and educational successes.
Contact: Jennifer Mesko
Source: CitizenLink
Source URL: www.citizenlink.org
Publish Date: October 3, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Louisiana Lawmaker Proposes Paying Poor Women to Be Sterilized
Louisiana Lawmaker Proposes Paying Poor Women to Be Sterilized
A Louisiana state lawmaker has proposed paying poor women on welfare to be voluntarily sterilized.
Rep. John LaBruzzo (R-Metairie), a New Orleans-area Republican, ignited a firestorm of protest after proposing the idea of paying poor women $1,000 if they would voluntarily undergo procedures that he said would help solve the problem of “generational welfare.”
LaBruzzo said the idea came when he and his staff were discussing ways to reduce the number of people relying on federal aid on the heels of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.
“I realized all these people were in Louisiana’s care and what a massive financial responsibility that is to the state,” LaBruzzo told the New Orleans CityBusiness newspaper on Sept. 23. “I said, ‘I wonder if it might be a good idea to pay some of these people to get sterilized.”
LaBruzzo emphasized the voluntary nature of his program, saying that sterilization could include tubal ligation for women or vasectomies for men. He also mentioned tax incentives encouraging non-welfare families to have more children.
The proposal has been denounced in most quarters.
Roman Catholic Archbishop Alfred Hughes of New Orleans called it “a form of eugenics that the Church and this country have always condemned as an egregious affront to those targeted and blatantly anti-life.”
Barbara Thomas, president of the North Baton Rouge Women’s Health Center, called LaBruzzo’s proposal “an outrage,” telling CNSNews.com she was “thoroughly disappointed.”
Thomas likened the sterilization idea to the eugenics ideas espoused by Adolf Hitler – or, as some argue, Planned Parenthood founder’s Margaret Sanger.
“In my opinion, it’s trying to rid the community of undesirables, and that’s not right,” she added.
Although LaBruzzo has said he doesn’t support abortion and wouldn’t encourage it, pro-life activist Dr. Alveda King said that she doesn’t see a practical difference in terms of what he’s proposing.
“Sterilization is just as bad as what they call ‘therapeutic abortion,’” King told CNSNews.com. “Neither solves any of the problems of society, and it’s a racist approach to something that should be handled with human compassion.”
LaBruzzo did not comment to CNSNews.com, but he did defend his proposal to CNN on Sept. 26.
“With the $700 billion dollar bailout, I think the taxpayers of America are getting fed up and saying, ‘Look, we need people to go to work, and to help pull the wagon instead of generation after generation jumping into the wagon,’” he said.
“In Louisiana, the problem of generational welfare is a big problem. And we need to deal with it. And that’s what we were brainstorming about.”
The lawmaker may be feeling the heat, however. Daniel Loar, executive director of the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, said that Rep. LaBruzzo is backing away from the controversial proposal.
“He said he was going to withdraw the idea and that he wanted to talk with us [the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops] about the concept of increasing the state tax credit for parents having children,” Loar told CNSNews.com. “So he has backed off, and I told him it was wise for him to back off from the idea of sterilization.
“I doubt that he realizes that David Duke, who used to represent that same district about 20 years ago, had made the same type of proposal,” Loar added. “John’s a younger guy, and I don’t know that he knew the history there, but it got everybody all excited, across the political spectrum. Nobody supported him (on this proposal.)”
Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, served as a Louisiana state representative in the late 1980’s.
Contact: Mary Jane O’Brien
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
A Louisiana state lawmaker has proposed paying poor women on welfare to be voluntarily sterilized.
Rep. John LaBruzzo (R-Metairie), a New Orleans-area Republican, ignited a firestorm of protest after proposing the idea of paying poor women $1,000 if they would voluntarily undergo procedures that he said would help solve the problem of “generational welfare.”
LaBruzzo said the idea came when he and his staff were discussing ways to reduce the number of people relying on federal aid on the heels of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.
“I realized all these people were in Louisiana’s care and what a massive financial responsibility that is to the state,” LaBruzzo told the New Orleans CityBusiness newspaper on Sept. 23. “I said, ‘I wonder if it might be a good idea to pay some of these people to get sterilized.”
LaBruzzo emphasized the voluntary nature of his program, saying that sterilization could include tubal ligation for women or vasectomies for men. He also mentioned tax incentives encouraging non-welfare families to have more children.
The proposal has been denounced in most quarters.
Roman Catholic Archbishop Alfred Hughes of New Orleans called it “a form of eugenics that the Church and this country have always condemned as an egregious affront to those targeted and blatantly anti-life.”
Barbara Thomas, president of the North Baton Rouge Women’s Health Center, called LaBruzzo’s proposal “an outrage,” telling CNSNews.com she was “thoroughly disappointed.”
Thomas likened the sterilization idea to the eugenics ideas espoused by Adolf Hitler – or, as some argue, Planned Parenthood founder’s Margaret Sanger.
“In my opinion, it’s trying to rid the community of undesirables, and that’s not right,” she added.
Although LaBruzzo has said he doesn’t support abortion and wouldn’t encourage it, pro-life activist Dr. Alveda King said that she doesn’t see a practical difference in terms of what he’s proposing.
“Sterilization is just as bad as what they call ‘therapeutic abortion,’” King told CNSNews.com. “Neither solves any of the problems of society, and it’s a racist approach to something that should be handled with human compassion.”
LaBruzzo did not comment to CNSNews.com, but he did defend his proposal to CNN on Sept. 26.
“With the $700 billion dollar bailout, I think the taxpayers of America are getting fed up and saying, ‘Look, we need people to go to work, and to help pull the wagon instead of generation after generation jumping into the wagon,’” he said.
“In Louisiana, the problem of generational welfare is a big problem. And we need to deal with it. And that’s what we were brainstorming about.”
The lawmaker may be feeling the heat, however. Daniel Loar, executive director of the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, said that Rep. LaBruzzo is backing away from the controversial proposal.
“He said he was going to withdraw the idea and that he wanted to talk with us [the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops] about the concept of increasing the state tax credit for parents having children,” Loar told CNSNews.com. “So he has backed off, and I told him it was wise for him to back off from the idea of sterilization.
“I doubt that he realizes that David Duke, who used to represent that same district about 20 years ago, had made the same type of proposal,” Loar added. “John’s a younger guy, and I don’t know that he knew the history there, but it got everybody all excited, across the political spectrum. Nobody supported him (on this proposal.)”
Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, served as a Louisiana state representative in the late 1980’s.
Contact: Mary Jane O’Brien
Source: CNSNews.com
Source URL: www.CNSNews.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Lawmakers Call for Investigation in Federally Funded Abortions
Lawmakers Call for Investigation after Spike in Federally Funded Abortions
More than 80 U.S. representatives are calling on the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to investigate whether taxpayer money is being misused on abortions in Illinois.
Under the federal Hyde Amendment, Medicaid can fund abortions only in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at risk.
In 2006, the government paid for 196 such abortions across the U.S. In 2007, the number jumped to 458.
In 2006, Illinois reported 84 federally funded abortions in cases of rape. That number jumped to 363 in 2007.
Members of Congress requested an explanation from HHS in June. A second letter, dated Sept. 26, reads: "We find this dramatic increase surprising, especially since corollary increases do not appear in any other state. Please provide detailed information regarding this increase."
The letter requests a response by Oct. 26.
Contact: None
Source: CitizenLink
Source URL: www.citizenlink.org
Publish Date: October 1, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
More than 80 U.S. representatives are calling on the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to investigate whether taxpayer money is being misused on abortions in Illinois.
Under the federal Hyde Amendment, Medicaid can fund abortions only in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at risk.
In 2006, the government paid for 196 such abortions across the U.S. In 2007, the number jumped to 458.
In 2006, Illinois reported 84 federally funded abortions in cases of rape. That number jumped to 363 in 2007.
Members of Congress requested an explanation from HHS in June. A second letter, dated Sept. 26, reads: "We find this dramatic increase surprising, especially since corollary increases do not appear in any other state. Please provide detailed information regarding this increase."
The letter requests a response by Oct. 26.
Contact: None
Source: CitizenLink
Source URL: www.citizenlink.org
Publish Date: October 1, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade in Pro-Life Movie
U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade in Award-Winning Pro-Life Movie
It is the first Monday in October and a future U.S. Supreme Court tackles the reversal of Roe vs. Wade in a dramatic new pro-life movie, COME WHAT MAY (CWM). The controversial film has received rave reviews from preview audiences nationwide, drawing large crowds in Oregon where 800 moviegoers filled the Grants Pass Performing Arts Center to capacity. Six distributors are vying for CWM, including the company currently distributing the new Christian blockbuster, FIREPROOF.
"What's remarkable is that COME WHAT MAY, a 2008 Redemptive Storyteller Award winner, was largely produced by over 40 homeschooled students mentored by only a handful of professionals," according to Mac Nichols, a tax attorney who plays one of the movie's U.S. Supreme Court Justices.
Advent Film Group (AFG) produced the micro-budget movie in association with Patrick Henry College (PHC), a true-to-life powerhouse in collegiate debate and moot court competition. The movie's legal argument is solid, claims George Escobar, founder of AFG. Dr. Michael Farris, PHC founder and chancellor, wrote the film's legal framework. Farris, a constitutional attorney, has successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Roe vs. Wade could hang in the balance if Justices John Paul Stevens, who is 88, or Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 75, were replaced by the next president. It may end the liberal wing majority of the current court. Whoever wins the presidency in 2008 will determine the fate of unborn millions for generations.
The movie's strong appeal and its pending release is providential. "This movie is causing (me) to reconsider (my) position," pro-choice voters are telling AFG after seeing the film. "A national breakout release could happen," Escobar acknowledges. "Eager sponsors are offering to underwrite a major movie event before November 4th."
A OneNewsNow.com reader reports: "COME WHAT MAY is an inspiring and Godly film that has a fresh perspective on our approach to abortion. It is refreshing to see a pro-family, pro-life film that puts priority on purity." Another reader adds, "I have seen this film, and I highly recommend it for its engaging storyline and intriguing rhetoric. No matter what your stance on the issues CWM tackles, you'll be entertained and mentally stimulated! Go with friends and you're sure to be provoked to discussion afterward."
Contact: George Escobar
Source: Advent Film Group
Source URL: www.adventfilmgroup.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
It is the first Monday in October and a future U.S. Supreme Court tackles the reversal of Roe vs. Wade in a dramatic new pro-life movie, COME WHAT MAY (CWM). The controversial film has received rave reviews from preview audiences nationwide, drawing large crowds in Oregon where 800 moviegoers filled the Grants Pass Performing Arts Center to capacity. Six distributors are vying for CWM, including the company currently distributing the new Christian blockbuster, FIREPROOF.
"What's remarkable is that COME WHAT MAY, a 2008 Redemptive Storyteller Award winner, was largely produced by over 40 homeschooled students mentored by only a handful of professionals," according to Mac Nichols, a tax attorney who plays one of the movie's U.S. Supreme Court Justices.
Advent Film Group (AFG) produced the micro-budget movie in association with Patrick Henry College (PHC), a true-to-life powerhouse in collegiate debate and moot court competition. The movie's legal argument is solid, claims George Escobar, founder of AFG. Dr. Michael Farris, PHC founder and chancellor, wrote the film's legal framework. Farris, a constitutional attorney, has successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Roe vs. Wade could hang in the balance if Justices John Paul Stevens, who is 88, or Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 75, were replaced by the next president. It may end the liberal wing majority of the current court. Whoever wins the presidency in 2008 will determine the fate of unborn millions for generations.
The movie's strong appeal and its pending release is providential. "This movie is causing (me) to reconsider (my) position," pro-choice voters are telling AFG after seeing the film. "A national breakout release could happen," Escobar acknowledges. "Eager sponsors are offering to underwrite a major movie event before November 4th."
A OneNewsNow.com reader reports: "COME WHAT MAY is an inspiring and Godly film that has a fresh perspective on our approach to abortion. It is refreshing to see a pro-family, pro-life film that puts priority on purity." Another reader adds, "I have seen this film, and I highly recommend it for its engaging storyline and intriguing rhetoric. No matter what your stance on the issues CWM tackles, you'll be entertained and mentally stimulated! Go with friends and you're sure to be provoked to discussion afterward."
Contact: George Escobar
Source: Advent Film Group
Source URL: www.adventfilmgroup.com
Publish Date: October 6, 2008
Click here to view this article
Click here for more articles like this one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)