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.
Advocates Eager To Learn More About Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor's Abortion-Rights Views
Abortion-rights groups on Wednesday offered their support for Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor but said that they were eager to learn more about her views on abortion rights, an issue on which she has made few major rulings in her time as a judge, the New York Times reports. According to the Times, groups on both sides of the abortion-rights debate tend to believe that Sotomayor would uphold Roe v. Wade because she was nominated by President Obama, who supports abortion rights. However, when asked on Tuesday if Obama questioned Sotomayor about her views on abortion rights before the nomination, White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs said that the president "did not ask that specifically." In addition, none of her rulings has directly dealt with the underlying issues of constitutional privacy that are the foundation for the Roe decision, according to the Times.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Abortion Group Funded by Development and Peace Removes Evidence from Website
A pro-abortion organization funded by the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP) has removed statements from its website expressing enthusiastic support for Mexico City's law permitting abortion on demand for the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The statements were originally reported by LifeSiteNews in March of this year as part of ongoing coverage of CCODP's support for pro-abortion organizations worldwide, The CCODP is an arm of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and claims to oppose the legalization of abortion.
Although the organization, the All Rights for Everyone Network (Red Todos los Derechos para Todos - TDT) has eliminated the material from its website, LSN has saved copies of the web pages, which also remain in the cache of the world's largest search engine, Google. LSN is also obtaining signed affadavits from witnesses who attest that they have viewed and printed out the pages in question from the internet.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Protesters Arrested on ND Campus to Return to South Bend to Face Charges
Dozens of pro-life protesters arrested at the University of Notre Dame on May 17 for protesting President Obama's commencement speech will be heading back to Indiana in coming weeks from all across the country to stand trial. While Notre Dame had pro-life demonstrators summarily arrested for "criminal trespassing," witnesses say that pro-Obama demonstrators were given free roam of the campus - a fact that the pro-lifers' attorney says violated the Equal Protection clause.
Click here for the full article.
Is Sotomayor a "Souter" on Roe v. Wade for the Abortion Movement? All Signs Point to No
A flurry of media coverage in recent days has reported on the unease among some pro-abortion constituencies that Obama's Supreme Court nominee could turn out to be a "David Souter" for the pro-abortion movement. Justice Souter was famously nominated by George H.W. Bush in 1990 and highly feted by conservatives as an anti-Roe justice. However, the Supreme Court judge has disappointed conservatives by consistently casting a pro-abortion vote on the Supreme Court ever since.
Sotomayor, a federal judge serving on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, has been nominated by President Obama to replace Souter, who is retiring from the court this summer.
However, despite reported pro-abortion concerns a number of signs contradict the possibility that Sotomayor would ever rule against the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. The latest comes in the form of Planned Parenthood's wholehearted endorsement on Wednesday of Sotomayor as a judge who "respects precedent."
Click here for the full article.
Ultrasound of Unborn Child Must be Made Available to Women Seeking Abortion: Nebraska Legislature
The Nebraska Legislature has passed a bill, introduced by Senator Tony Fulton, that requires abortionists to make an ultrasound of the unborn child available to a woman seeking an abortion if she requests it.
Furthermore, if the woman asks for a detailed medical analysis of the ultrasound, she must be given information detailing the size of the child, any cardiac activity, and information regarding "external members and internal organs, if present and viewable."
Supporters of the bill say that this will enable women to make a more informed decision.
Click here for the full article.
May 29, 2009
May 28, 2009
No common ground
No common ground
In his letter to the church at Colosse, the Apostle Paul warned the faithful believers to be on guard for those who speak with eloquence, but whose message is corrupt and evil. His purpose was "so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments." It is becoming increasingly clear that as our country has lost its grip on its Godly underpinnings and has forsaken a solid biblical worldview, our ability as a people to resist this trap has greatly deteriorated.
Consider as evidence the reaction of many Americans to our president's recent remarks on the most crucial human rights issue of our time. In addressing abortion during a commencement speech, President Barack Obama appeared to humbly propose attempting to find common ground.
"Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we all seek the same love of family and the same fulfillment of a life well-lived." Does President Obama not realize how twisted of a statement that is for him to make, given that his policies facilitate the destruction of human dignity in the womb? If we are all endowed by God with the right to experience the fulfillment of a life well-lived, Mr. President, why do you continue to advocate limiting that right to merely those who are convenient?
Yet media sources across the country had high praise for Obama's "eloquence" on the issue. To them I would simply point out that a steaming pile of excrement, eloquently presented, is still a steaming pile of excrement.
To illustrate, let's suppose I made the audacious suggestion that we begin allowing families to choose the execution of their dependent great-grandparents. These elderly folks are not productive members of society, they are a financial and emotional drain on a family's resources, and they drive big cars with large emissions, making our planet less livable. Or perhaps I suggest allowing families to choose the execution of their physically or emotionally handicapped children. They tried their best to provide for these kids, but they had no idea the burden they would end up being. Financially, emotionally, it's just too much for them.
Though I would be using the same logic as the abortion crowd, you would hopefully recoil in disgust at my depraved and inhuman proposals. So in response, suppose I offered to "find common ground" with you. How about a waiting period? You have to wait 30 days after your initial decision to kill your grandparents. That's more reasonable, right? Or we could have a familial consent law? You must have unanimous approval from your immediate family to go through with the execution. Better yet, a post-birth version of the ultrasound law: you have to watch a 30-minute video of your grandparents knitting, crocheting, and watching TV before you have them exterminated.
Do these compromises make my suggestion more agreeable to you? Of course not. And why? Because you recognize that life itself is worth protecting, not because of what it can do, or how easy it is to deal with, or whether it's "wanted," or whether it's financially independent. It's worth protecting simply because it's life...and there is intrinsic worth in every human being.
That is why there is and can be no "common ground" on the issue of abortion. Waiting periods, parental consent, ultrasound laws...they all end up with the same result: "Do these things, and then you can kill the baby." To Americans who have grown up in a country predicated upon defending the defenseless and recognizing what even Barack Obama himself calls the dignity of life given to us by God, this is unacceptable.
Scientifically, medically, spiritually, there is no longer any question that human life begins at the moment of conception. And therefore we are compelled to defend it from that point, not find common ground with those who wish to allow its destruction...even if they make their proposals with what Paul called "fine-sounding arguments."
Obama may speak with high platitudes and with soaring rhetoric. But if we as a people lack the ability to see through such eloquence and examine the content of what is being said, rather than the mere presentation of how it is said, God help us.
Contact: Peter Heck
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
In his letter to the church at Colosse, the Apostle Paul warned the faithful believers to be on guard for those who speak with eloquence, but whose message is corrupt and evil. His purpose was "so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments." It is becoming increasingly clear that as our country has lost its grip on its Godly underpinnings and has forsaken a solid biblical worldview, our ability as a people to resist this trap has greatly deteriorated.
Consider as evidence the reaction of many Americans to our president's recent remarks on the most crucial human rights issue of our time. In addressing abortion during a commencement speech, President Barack Obama appeared to humbly propose attempting to find common ground.
"Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we all seek the same love of family and the same fulfillment of a life well-lived." Does President Obama not realize how twisted of a statement that is for him to make, given that his policies facilitate the destruction of human dignity in the womb? If we are all endowed by God with the right to experience the fulfillment of a life well-lived, Mr. President, why do you continue to advocate limiting that right to merely those who are convenient?
Yet media sources across the country had high praise for Obama's "eloquence" on the issue. To them I would simply point out that a steaming pile of excrement, eloquently presented, is still a steaming pile of excrement.
To illustrate, let's suppose I made the audacious suggestion that we begin allowing families to choose the execution of their dependent great-grandparents. These elderly folks are not productive members of society, they are a financial and emotional drain on a family's resources, and they drive big cars with large emissions, making our planet less livable. Or perhaps I suggest allowing families to choose the execution of their physically or emotionally handicapped children. They tried their best to provide for these kids, but they had no idea the burden they would end up being. Financially, emotionally, it's just too much for them.
Though I would be using the same logic as the abortion crowd, you would hopefully recoil in disgust at my depraved and inhuman proposals. So in response, suppose I offered to "find common ground" with you. How about a waiting period? You have to wait 30 days after your initial decision to kill your grandparents. That's more reasonable, right? Or we could have a familial consent law? You must have unanimous approval from your immediate family to go through with the execution. Better yet, a post-birth version of the ultrasound law: you have to watch a 30-minute video of your grandparents knitting, crocheting, and watching TV before you have them exterminated.
Do these compromises make my suggestion more agreeable to you? Of course not. And why? Because you recognize that life itself is worth protecting, not because of what it can do, or how easy it is to deal with, or whether it's "wanted," or whether it's financially independent. It's worth protecting simply because it's life...and there is intrinsic worth in every human being.
That is why there is and can be no "common ground" on the issue of abortion. Waiting periods, parental consent, ultrasound laws...they all end up with the same result: "Do these things, and then you can kill the baby." To Americans who have grown up in a country predicated upon defending the defenseless and recognizing what even Barack Obama himself calls the dignity of life given to us by God, this is unacceptable.
Scientifically, medically, spiritually, there is no longer any question that human life begins at the moment of conception. And therefore we are compelled to defend it from that point, not find common ground with those who wish to allow its destruction...even if they make their proposals with what Paul called "fine-sounding arguments."
Obama may speak with high platitudes and with soaring rhetoric. But if we as a people lack the ability to see through such eloquence and examine the content of what is being said, rather than the mere presentation of how it is said, God help us.
Contact: Peter Heck
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Wisconsin Right to Life Continues to Expose the Truth Behind the Madison Late-Term Abortion Plan
Wisconsin Right to Life Continues to Expose the Truth Behind the Madison Late-Term Abortion Plan
Third in a Series of Ads Appears Today in Wisconsin State Journal
Anti-abortion activists hold up signs in protest of a proposal to allow second-trimester abortions at MSC.
For the past two weeks, Wisconsin Right to Life has run ads in the Wisconsin State Journal that focus on the late-term abortion plan at the Madison Surgery Center. The ads are meant to educate the public about the realities associated with late-term abortions which involve the dismemberment of fully formed babies.
This week's ad, which appears today, exposes information contained in internal emails between various UW officials that were obtained through an open records request.
Among the shocking revelations is that most of the late-term abortions will be performed simply because a woman wants one and that UW officials hope the Obama administration will give them wiggle room to decide whether employees will be forced to participate in late-term abortions.
The entire ad can be viewed here.
"The public has a right to know exactly what is at stake with the late-term abortion plan" said Barbara Lyons, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. "Tens of thousands have already signed petitions protesting the late-term abortion plan and current and prospective patients have changed their appointments and even their health care away from the Madison Surgery Center. Now we are taking the message to the public."
Contact: Susan Armacost, Barbara L. Lyons
Source: Wisconsin Right To Life
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Third in a Series of Ads Appears Today in Wisconsin State Journal
Anti-abortion activists hold up signs in protest of a proposal to allow second-trimester abortions at MSC.
For the past two weeks, Wisconsin Right to Life has run ads in the Wisconsin State Journal that focus on the late-term abortion plan at the Madison Surgery Center. The ads are meant to educate the public about the realities associated with late-term abortions which involve the dismemberment of fully formed babies.
This week's ad, which appears today, exposes information contained in internal emails between various UW officials that were obtained through an open records request.
Among the shocking revelations is that most of the late-term abortions will be performed simply because a woman wants one and that UW officials hope the Obama administration will give them wiggle room to decide whether employees will be forced to participate in late-term abortions.
The entire ad can be viewed here.
"The public has a right to know exactly what is at stake with the late-term abortion plan" said Barbara Lyons, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. "Tens of thousands have already signed petitions protesting the late-term abortion plan and current and prospective patients have changed their appointments and even their health care away from the Madison Surgery Center. Now we are taking the message to the public."
Contact: Susan Armacost, Barbara L. Lyons
Source: Wisconsin Right To Life
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Obama Never Asked Court Nominee About Abortion, White House Says
Obama Never Asked Court Nominee About Abortion, White House Says
President Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, May 26, 2009. (AP Photo) White House
President Barack Obama never asked his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court whether she supports the Court's Roe vs. Wade decision -- the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion.
Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor, a judge on the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York, to fill the seat of retiring Associate Justice David Souter.
"The president doesn't have a litmus test and that question was not one that he posed to her," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Wednesday.
Since the 1973 ruling took the matter out of the hands of states, abortion has been a pivotal issue in the confirmation process of nearly every high court justice, particularly since the 1980s.
The New York Times reported on Thursday that abortion rights advocates "are quietly expressing unease that Judge Sotomayor may not be a reliable vote to uphold Roe v. Wade."
Sotomayor has never directly ruled on the constitutionality of abortion. But according to the newspaper, she has written opinions on tangential issues where she ended up on the same side taken by pro-lifers.
"We look forward to learning more about Judge Sotomayor's views on the right to privacy and the landmark Roe v. Wade decision as the Senate's hearing process moves forward," Nancy Keenan, President of NARAL Pro-Choice America, says in a message on NARAL's Web site.
The Times reported that Keenan is pushing senators to made discussion about Roe v. Wade part of the nomination process – before they vote to confirm Sotomayor.
In announcing Sotomayor's nomination Tuesday, Obama cited her "respect for precedent and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand." In previous judicial confirmation battles, Democrats have used the word "precedent" to refer to a nominee's support for the Roe decision.
Contact: Fred Lucas
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
President Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, May 26, 2009. (AP Photo) White House
President Barack Obama never asked his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court whether she supports the Court's Roe vs. Wade decision -- the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion.
Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor, a judge on the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York, to fill the seat of retiring Associate Justice David Souter.
"The president doesn't have a litmus test and that question was not one that he posed to her," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Wednesday.
Since the 1973 ruling took the matter out of the hands of states, abortion has been a pivotal issue in the confirmation process of nearly every high court justice, particularly since the 1980s.
The New York Times reported on Thursday that abortion rights advocates "are quietly expressing unease that Judge Sotomayor may not be a reliable vote to uphold Roe v. Wade."
Sotomayor has never directly ruled on the constitutionality of abortion. But according to the newspaper, she has written opinions on tangential issues where she ended up on the same side taken by pro-lifers.
"We look forward to learning more about Judge Sotomayor's views on the right to privacy and the landmark Roe v. Wade decision as the Senate's hearing process moves forward," Nancy Keenan, President of NARAL Pro-Choice America, says in a message on NARAL's Web site.
The Times reported that Keenan is pushing senators to made discussion about Roe v. Wade part of the nomination process – before they vote to confirm Sotomayor.
In announcing Sotomayor's nomination Tuesday, Obama cited her "respect for precedent and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand." In previous judicial confirmation battles, Democrats have used the word "precedent" to refer to a nominee's support for the Roe decision.
Contact: Fred Lucas
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Adult stem cells cure child of sickle cell anemia
Adult stem cells cure child of sickle cell anemia
Research using adult stem cells has saved the life of a Texas boy suffering from sickle cell anemia.
Dallas-area residents Joe and Darlene Davis welcomed the news of a pregnancy and later the birth of their first son. Texas Alliance for Life recorded an interview with the couple.
"I was very excited to find that I had a son -- but finding out that he had sickle cell anemia, as a nurse I knew there was going to be a lot of problems associated with that disease," Joe said.
"The child can have strokes," Darlene also noted. "It can stunt his growth and damage some organs, and the child can die at an early age -- age 15 maybe or earlier."
Stem cell therapy was the key, and when the Davises received news of a new pregnancy and the birth of another son, they were elated because stem cells from the new baby's umbilical cord could be used to help their ailing firstborn.
"[Cells from] Isaac's umbilical cord blood, adult stem cells, [were] going to save my son's life, and that adult stem cell got my son cured today. He is healed," Darlene adds. "What I'm talking about is no more sickle cell, no more running to the hospital, no more fevers, no more blood transfusion. He's a healthy child today."
Research shows adult stem cells are now being used to treat well over 70 diseases and medical conditions, while research using embryonic stem cells -- which requires killing of a human embryo -- has produced no results.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Research using adult stem cells has saved the life of a Texas boy suffering from sickle cell anemia.
Dallas-area residents Joe and Darlene Davis welcomed the news of a pregnancy and later the birth of their first son. Texas Alliance for Life recorded an interview with the couple.
"I was very excited to find that I had a son -- but finding out that he had sickle cell anemia, as a nurse I knew there was going to be a lot of problems associated with that disease," Joe said.
"The child can have strokes," Darlene also noted. "It can stunt his growth and damage some organs, and the child can die at an early age -- age 15 maybe or earlier."
Stem cell therapy was the key, and when the Davises received news of a new pregnancy and the birth of another son, they were elated because stem cells from the new baby's umbilical cord could be used to help their ailing firstborn.
"[Cells from] Isaac's umbilical cord blood, adult stem cells, [were] going to save my son's life, and that adult stem cell got my son cured today. He is healed," Darlene adds. "What I'm talking about is no more sickle cell, no more running to the hospital, no more fevers, no more blood transfusion. He's a healthy child today."
Research shows adult stem cells are now being used to treat well over 70 diseases and medical conditions, while research using embryonic stem cells -- which requires killing of a human embryo -- has produced no results.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: May 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Baby Faith Dies at 93 Days – Doctors Had Pressured Mother to Abort Anencephalic Daughter
Baby Faith Dies at 93 Days – Doctors Had Pressured Mother to Abort Anencephalic Daughter
Faith Hope Walker
Myah Walker has described the time from her daughter's birth up until this past Saturday, May 23, as the "best 93 days of my life." Faith Hope Walker, the baby about whom LifeSiteNews had previously reported, passed away peacefully this weekend in the arms of her mother, a 23 year-old student living in Moncton, New Brunswick.
Myah, who maintained a weblog of her daughter's life, wrote on Saturday, "She looked up at me and opened her beautiful eyes, and I realized what was happening. I told her to go with Jesus. I told her that I loved her and that it was ok, that I would meet her in Heaven."
Faith was born with a condition called anencephaly, in which a portion of the child's brain fails to fully develop. With the prevalence in the medical community of eugenic abortion, the great majority of such children are not allowed to live until birth.
Myah has said that she was pressured by hospital staff to have Faith killed before birth via abortion. Doctors told her that Faith was alive only because "she was attached" to her mother and that even if she survived to birth, she would be neither able to hear nor see.
Myah, a believing Christian, was told by doctors that she could continue the pregnancy without risk, "Or, I could choose to induce early to terminate the pregnancy."
She wrote, "For some reason I had to give the doctors my decision over and over again, which was frustrating. One doctor asked, 'Can I ask why you want to continue this pregnancy?' I guess some people are baffled by unconditional love."
When the baby was born, she was apparently able to both see and hear and suffered no health problems other than anencephaly. No medication was required in Faith's daily care and she was able to breastfeed, although she also received nutrition through a tube.
As a "lethal foetal anomaly," anencephaly is widely considered justification for abortion or "early induction" of birth, even by some Catholic ethicists.
As LifeSiteNews.com has reported, Fr. Michael Prieur, the chief ethicist for the diocese of London in Ontario, Canada has justified the procedure for lethal foetal anomaly in his work at St. Joseph's Catholic Hospital in London. He wrote in a June 1997 paper that the hospital had been using early induction for children diagnosed with anencephaly since 1985.
Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 27, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Faith Hope Walker
Myah Walker has described the time from her daughter's birth up until this past Saturday, May 23, as the "best 93 days of my life." Faith Hope Walker, the baby about whom LifeSiteNews had previously reported, passed away peacefully this weekend in the arms of her mother, a 23 year-old student living in Moncton, New Brunswick.
Myah, who maintained a weblog of her daughter's life, wrote on Saturday, "She looked up at me and opened her beautiful eyes, and I realized what was happening. I told her to go with Jesus. I told her that I loved her and that it was ok, that I would meet her in Heaven."
Faith was born with a condition called anencephaly, in which a portion of the child's brain fails to fully develop. With the prevalence in the medical community of eugenic abortion, the great majority of such children are not allowed to live until birth.
Myah has said that she was pressured by hospital staff to have Faith killed before birth via abortion. Doctors told her that Faith was alive only because "she was attached" to her mother and that even if she survived to birth, she would be neither able to hear nor see.
Myah, a believing Christian, was told by doctors that she could continue the pregnancy without risk, "Or, I could choose to induce early to terminate the pregnancy."
She wrote, "For some reason I had to give the doctors my decision over and over again, which was frustrating. One doctor asked, 'Can I ask why you want to continue this pregnancy?' I guess some people are baffled by unconditional love."
When the baby was born, she was apparently able to both see and hear and suffered no health problems other than anencephaly. No medication was required in Faith's daily care and she was able to breastfeed, although she also received nutrition through a tube.
As a "lethal foetal anomaly," anencephaly is widely considered justification for abortion or "early induction" of birth, even by some Catholic ethicists.
As LifeSiteNews.com has reported, Fr. Michael Prieur, the chief ethicist for the diocese of London in Ontario, Canada has justified the procedure for lethal foetal anomaly in his work at St. Joseph's Catholic Hospital in London. He wrote in a June 1997 paper that the hospital had been using early induction for children diagnosed with anencephaly since 1985.
Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 27, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR THURSDAY
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.
More on Judge Sonia
from The Lake County Right to Life Blog by Lake County Right to Life
Do you watch Judge Judy? Maybe, you will watch Judge Sonia. Certainly the major media is watching Judge Sonia, but not quite the way they should be. Certainly a firestorm erupted when President Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court. In fact, recently President Obama said he wanted her confirmed so she could walk up the marble steps and begin to bring justice to our country.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion supporters vandalize church, pro-life offices and university
The Abat Oliba University in Barcelona became the third target for vandalism by abortion supporters, who have painted pro-abortion graffiti on the walls of various places in the city.
In just one week, abortion supporters in Barcelona have vandalized the parish of St. Francis, the offices of E-Cristians and the Abat Oliba University.
"The new attack, this time on an educational center and the historic building that houses it, is the latest in a string of aggressions by supporters of the new law on abortion that the Socialist Party government is promoting.
Click here for the full article.
Proposal to Ban Abortion after 24 Weeks up for Debate in Romanian Parliament
The new Criminal Code would grant "personhood" to the unborn after 24 weeks
A new Criminal Code being prepared in Romania proposes to declare unborn babies as persons once they have reached 24 weeks gestation, and to ban abortion after that stage of development.
Abortion is currently prohibited after 14 weeks, with an exception granted where the health of the mother is at risk, a clause which has been interpreted liberally in the past. The proposal up for debate in Parliament would disallow this exception after 24 weeks. The killing or harming of the child would be criminally punishable for both the mother and the doctor.
Click here for the full article.
More on Judge Sonia
from The Lake County Right to Life Blog by Lake County Right to Life
Do you watch Judge Judy? Maybe, you will watch Judge Sonia. Certainly the major media is watching Judge Sonia, but not quite the way they should be. Certainly a firestorm erupted when President Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court. In fact, recently President Obama said he wanted her confirmed so she could walk up the marble steps and begin to bring justice to our country.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion supporters vandalize church, pro-life offices and university
The Abat Oliba University in Barcelona became the third target for vandalism by abortion supporters, who have painted pro-abortion graffiti on the walls of various places in the city.
In just one week, abortion supporters in Barcelona have vandalized the parish of St. Francis, the offices of E-Cristians and the Abat Oliba University.
"The new attack, this time on an educational center and the historic building that houses it, is the latest in a string of aggressions by supporters of the new law on abortion that the Socialist Party government is promoting.
Click here for the full article.
Proposal to Ban Abortion after 24 Weeks up for Debate in Romanian Parliament
The new Criminal Code would grant "personhood" to the unborn after 24 weeks
A new Criminal Code being prepared in Romania proposes to declare unborn babies as persons once they have reached 24 weeks gestation, and to ban abortion after that stage of development.
Abortion is currently prohibited after 14 weeks, with an exception granted where the health of the mother is at risk, a clause which has been interpreted liberally in the past. The proposal up for debate in Parliament would disallow this exception after 24 weeks. The killing or harming of the child would be criminally punishable for both the mother and the doctor.
Click here for the full article.
May 27, 2009
Billionaire Population Controllers are Aiding a Disaster-in-the-Making
Billionaire Population Controllers are Aiding a Disaster-in-the-Making
Commenting on a May 24 story in The London Times, "Demographic Winter" Producer Barry McLerran said an association of liberal billionaires (called the Good Club) was "working with a 1960s paradigm" and that their philanthropy will exacerbate a 21st century problem.
According to The Times, the meeting took place in New York on May 5 (at the behest of Microsoft founder Bill Gates) and included some of the wealthiest people in America -- among them Gates, David Rockefeller Jr, George Soros, Warren Buffett, Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey. Their combined charitable giving is said to have exceeded 45 billion British pounds since 1996.
The focus of the meeting was reported to be directing their dollars toward more population control. At a conference in February, Gates said the world's population will "peak at 9.3 billion, but with charitable initiatives such as better reproductive health care (code words for contraception and abortion) we think we can cap that at 8.3 billion."
McLerran commented: "Gates forgot to mention -- or perhaps he doesn't know -- that birth rates have declined by more than 50% since 1979. In most of the developed world, fertility is well below replacement level."
The "Demographic Winter" producer added: "Wherever the world's population caps, with rapidly falling birth rates, it will begin declining shortly thereafter -- perhaps as early as 2030, according to the United Nations Population Division. Instead of over-population, the crisis that confronts us in this century will be how to keep economies and nations going in the face of the coming de-population."
Said McLerran, "If the 'Good Club' really wants to do good, instead of adding fuel to the fire, it will consider the reality of declining birth rates and their impact on humanity in this century. Then perhaps they'll begin to realize that people are the one irreplaceable resource."
Contact: Don Feder
Source: Christian Newswire
Publish Date: May 27, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Commenting on a May 24 story in The London Times, "Demographic Winter" Producer Barry McLerran said an association of liberal billionaires (called the Good Club) was "working with a 1960s paradigm" and that their philanthropy will exacerbate a 21st century problem.
According to The Times, the meeting took place in New York on May 5 (at the behest of Microsoft founder Bill Gates) and included some of the wealthiest people in America -- among them Gates, David Rockefeller Jr, George Soros, Warren Buffett, Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey. Their combined charitable giving is said to have exceeded 45 billion British pounds since 1996.
The focus of the meeting was reported to be directing their dollars toward more population control. At a conference in February, Gates said the world's population will "peak at 9.3 billion, but with charitable initiatives such as better reproductive health care (code words for contraception and abortion) we think we can cap that at 8.3 billion."
McLerran commented: "Gates forgot to mention -- or perhaps he doesn't know -- that birth rates have declined by more than 50% since 1979. In most of the developed world, fertility is well below replacement level."
The "Demographic Winter" producer added: "Wherever the world's population caps, with rapidly falling birth rates, it will begin declining shortly thereafter -- perhaps as early as 2030, according to the United Nations Population Division. Instead of over-population, the crisis that confronts us in this century will be how to keep economies and nations going in the face of the coming de-population."
Said McLerran, "If the 'Good Club' really wants to do good, instead of adding fuel to the fire, it will consider the reality of declining birth rates and their impact on humanity in this century. Then perhaps they'll begin to realize that people are the one irreplaceable resource."
Contact: Don Feder
Source: Christian Newswire
Publish Date: May 27, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Family and Life advocates concerned with Sotomayor's "judicial activism"
Family and Life advocates concerned with Sotomayor's "judicial activism"
President Obama meets with Sonia Sotomayor in the Oval Office on May 21 / Photo Credit: White House
President Obama introduced Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee to replace retiring Justice David Souter this morning at the White House. Conservative court watchers reacted to the announcement by warning that Sotomayor's judicial record shows she is an activist judge.
This morning just after 10 a.m., President Obama introduced Sonia Sotomayor, emphasizing her rise from humble beginnings to graduating from Princeton and later Yale.
"Along the way," Obama said, she's faced down barriers, overcome the odds, lived out the American Dream that brought her parents here so long ago. ...What Sonia will bring to the Court, then, is not only the knowledge and experience acquired over a course of a brilliant legal career, but the wisdom accumulated from an inspiring life's journey."
Sotomayor will be the third woman to serve on the nation's highest court and the first Latina.
However, some court watchers are worried by remarks that Sotomayor made in a 2001 speech at Berkeley, where she stated that she believes it is appropriate for judges to consider their "experiences as women and people of color," and that these experiences should "affect our decisions."
She went on to say in the same speech, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Judge Sotomayor also said in a speech to the Duke Law School in 2005 that the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made," a comment that has stoked fears that she will be an activist judge.
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser, commented on the Supreme Court nominee's remarks by saying, "Women are best protected by the rule of law – and blind justice. Their rights are most endangered when personal preference, ideology or painful personal history inform judgment."
On the other hand, Judge Sotomayor appeared to distance herself from her remarks about letting personal experiences inform the law when she said today at the White House, "I firmly believe in the rule of law as the foundation for all of our basic rights."
While Sotomayor's judicial stance on protecting the unborn is somewhat unknown, the Latina judge did rule against abortion supporters who sued to overturn the Mexico City policy. The pro-abortion group claimed the policy violated their First Amendment, due process and equal protection rights.
Concerned Women for America's Wendy Wright called on all senators to demand ample time for a careful and thorough examination of the nominee's record.
"A necessary quality for a Supreme Court justice is to be committed to equal treatment of the law, regardless of ethnicity or sex. Sonia Sotomayor has an extensive record and several troubling opinions where she seems willing to expand certain 'rights' beyond what the Constitution establishes and the appropriate Supreme Court precedent," Wright said.
One other issue highlighted by CWA is the fact that Sotomayor has a high rate of having her rulings reversed. Out of seven cases brought before the Supreme Court, Sotomayor has only had one case upheld by the court.
Her reversal rate "alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senate's duty to do so," Wright stated.
Source: Catholic News Agency
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
President Obama meets with Sonia Sotomayor in the Oval Office on May 21 / Photo Credit: White House
President Obama introduced Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee to replace retiring Justice David Souter this morning at the White House. Conservative court watchers reacted to the announcement by warning that Sotomayor's judicial record shows she is an activist judge.
This morning just after 10 a.m., President Obama introduced Sonia Sotomayor, emphasizing her rise from humble beginnings to graduating from Princeton and later Yale.
"Along the way," Obama said, she's faced down barriers, overcome the odds, lived out the American Dream that brought her parents here so long ago. ...What Sonia will bring to the Court, then, is not only the knowledge and experience acquired over a course of a brilliant legal career, but the wisdom accumulated from an inspiring life's journey."
Sotomayor will be the third woman to serve on the nation's highest court and the first Latina.
However, some court watchers are worried by remarks that Sotomayor made in a 2001 speech at Berkeley, where she stated that she believes it is appropriate for judges to consider their "experiences as women and people of color," and that these experiences should "affect our decisions."
She went on to say in the same speech, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
Judge Sotomayor also said in a speech to the Duke Law School in 2005 that the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made," a comment that has stoked fears that she will be an activist judge.
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser, commented on the Supreme Court nominee's remarks by saying, "Women are best protected by the rule of law – and blind justice. Their rights are most endangered when personal preference, ideology or painful personal history inform judgment."
On the other hand, Judge Sotomayor appeared to distance herself from her remarks about letting personal experiences inform the law when she said today at the White House, "I firmly believe in the rule of law as the foundation for all of our basic rights."
While Sotomayor's judicial stance on protecting the unborn is somewhat unknown, the Latina judge did rule against abortion supporters who sued to overturn the Mexico City policy. The pro-abortion group claimed the policy violated their First Amendment, due process and equal protection rights.
Concerned Women for America's Wendy Wright called on all senators to demand ample time for a careful and thorough examination of the nominee's record.
"A necessary quality for a Supreme Court justice is to be committed to equal treatment of the law, regardless of ethnicity or sex. Sonia Sotomayor has an extensive record and several troubling opinions where she seems willing to expand certain 'rights' beyond what the Constitution establishes and the appropriate Supreme Court precedent," Wright said.
One other issue highlighted by CWA is the fact that Sotomayor has a high rate of having her rulings reversed. Out of seven cases brought before the Supreme Court, Sotomayor has only had one case upheld by the court.
Her reversal rate "alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senate's duty to do so," Wright stated.
Source: Catholic News Agency
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
SBA List: Women Should be Concerned About Sotomayor
SBA List: Women Should be Concerned About Sotomayor
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser offered the following reaction in response to today's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court by President Obama this morning:
"Women are best protected by the rule of law -- and blind justice. Their rights are most endangered when personal preference, ideology or painful personal history inform judgment. Susan B. Anthony and her early feminist compatriots fought for a human rights standard sustained only through blind justice. When evidence of personal preference appears in any Supreme Court nominee's judgment, it should give all women pause. Given what we know about Judge Sonia Sotomayor's own judicial philosophy -- including her support of policymaking from the bench -- Americans should be concerned about the role of personal preference in her overall judicial philosophy.
When it comes to protecting all human life, one group is never served by undermining the rights of another. Women will never be served by ignoring the rights of unborn children. Judge Sonia Sotomayor's record of support for judicial activism offers little comfort that she will be a friend to the unborn on the Supreme Court. As the Senate fulfills its Constitutional role to 'advise and consent,' Senators should ask the hard questions to thoroughly assess Sotomayor's judicial temperament, and reaffirm the authentic feminist standard of blind justice for all."
In a 2002 speech at Berkeley, Judge Sotomayor stated that she believes it is appropriate for a judge to consider their "experiences as women and people of color," which she believes should "affect our decisions." She went on to say in that same speech "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." She reiterated her commitment to that lawless judicial philosophy at Duke Law School in 2005 when she stated that the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made."
Contact: Joy Yearout
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser offered the following reaction in response to today's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court by President Obama this morning:
"Women are best protected by the rule of law -- and blind justice. Their rights are most endangered when personal preference, ideology or painful personal history inform judgment. Susan B. Anthony and her early feminist compatriots fought for a human rights standard sustained only through blind justice. When evidence of personal preference appears in any Supreme Court nominee's judgment, it should give all women pause. Given what we know about Judge Sonia Sotomayor's own judicial philosophy -- including her support of policymaking from the bench -- Americans should be concerned about the role of personal preference in her overall judicial philosophy.
When it comes to protecting all human life, one group is never served by undermining the rights of another. Women will never be served by ignoring the rights of unborn children. Judge Sonia Sotomayor's record of support for judicial activism offers little comfort that she will be a friend to the unborn on the Supreme Court. As the Senate fulfills its Constitutional role to 'advise and consent,' Senators should ask the hard questions to thoroughly assess Sotomayor's judicial temperament, and reaffirm the authentic feminist standard of blind justice for all."
In a 2002 speech at Berkeley, Judge Sotomayor stated that she believes it is appropriate for a judge to consider their "experiences as women and people of color," which she believes should "affect our decisions." She went on to say in that same speech "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." She reiterated her commitment to that lawless judicial philosophy at Duke Law School in 2005 when she stated that the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made."
Contact: Joy Yearout
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
France Considering Allowing Midwives to Perform Chemical Abortions
France Considering Allowing Midwives to Perform Chemical Abortions
The government of France is considering passing into law an amendment that would make it legal for midwives to administer RU-486, also known as the "abortion pill." According to reports the pro-abortion lobby is pushing for this law to be passed in the wake of a decrease in interest from physicians in becoming abortionists.
"The pro-abortion lobby would like to extend to midwives authorization to practice chemical abortion, as practitioners working in the city have not rushed to apply for approval to practice [abortions]," stated a letter to French Senators by a pro-life group known as Right to be Born (Driot de Naître).
"With 830 000 births per year, France already lacks midwives. It is not their role to administer a chemical that burns the baby in the womb of its mother," Right to be Born said.
The letter continued by stating that the pro-abortion lobby led the French people to believe that "chemical abortion is not traumatic for women." However, says the group, it is possible for RU-486 to cause severe bleeding such that hospitalization is required.
Right to be Born called upon the French Senate to "take a position consistent with the natural role of a midwife, with freedom of conscience for midwives, and with the sanctity of human life."
Click here for the Original French of Right to be Born's statement.
Contact: Alex Bush
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date:
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The government of France is considering passing into law an amendment that would make it legal for midwives to administer RU-486, also known as the "abortion pill." According to reports the pro-abortion lobby is pushing for this law to be passed in the wake of a decrease in interest from physicians in becoming abortionists.
"The pro-abortion lobby would like to extend to midwives authorization to practice chemical abortion, as practitioners working in the city have not rushed to apply for approval to practice [abortions]," stated a letter to French Senators by a pro-life group known as Right to be Born (Driot de Naître).
"With 830 000 births per year, France already lacks midwives. It is not their role to administer a chemical that burns the baby in the womb of its mother," Right to be Born said.
The letter continued by stating that the pro-abortion lobby led the French people to believe that "chemical abortion is not traumatic for women." However, says the group, it is possible for RU-486 to cause severe bleeding such that hospitalization is required.
Right to be Born called upon the French Senate to "take a position consistent with the natural role of a midwife, with freedom of conscience for midwives, and with the sanctity of human life."
Click here for the Original French of Right to be Born's statement.
Contact: Alex Bush
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date:
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY
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.
Wetzstein: Pro-Life Shift Not Surprising
It's rather ironic that as the most pro-choice government in U.S. history settles into its seats, a national poll finds that most Americans are pro-life. Some observers have tried to pooh-pooh this result, but it doesn't surprise me for two reasons explained below. There's no doubt that Americans intentionally elected many pro-choice politicians in 2006 and 2008. So it seems logical that Gallup pollsters would find strong support for abortion outside the voting booth, too.
Click here for the full article.
Planned Parenthood Urges Gov. Schwarzenegger to Rescind Harmful Budget Cuts to Women's
Planned Parenthood Federation of America is urging Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to rescind his proposal to cut $36 million in family planning funds from the state budget. These cuts would put preventive health care and family planning at risk for countless women in California.
Click here for the full article.
Billionaire Club In Bid To Curb Overpopulation
Some of America's leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world's population and speed up improvements in health and education. The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change. Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America's wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.
Click here for the full article.
UK Releases Shocking Advert To Prevent Teen Pregnancy
The UK's Health Service has released a new advertisement in an attempt to prevent teen pregnancy. The advert realistically shows a schoolgirl on a playground in labor, she is screaming surrounded by a crowd of students. It finishes with the website Hey Babe flickering across the screen. It is hoped that the shocking advert will help get the message out to teenagers, and promote the website which has lots of helpful advice on sexual issues, including contraception and abortion.
Click here for the full article.
Multiple Abortions Reaches Record High
Repeat abortions have reached a record high, figures released today reveal. One third of women who had an abortion last year were on their second, third or even eighth termination, new figures show. The statistics will fuel the debate over whether some women are using abortion as a form of contraception. In total, there were 64,715 repeat abortions in 2008, 33 per cent of the total and up from 64,230 the year before.
Click here for the full article.
Genocide Awareness Project, Abortion-Rights Protesters Clash In Red Square
The visual anti-abortion exhibit was displayed in Red Square, while abortion-rights protesters circled the project and chanted their opposition. "I'd say about 80 percent of the people just walk right on by, steal a couple of glances," said UW sophomore Marc Snyder, who organized GAP's presence on campus. "It's too hard to say if it's just apathy or [if] it's just too much to deal with all at once." GAP's methodology involves the juxta-position of graphic images of abortion with images of violence and mass killing, paired with evocative text. Some of the photographs depict Holocaust victims, lynchings and child abuse.
Click here for the full article.
Planned Parenthood On Sotomayor
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, weighs in on Pres. Obama's selection of Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring SCOTUS Justice David Souter: "This historic nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court sends a strong signal that President Obama understands the importance of ensuring that our Supreme Court justices respect precedent while also protecting our civil liberties.
Click here for the full article.
Wetzstein: Pro-Life Shift Not Surprising
It's rather ironic that as the most pro-choice government in U.S. history settles into its seats, a national poll finds that most Americans are pro-life. Some observers have tried to pooh-pooh this result, but it doesn't surprise me for two reasons explained below. There's no doubt that Americans intentionally elected many pro-choice politicians in 2006 and 2008. So it seems logical that Gallup pollsters would find strong support for abortion outside the voting booth, too.
Click here for the full article.
Planned Parenthood Urges Gov. Schwarzenegger to Rescind Harmful Budget Cuts to Women's
Planned Parenthood Federation of America is urging Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to rescind his proposal to cut $36 million in family planning funds from the state budget. These cuts would put preventive health care and family planning at risk for countless women in California.
Click here for the full article.
Billionaire Club In Bid To Curb Overpopulation
Some of America's leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world's population and speed up improvements in health and education. The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change. Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America's wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.
Click here for the full article.
UK Releases Shocking Advert To Prevent Teen Pregnancy
The UK's Health Service has released a new advertisement in an attempt to prevent teen pregnancy. The advert realistically shows a schoolgirl on a playground in labor, she is screaming surrounded by a crowd of students. It finishes with the website Hey Babe flickering across the screen. It is hoped that the shocking advert will help get the message out to teenagers, and promote the website which has lots of helpful advice on sexual issues, including contraception and abortion.
Click here for the full article.
Multiple Abortions Reaches Record High
Repeat abortions have reached a record high, figures released today reveal. One third of women who had an abortion last year were on their second, third or even eighth termination, new figures show. The statistics will fuel the debate over whether some women are using abortion as a form of contraception. In total, there were 64,715 repeat abortions in 2008, 33 per cent of the total and up from 64,230 the year before.
Click here for the full article.
Genocide Awareness Project, Abortion-Rights Protesters Clash In Red Square
The visual anti-abortion exhibit was displayed in Red Square, while abortion-rights protesters circled the project and chanted their opposition. "I'd say about 80 percent of the people just walk right on by, steal a couple of glances," said UW sophomore Marc Snyder, who organized GAP's presence on campus. "It's too hard to say if it's just apathy or [if] it's just too much to deal with all at once." GAP's methodology involves the juxta-position of graphic images of abortion with images of violence and mass killing, paired with evocative text. Some of the photographs depict Holocaust victims, lynchings and child abuse.
Click here for the full article.
Planned Parenthood On Sotomayor
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, weighs in on Pres. Obama's selection of Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring SCOTUS Justice David Souter: "This historic nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court sends a strong signal that President Obama understands the importance of ensuring that our Supreme Court justices respect precedent while also protecting our civil liberties.
Click here for the full article.
May 26, 2009
'Activist' appellate judge picked for Supreme Court
'Activist' appellate judge picked for Supreme Court
Sonia Sotomayor once told conference courts 'set policy'
A judge on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals who once boasted during a conference that it is at that level in the court system where "policy is made" has been named by President Obama to replace the retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a forum at the Duke University School of Law in 2005, Sonia Sotomayor said, "Court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know – and I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law, I know. OK, I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it, I'm – you know. OK. Having said that, the court of appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating – its interpretation, its application."
Sotomayor would replace the left-leaning Souter, and speculation was thick today whether she would – or even could – move the court further to the left.
In his announcement, Obama praised Sotomayor as "the kind of justice we need" on the Supreme Court.
He called her "an inspiring woman who I believe will make a great justice."
She is the first candidate of Puerto Rican heritage named to the nation's highest court. Born in the Bronx, the 54-year-old's father was a tool-and-die worker who died when she was a child. Her mother, a nurse, raised Sotomayor and her brother.
Sotomayor was married in 1976 but was divorced after seven years.
According to Wendy E. Long, counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network, Sotomayor is "a liberal judicial activist of the first order."
Long described Sotomayor as thinking "her own personal political agenda is more important tha[n] the law as written," and a Fox News commentator said she is neither a consensus-builder nor well-liked by her appellate panel co-workers.
Christian Broadcasting Network commentator David Brody warned the nomination could rebound on Obama.
"He may get her through because he has the numbers in the Senate but his poll numbers showing him as a centrist may take a hit. Keep an eye on Gallup," he said.
However, because of Souter's similar leanings, the nomination is unlikely to change the ideological bent of the court immediately.
Democrats have 59 votes in the Senate and would need 60 to clear a Republican filibuster. Also, according to Senate rules, at least one Republican would need to vote for her at the committee level.
Long earlier talked with Greg Corombos of Radio America/WND about why she believes the three women including Sotomayor who were at the top of Obama's list for the court should be scrutinized carefully.
Long said Sotomayor's activism is "exactly what the president has talked about. He likes that. He thinks that liberal judges are so smart and so enlightened and have such great instincts about what policy should be that they should be making the decisions about policy for the rest of us."
Long contends self-government is "destroyed" when unelected judges begin taking over the function of elected representatives.
Sotomayor was part of a panel on the 2nd Circuit that declined to rule on the merits of a major reverse-discrimination case regarding firefighters in New Haven, Conn. The case is currently in front of the Supreme Court.
"Judge Sotomayor bascially buried their claims and tried to throw them out without even really analyzing these very important questions about quotas and reverse discrimination and fairness under the law," according to Long.
Sotomayor has been on the 2nd Circuit since 1998. She began her legal career as an assistant district attorney in New York County, and after graduating from Princeton in 1976, she attended Yale. She's been active in the special interest New York City Chapter of the Women's Bar Association, the Hispanic National Bar Association, the Puerto Rican Bar Association, the Association of Judges of Hispanic Heritage and the National Association of Women Judges.
Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, described Sotomayor as "a radical pick that divides America.
"She believes the role of the court is to set policy which is exactly the philosophy that led to the Supreme Court turning into the National Abortion Control Board denying the American people to right to be heard on this critical issue," Yoest said. "This appointment would provide a pedestal for an avowed judicial activist to impose her personal policy and beliefs onto others from the bench at a time when the courts are at a crossroad and critical abortion regulations – supported by the vast majority of Americans – like partial-birth abortion and informed consent laws lie in the balance."
"Despite 17 years on the bench, Sotomayor has never directly decided whether a law regulating abortion is constitutional," noted officials with Liberty Counsel. "In Center for Reproductive Law & Policy v. Bush, she wrote an opinion that upheld the Mexico City Policy prohibiting federal funding of overseas abortions."
Liberty Counsel also noted, "Sotomayor does not believe that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to individuals."
"The ghost of George H. W. Bush still continues in the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. He gave us Justice David Souter and he may have given us Sotomayor. No one ever expected President Barack Obama to nominate someone who respects the original intent of the Constitution," said Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel. "While Sotomayor is not the easiest nomination the president was considering in his short list, she is by far not the most risky either. She has had a mixed history on cases. Her personality is not likely one that will persuade other justices to her point of view. Her nomination does not change the makeup of the United States Supreme Court."
"This is a very aggressive decision that will trigger a national debate on the issue of judicial activism," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law & Justice. "The background and philosophy of Judge Sotomayor clearly puts the Constitution front and center. How will this nominee view the Constitution and the rule of law? Will she embrace past comments when she stated that the 'court of appeals is where policy is made?' This nomination raises serious questions about the issue of legislating from the bench.
"We're hopeful that the members of the Senate will ask the tough questions about her judicial philosophy and temperament when the confirmation hearings get under way this summer," he said.
Click here to sign the petition hosted by Organized for Life to stop the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor.
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Sonia Sotomayor once told conference courts 'set policy'
A judge on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals who once boasted during a conference that it is at that level in the court system where "policy is made" has been named by President Obama to replace the retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a forum at the Duke University School of Law in 2005, Sonia Sotomayor said, "Court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know – and I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law, I know. OK, I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it, I'm – you know. OK. Having said that, the court of appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating – its interpretation, its application."
Sotomayor would replace the left-leaning Souter, and speculation was thick today whether she would – or even could – move the court further to the left.
In his announcement, Obama praised Sotomayor as "the kind of justice we need" on the Supreme Court.
He called her "an inspiring woman who I believe will make a great justice."
She is the first candidate of Puerto Rican heritage named to the nation's highest court. Born in the Bronx, the 54-year-old's father was a tool-and-die worker who died when she was a child. Her mother, a nurse, raised Sotomayor and her brother.
Sotomayor was married in 1976 but was divorced after seven years.
According to Wendy E. Long, counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network, Sotomayor is "a liberal judicial activist of the first order."
Long described Sotomayor as thinking "her own personal political agenda is more important tha[n] the law as written," and a Fox News commentator said she is neither a consensus-builder nor well-liked by her appellate panel co-workers.
Christian Broadcasting Network commentator David Brody warned the nomination could rebound on Obama.
"He may get her through because he has the numbers in the Senate but his poll numbers showing him as a centrist may take a hit. Keep an eye on Gallup," he said.
However, because of Souter's similar leanings, the nomination is unlikely to change the ideological bent of the court immediately.
Democrats have 59 votes in the Senate and would need 60 to clear a Republican filibuster. Also, according to Senate rules, at least one Republican would need to vote for her at the committee level.
Long earlier talked with Greg Corombos of Radio America/WND about why she believes the three women including Sotomayor who were at the top of Obama's list for the court should be scrutinized carefully.
Long said Sotomayor's activism is "exactly what the president has talked about. He likes that. He thinks that liberal judges are so smart and so enlightened and have such great instincts about what policy should be that they should be making the decisions about policy for the rest of us."
Long contends self-government is "destroyed" when unelected judges begin taking over the function of elected representatives.
Sotomayor was part of a panel on the 2nd Circuit that declined to rule on the merits of a major reverse-discrimination case regarding firefighters in New Haven, Conn. The case is currently in front of the Supreme Court.
"Judge Sotomayor bascially buried their claims and tried to throw them out without even really analyzing these very important questions about quotas and reverse discrimination and fairness under the law," according to Long.
Sotomayor has been on the 2nd Circuit since 1998. She began her legal career as an assistant district attorney in New York County, and after graduating from Princeton in 1976, she attended Yale. She's been active in the special interest New York City Chapter of the Women's Bar Association, the Hispanic National Bar Association, the Puerto Rican Bar Association, the Association of Judges of Hispanic Heritage and the National Association of Women Judges.
Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, described Sotomayor as "a radical pick that divides America.
"She believes the role of the court is to set policy which is exactly the philosophy that led to the Supreme Court turning into the National Abortion Control Board denying the American people to right to be heard on this critical issue," Yoest said. "This appointment would provide a pedestal for an avowed judicial activist to impose her personal policy and beliefs onto others from the bench at a time when the courts are at a crossroad and critical abortion regulations – supported by the vast majority of Americans – like partial-birth abortion and informed consent laws lie in the balance."
"Despite 17 years on the bench, Sotomayor has never directly decided whether a law regulating abortion is constitutional," noted officials with Liberty Counsel. "In Center for Reproductive Law & Policy v. Bush, she wrote an opinion that upheld the Mexico City Policy prohibiting federal funding of overseas abortions."
Liberty Counsel also noted, "Sotomayor does not believe that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to individuals."
"The ghost of George H. W. Bush still continues in the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. He gave us Justice David Souter and he may have given us Sotomayor. No one ever expected President Barack Obama to nominate someone who respects the original intent of the Constitution," said Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel. "While Sotomayor is not the easiest nomination the president was considering in his short list, she is by far not the most risky either. She has had a mixed history on cases. Her personality is not likely one that will persuade other justices to her point of view. Her nomination does not change the makeup of the United States Supreme Court."
"This is a very aggressive decision that will trigger a national debate on the issue of judicial activism," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law & Justice. "The background and philosophy of Judge Sotomayor clearly puts the Constitution front and center. How will this nominee view the Constitution and the rule of law? Will she embrace past comments when she stated that the 'court of appeals is where policy is made?' This nomination raises serious questions about the issue of legislating from the bench.
"We're hopeful that the members of the Senate will ask the tough questions about her judicial philosophy and temperament when the confirmation hearings get under way this summer," he said.
Click here to sign the petition hosted by Organized for Life to stop the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor.
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Today is the Final Day for Public Comment on New Embryo Research Guidelines
Today is the Final Day for Public Comment on New Embryo Research Guidelines
The public comment period on new draft guidelines for taxpayer-funded embryonic stem cell research (ESCr) comes to an end 11:00 p.m. E.S.T. Tuesday night.
Following President Obama's executive order March 9 releasing taxpayer funding for ESCR, the National Institutes of Health drafted guidelines that Cardinal Justin Rigali, chairman of the bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities, called "a new chapter in divorcing biomedical research from its necessary ethical foundation."
While Clinton-era ESCR policy was limited to allowing research on frozen embryos, so as to ensure parents had time to consider their decision to have the embryos destroyed, Rigali noted, "the new guidelines are broader in allowing destruction of newly created embryos that were never frozen, increasing the prospects for a rushed and biased consent process."
"Despite supporters' constant claim that this agenda involves only embryos that 'would otherwise be discarded,' the guidelines provide that the option of donating embryonic children for destructive research will be offered to parents alongside all other options, including those allowing the embryos to live," said Rigali.
"For the first time, federal tax dollars will be used to encourage destruction of living embryonic human beings for stem cell research - including human beings who otherwise would have survived and been born."
Click here to comment on the NIH draft guidelines
Click here to comment to your U.S. Senators and Representative
Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121
Full contact info for U.S. Congressmen can be found at...
Click here for the U.S. Senate
Click here for the U.S. House of Representatives
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 22, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The public comment period on new draft guidelines for taxpayer-funded embryonic stem cell research (ESCr) comes to an end 11:00 p.m. E.S.T. Tuesday night.
Following President Obama's executive order March 9 releasing taxpayer funding for ESCR, the National Institutes of Health drafted guidelines that Cardinal Justin Rigali, chairman of the bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities, called "a new chapter in divorcing biomedical research from its necessary ethical foundation."
While Clinton-era ESCR policy was limited to allowing research on frozen embryos, so as to ensure parents had time to consider their decision to have the embryos destroyed, Rigali noted, "the new guidelines are broader in allowing destruction of newly created embryos that were never frozen, increasing the prospects for a rushed and biased consent process."
"Despite supporters' constant claim that this agenda involves only embryos that 'would otherwise be discarded,' the guidelines provide that the option of donating embryonic children for destructive research will be offered to parents alongside all other options, including those allowing the embryos to live," said Rigali.
"For the first time, federal tax dollars will be used to encourage destruction of living embryonic human beings for stem cell research - including human beings who otherwise would have survived and been born."
Click here to comment on the NIH draft guidelines
Click here to comment to your U.S. Senators and Representative
Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121
Full contact info for U.S. Congressmen can be found at...
Click here for the U.S. Senate
Click here for the U.S. House of Representatives
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 22, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Filibuster Could Block Extreme Pro-Abort Obama Justice Pick Dawn Johnsen
Filibuster Could Block Extreme Pro-Abort Obama Justice Pick Dawn Johnsen
Criticism continues to pour in from pro-life lawmakers over the radical pro-abortion views of Dawn Johnsen, Obama's pick to head the Office of Legal Counsel, who reportedly does not have enough votes to overcome a Republican filibuster in the Senate. However, GOP judiciary committee members fear that Obama may move the nomination through while Congress is in recess over Memorial Day, a tactic known as a recess appointment.
Johnsen was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February along party lines for the Justice Department slot, where she would act as legal advisor to the president.
31 Indiana state senators have petitioned the two U.S. Senators from Indiana to reject the Johnsen nomination. The two U.S. Senators, Democrat Evan Bayh and the customarily pro-life Republican Richard Lugar, currently support the nomination.
"It's a statement from a very strong pro-life caucus," Indiana Senate President Pro Tempore David Long told the Associated Press about the petition from the Indiana senators. "It is not based on the fact she is pro-choice, it is based on the fact that she is radically so."
Since the nomination, pro-life lawmakers have expressed their concern that Dawn Johnsen, a professor at the Indiana University School of Law, has written some of the most extreme statements in favor of abortion on record as legal director of NARAL and staff counsel to the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project.
An architect of the Freedom of Choice Act, Johnsen told the Supreme Court in 1989 that any pro-life law is equivalent to forcing "involuntary servitude," because it "requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state's asserted interest."
Pro-life laws "reduce pregnant women to no more than fetal containers," said Johnsen, and thus anything less than unrestricted abortion violates the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibits slavery.
"Progressives must not portray all abortions as tragedies," Johnsen wrote as a contributor to the 2009 book The Constitution in 2020. "Senator Hillary Clinton ... took the aspiration a step in the wrong direction when she called for policy changes so that abortion 'does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances,'" she added.
In addition, Johnsen helped prepare the plaintiff's briefs for the 1988 case, United States Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, which sought to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status because of its pro-life advocacy.
"The president has said we have to find common ground on the issue of abortion, but his nomination of Dawn Johnsen to head up the office of legal counsel is among the most controversial of his nominees," said Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) in a floor speech Wednesday.
While Johnsen compared pregnancy to slavery, said Foxx: "I and millions of other women do not feel this way. We cherish the opportunity to have borne a child."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told Roll Call that the Senate vote would be delayed until Johnsen can accrue a filibuster-proof 60 votes.
"Right now we're finding out when to do that. I've had a number of conversations with some Republicans to find out if we have a couple of Republican votes," Reid said. "We need a couple Republican votes until we can get to 60."
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 22, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Criticism continues to pour in from pro-life lawmakers over the radical pro-abortion views of Dawn Johnsen, Obama's pick to head the Office of Legal Counsel, who reportedly does not have enough votes to overcome a Republican filibuster in the Senate. However, GOP judiciary committee members fear that Obama may move the nomination through while Congress is in recess over Memorial Day, a tactic known as a recess appointment.
Johnsen was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February along party lines for the Justice Department slot, where she would act as legal advisor to the president.
31 Indiana state senators have petitioned the two U.S. Senators from Indiana to reject the Johnsen nomination. The two U.S. Senators, Democrat Evan Bayh and the customarily pro-life Republican Richard Lugar, currently support the nomination.
"It's a statement from a very strong pro-life caucus," Indiana Senate President Pro Tempore David Long told the Associated Press about the petition from the Indiana senators. "It is not based on the fact she is pro-choice, it is based on the fact that she is radically so."
Since the nomination, pro-life lawmakers have expressed their concern that Dawn Johnsen, a professor at the Indiana University School of Law, has written some of the most extreme statements in favor of abortion on record as legal director of NARAL and staff counsel to the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project.
An architect of the Freedom of Choice Act, Johnsen told the Supreme Court in 1989 that any pro-life law is equivalent to forcing "involuntary servitude," because it "requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state's asserted interest."
Pro-life laws "reduce pregnant women to no more than fetal containers," said Johnsen, and thus anything less than unrestricted abortion violates the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibits slavery.
"Progressives must not portray all abortions as tragedies," Johnsen wrote as a contributor to the 2009 book The Constitution in 2020. "Senator Hillary Clinton ... took the aspiration a step in the wrong direction when she called for policy changes so that abortion 'does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances,'" she added.
In addition, Johnsen helped prepare the plaintiff's briefs for the 1988 case, United States Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, which sought to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status because of its pro-life advocacy.
"The president has said we have to find common ground on the issue of abortion, but his nomination of Dawn Johnsen to head up the office of legal counsel is among the most controversial of his nominees," said Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) in a floor speech Wednesday.
While Johnsen compared pregnancy to slavery, said Foxx: "I and millions of other women do not feel this way. We cherish the opportunity to have borne a child."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told Roll Call that the Senate vote would be delayed until Johnsen can accrue a filibuster-proof 60 votes.
"Right now we're finding out when to do that. I've had a number of conversations with some Republicans to find out if we have a couple of Republican votes," Reid said. "We need a couple Republican votes until we can get to 60."
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 22, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
U.S. bishops’ official: Stem cell guidelines ignore science and embryonic humanity
U.S. bishops' official: Stem cell guidelines ignore science and embryonic humanity
Msgr. David Malloy, General Secretary of the USCCB
The U.S. bishops' conference has submitted comment concerning the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines on embryonic stem cell research, saying the rules ignore science, ethics and the humanity of the embryo.
Msgr. David Malloy, General Secretary of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), authored the comments. He said the proposed guidelines miss an "enormous opportunity" to combine science and "responsible ethics." He declared it a "central fact of science" that the embryo is a human being "at a very early stage of his or her development." Federal advisory groups had acknowledged this fact, Msgr. Malloy said, citing the National Bioethics Advisory Commission appointed by President Clinton.
The monsignor insisted it was a human right not to be subjected to harmful experimentation and said laws which do not protect that right are of questionable moral legitimacy.
Noting alternative methods of stem cell research such as induced pluripotent stem cells, he decried President Obama's executive order which lifted funding restrictions on embryonic stem cell research.
According to Msgr. Malloy, the order also lifted requirements that NIH "thoroughly explore new avenues for obtaining pluripotent stem cells without destroying human embryos."
"Both science and ethics have been ignored in this decision," he charged.
"Avenues of stem cell research which pose no moral problem are now showing great promise. In fact, human patients suffering from all the conditions cited by President Obama when he signed his executive order – cancer, juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, heart disease – have been shown in peer-reviewed studies to benefit from clinical trials using human stem cells," he continued.
"And in every case, the benefit has come not from embryonic stem cells, but from the adult and cord blood stem cells that this organization and others have said should receive priority attention."
Msgr. Malloy said the guidelines do not seek to fund research in which embryos are created for the purpose of research, but he said they were "broader or more permissive" than any previous research policy in key respects.
"As the President noted," he said, "we must not make 'a false choice between sound science and moral values.' In fact, these sources of guidance both point in the same direction, away from destructive embryonic stem cell research. His executive order and these Guidelines nonetheless insist on a course of action that is both morally objectionable and, increasingly, scientifically obsolete."
"This is not merely a political or ideological problem, or a problem of religious dogma, but a deeply human problem: We are testing the limits of our obligation to treat all fellow human beings, of every age and condition, with basic respect," Msgr. Malloy said.
Source: Catholic News Agency
Publish Date: May 25, 200
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Msgr. David Malloy, General Secretary of the USCCB
The U.S. bishops' conference has submitted comment concerning the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines on embryonic stem cell research, saying the rules ignore science, ethics and the humanity of the embryo.
Msgr. David Malloy, General Secretary of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), authored the comments. He said the proposed guidelines miss an "enormous opportunity" to combine science and "responsible ethics." He declared it a "central fact of science" that the embryo is a human being "at a very early stage of his or her development." Federal advisory groups had acknowledged this fact, Msgr. Malloy said, citing the National Bioethics Advisory Commission appointed by President Clinton.
The monsignor insisted it was a human right not to be subjected to harmful experimentation and said laws which do not protect that right are of questionable moral legitimacy.
Noting alternative methods of stem cell research such as induced pluripotent stem cells, he decried President Obama's executive order which lifted funding restrictions on embryonic stem cell research.
According to Msgr. Malloy, the order also lifted requirements that NIH "thoroughly explore new avenues for obtaining pluripotent stem cells without destroying human embryos."
"Both science and ethics have been ignored in this decision," he charged.
"Avenues of stem cell research which pose no moral problem are now showing great promise. In fact, human patients suffering from all the conditions cited by President Obama when he signed his executive order – cancer, juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, heart disease – have been shown in peer-reviewed studies to benefit from clinical trials using human stem cells," he continued.
"And in every case, the benefit has come not from embryonic stem cells, but from the adult and cord blood stem cells that this organization and others have said should receive priority attention."
Msgr. Malloy said the guidelines do not seek to fund research in which embryos are created for the purpose of research, but he said they were "broader or more permissive" than any previous research policy in key respects.
"As the President noted," he said, "we must not make 'a false choice between sound science and moral values.' In fact, these sources of guidance both point in the same direction, away from destructive embryonic stem cell research. His executive order and these Guidelines nonetheless insist on a course of action that is both morally objectionable and, increasingly, scientifically obsolete."
"This is not merely a political or ideological problem, or a problem of religious dogma, but a deeply human problem: We are testing the limits of our obligation to treat all fellow human beings, of every age and condition, with basic respect," Msgr. Malloy said.
Source: Catholic News Agency
Publish Date: May 25, 200
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Obama Selects Top NYC Condom Pusher to Head CDC
Obama Selects Top NYC Condom Pusher to Head CDC
President Obama earlier this month appointed New York City Health Commissioner Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, a strong proponent of contraceptive-based HIV prevention, as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The appointment, which Obama announced May 15, does not require Senate confirmation.
Frieden, who received degrees in Medicine and Public Health from Columbia University, in 2007 headed up a massive media campaign featuring NYC-brand condoms, tens of millions of which have since been handed out to New Yorkers.
The "Get Some NYC Condom" campaign says on its site that the New York Department of Health "set a national precedent with its NYC Condom campaign, a Lifestyles condom in a chic, branded Gotham wrapper aimed at catching the public's eye and increasing free condom awareness and use in NYC."
Six months into the campaign, the department announced it was averaging 3 million condoms distributed per month - double the rate recorded in 2005.
"Take the worry of disease and pregnancy out of your sex life - using condoms can make sex more relaxed and enjoyable," said the department's website.
According to a 2007 New York Post article, then-archbishop of New York Cardinal Edward Egan and Brooklyn bishop Nicholas DiMarzio condemned the campaign, saying they were particularly disturbed that the "NYC" condoms were freely handed out by city workers to young teens on the streets.
"The decision of the City of New York to distribute [26] million free condoms to the public - and minors as well, according to news reports - is tragic and misguided," said the bishops in a joint statement. "Our political leaders fail to protect the moral tone of our community when they encourage inappropriate sexual activity by blanketing our neighborhoods with condoms."
In 2008, Morality in Media president Robert Peters criticized Frieden's campaign for its blaringly public approbation of condom use.
"Just as most Americans do not want to view endless ads for 'erectile dysfunction' products on TV, so most New Yorkers do not want to see endless ads for condomized promiscuity on TV and in the subway cars they and their children must ride," said Peters.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 22, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
President Obama earlier this month appointed New York City Health Commissioner Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, a strong proponent of contraceptive-based HIV prevention, as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The appointment, which Obama announced May 15, does not require Senate confirmation.
Frieden, who received degrees in Medicine and Public Health from Columbia University, in 2007 headed up a massive media campaign featuring NYC-brand condoms, tens of millions of which have since been handed out to New Yorkers.
The "Get Some NYC Condom" campaign says on its site that the New York Department of Health "set a national precedent with its NYC Condom campaign, a Lifestyles condom in a chic, branded Gotham wrapper aimed at catching the public's eye and increasing free condom awareness and use in NYC."
Six months into the campaign, the department announced it was averaging 3 million condoms distributed per month - double the rate recorded in 2005.
"Take the worry of disease and pregnancy out of your sex life - using condoms can make sex more relaxed and enjoyable," said the department's website.
According to a 2007 New York Post article, then-archbishop of New York Cardinal Edward Egan and Brooklyn bishop Nicholas DiMarzio condemned the campaign, saying they were particularly disturbed that the "NYC" condoms were freely handed out by city workers to young teens on the streets.
"The decision of the City of New York to distribute [26] million free condoms to the public - and minors as well, according to news reports - is tragic and misguided," said the bishops in a joint statement. "Our political leaders fail to protect the moral tone of our community when they encourage inappropriate sexual activity by blanketing our neighborhoods with condoms."
In 2008, Morality in Media president Robert Peters criticized Frieden's campaign for its blaringly public approbation of condom use.
"Just as most Americans do not want to view endless ads for 'erectile dysfunction' products on TV, so most New Yorkers do not want to see endless ads for condomized promiscuity on TV and in the subway cars they and their children must ride," said Peters.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 22, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Tiller Abortion Worker Honored at White House by Obama
Tiller Abortion Worker Honored at White House by Obama
Yet another connection between Pres. Obama and late-term abortionist George Tiller
Gold Star Mother Betty Pulliam, who lost a son in Viet Nam, now works to take the lives of other women's sons and daughters at George Tiller late-term abortion mill in Wichita, Kansas. Yesterday, she breakfasted with President Obama and was honored in our nation's capital as part of a Memorial Day observance.
This is yet another connection between Obama and late-term abortionist George Tiller. Obama's new Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, had close connections with Tiller. Pulliam was among those who were honored by Sebelius at a party held in Tiller's honor at the Kansas governor's mansion.
Pulliam, at 83, volunteers her time at Tiller's clinic on busy abortion days. She told the Wichita Eagle of her role as a Gold Star Mother, "You really don't want to belong to this club because in order to belong to this club, you have to lose a child. So nobody wants to belong to it."
"How ironic that Pulliam could make such a statement when she has dedicated a large portion of her life to insuring that other women lose their children to abortion. It is hypocrisy at best, and perhaps stems from some sick need to make sure that other women suffer as she has," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
"Abortion, by its very nature, devalues human life. Pulliam's work at Tiller's abortion clinic, which specializes in particularly heinous late-term abortions on healthy, viable babies, is a major contributor to that devaluation. On a day when our country honored those who willingly sacrificed the precious gift of life for the sake of others, Pulliam's work taking innocent lives through abortion dishonors their brave sacrifice."
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Yet another connection between Pres. Obama and late-term abortionist George Tiller
Gold Star Mother Betty Pulliam, who lost a son in Viet Nam, now works to take the lives of other women's sons and daughters at George Tiller late-term abortion mill in Wichita, Kansas. Yesterday, she breakfasted with President Obama and was honored in our nation's capital as part of a Memorial Day observance.
This is yet another connection between Obama and late-term abortionist George Tiller. Obama's new Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, had close connections with Tiller. Pulliam was among those who were honored by Sebelius at a party held in Tiller's honor at the Kansas governor's mansion.
Pulliam, at 83, volunteers her time at Tiller's clinic on busy abortion days. She told the Wichita Eagle of her role as a Gold Star Mother, "You really don't want to belong to this club because in order to belong to this club, you have to lose a child. So nobody wants to belong to it."
"How ironic that Pulliam could make such a statement when she has dedicated a large portion of her life to insuring that other women lose their children to abortion. It is hypocrisy at best, and perhaps stems from some sick need to make sure that other women suffer as she has," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
"Abortion, by its very nature, devalues human life. Pulliam's work at Tiller's abortion clinic, which specializes in particularly heinous late-term abortions on healthy, viable babies, is a major contributor to that devaluation. On a day when our country honored those who willingly sacrificed the precious gift of life for the sake of others, Pulliam's work taking innocent lives through abortion dishonors their brave sacrifice."
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: May 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
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.
Rhode Island Considers Public Cord-Blood Bank
For years, women have been able to store their babies' cord blood at a steep cost. Now, Rhode Island is working toward hosting New England's first public cord-blood bank.
Stem cells found in cord blood have been used to treat diseases and conditions such as leukemia and lymphoma.
The Rhode Island Blood Center and Women & Infants Hospital have started collecting donated umbilical-cord blood in a one-year trial program. Initially, the blood will be sent to the New Jersey Cord Blood Bank. The blood stored there and at other public blood banks is used to treat people around the world.
Click here for the full article.
Twelve Mexican states now protect right to life in their constitutions
The San Luis de Potosi State Congress in Mexico approved a measure Thursday reforming the State Constitution to protect the right to life of children from the moment of conception.
Representative Vicente Toledo Alvarez said the reform would ensure that the State's Constitution clearly recognizes the right to life as the most basic of all human rights and protects it from the moment of conception.
Before passage of the measure, Archbishop Luis Morales Reyes of San Luis Potosi said, "The Church has her principles and one of them is life. I am only stating that the Church supports life and will always support life, regardless of the politics or laws of the moment."
Click here for the full article.
Tennessee General Assembly Advances Bill To Restrict Abortion Access
The Tennessee House on Monday voted 76-22 to approve a resolution (S.J.R. 127) to amend the state constitution to allow the Legislature to impose stricter limits on abortion, the AP/Memphis Commercial Appeal reports. The resolution, which aims to void a 2000 Tennessee Supreme Court ruling, was passed by the state Senate in March, but it still has hurdles to overcome. In order to change the state constitution, the measure will have to be approved by a two-thirds majority of both houses in the next General Assembly, either in 2011 or 2012, before it could go to voters in 2014.
Click here for the full article.
CEDAW Committee Targets East Timor on Abortion
As pre-session working groups of the committee charged with overseeing compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) meet in advance of the committee's July session, the small Asian nation of East Timor has come under pressure for its continued criminalization of abortion. East Timor's new penal code, which will take effect early next month, continues to penalize the practice, including abortion in cases of rape or incest, but with the added proviso that exceptions can be made in cases where the mother's health is in jeopardy.
Click here for the full article.
Don't expect smooth sailing for Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor (2nd Circuit Court justice)The head of a group that promotes constitutionalist judicial nominees says President Obama will come to regret his choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be his first Supreme Court nominee because she is not only an extreme liberal ideologue but also an unethical jurist.
Click here for the full article.
Disappointment over abortion rise
Measures will be introduced to reduce repeated unwanted pregnancies
The Scottish Government has expressed disappointment after the number of abortions being carried out in Scotland rose to an all-time high last year.
There were 13,817 terminations in 2008, an increase of 79 on the previous year.
Almost 3,500 were carried out on teenagers and 343 were performed on girls aged under 16.
Click here for the full article.
Rhode Island Considers Public Cord-Blood Bank
For years, women have been able to store their babies' cord blood at a steep cost. Now, Rhode Island is working toward hosting New England's first public cord-blood bank.
Stem cells found in cord blood have been used to treat diseases and conditions such as leukemia and lymphoma.
The Rhode Island Blood Center and Women & Infants Hospital have started collecting donated umbilical-cord blood in a one-year trial program. Initially, the blood will be sent to the New Jersey Cord Blood Bank. The blood stored there and at other public blood banks is used to treat people around the world.
Click here for the full article.
Twelve Mexican states now protect right to life in their constitutions
The San Luis de Potosi State Congress in Mexico approved a measure Thursday reforming the State Constitution to protect the right to life of children from the moment of conception.
Representative Vicente Toledo Alvarez said the reform would ensure that the State's Constitution clearly recognizes the right to life as the most basic of all human rights and protects it from the moment of conception.
Before passage of the measure, Archbishop Luis Morales Reyes of San Luis Potosi said, "The Church has her principles and one of them is life. I am only stating that the Church supports life and will always support life, regardless of the politics or laws of the moment."
Click here for the full article.
Tennessee General Assembly Advances Bill To Restrict Abortion Access
The Tennessee House on Monday voted 76-22 to approve a resolution (S.J.R. 127) to amend the state constitution to allow the Legislature to impose stricter limits on abortion, the AP/Memphis Commercial Appeal reports. The resolution, which aims to void a 2000 Tennessee Supreme Court ruling, was passed by the state Senate in March, but it still has hurdles to overcome. In order to change the state constitution, the measure will have to be approved by a two-thirds majority of both houses in the next General Assembly, either in 2011 or 2012, before it could go to voters in 2014.
Click here for the full article.
CEDAW Committee Targets East Timor on Abortion
As pre-session working groups of the committee charged with overseeing compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) meet in advance of the committee's July session, the small Asian nation of East Timor has come under pressure for its continued criminalization of abortion. East Timor's new penal code, which will take effect early next month, continues to penalize the practice, including abortion in cases of rape or incest, but with the added proviso that exceptions can be made in cases where the mother's health is in jeopardy.
Click here for the full article.
Don't expect smooth sailing for Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor (2nd Circuit Court justice)The head of a group that promotes constitutionalist judicial nominees says President Obama will come to regret his choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be his first Supreme Court nominee because she is not only an extreme liberal ideologue but also an unethical jurist.
Click here for the full article.
Disappointment over abortion rise
Measures will be introduced to reduce repeated unwanted pregnancies
The Scottish Government has expressed disappointment after the number of abortions being carried out in Scotland rose to an all-time high last year.
There were 13,817 terminations in 2008, an increase of 79 on the previous year.
Almost 3,500 were carried out on teenagers and 343 were performed on girls aged under 16.
Click here for the full article.
May 22, 2009
Ask Obama Administration to Protect Human Embryos
Ask Obama Administration to Protect Human Embryos
When President Barack Obama opened the door for more federal funding of destructive embryonic stem-cell research, he also directed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to write guidelines for which type of research would be eligible for funding.
"These guidelines devote your tax dollars to experiments with embryonic stem cells, from destroyed human embryos," said Tony Perkins, president of FRC Action. "But the only successful treatments and cures come from adult stem cells, taken from bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, fat tissue and other body tissues."
Life advocates have until Tuesday, May 26, to submit comments on the guidelines.
TAKE ACTION
Please ask the National Institutes of Health to protect human embryos from destruction. Ask the agency to instead focus on adult stem-cell research, which already has provided dozens of therapies and treatments for humans. (Click here to use the NIH online form to comment)
When President Barack Obama opened the door for more federal funding of destructive embryonic stem-cell research, he also directed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to write guidelines for which type of research would be eligible for funding.
"These guidelines devote your tax dollars to experiments with embryonic stem cells, from destroyed human embryos," said Tony Perkins, president of FRC Action. "But the only successful treatments and cures come from adult stem cells, taken from bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, fat tissue and other body tissues."
Life advocates have until Tuesday, May 26, to submit comments on the guidelines.
TAKE ACTION
Please ask the National Institutes of Health to protect human embryos from destruction. Ask the agency to instead focus on adult stem-cell research, which already has provided dozens of therapies and treatments for humans. (Click here to use the NIH online form to comment)
Does Legalizing Abortion Abroad Protect Women’s Health?
Does Legalizing Abortion Abroad Protect Women's Health?
Analysis shows that modern medicine, not abortion, holds the key to reducing maternal mortality in the developing world.
Abortion supporters claim that legalization of abortion reduces abortion-related deaths, but the evidence suggests that modern medicine and quality health care — not legal abortion — hold the key to reducing maternal mortality in the developing world.
An analysis of World Health Organization and U.N. documents released today by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Global Outreach (MCCL) shows the impact of improved medical care and legalized abortion on maternal mortality rates in several countries.
Scott Fischbach, executive director of MCCL, presented the findings today in Geneva and called on the World Health Assembly to focus on the improvement of women's health care in the developing world.
"We have known for decades that most maternal deaths can be prevented with adequate nutrition, basic health care, and good obstetric care throughout pregnancy, at delivery, and postpartum," Fischbach said in a statement. "Yet some in the international community have focused resources primarily on legalizing abortion, in many cases at the expense of women's lives."
The analysis, "Does Legalizing Abortion Protect Women's Health?" reveals that legal abortion means more abortion. In South Africa, abortions rose from an estimated 1,600 in 1996 — the year before abortion was legalized — to 85,621 in 2005. In the U.S., abortions have increased from an estimated 500,000 a year just before Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 to a peak of 1.4 million in 1990.
In the developing world, the danger of legalized abortion is profound, the analysis found.
For example, in India, abortion is broadly legal, but maternal deaths are common due to dangerous medical conditions.
"Women generally at risk because they lack access to a doctor, hospital or antibiotics before abortion's legalization will face those same circumstances after legalization," Fischbach said. "And if legalization triggers a higher demand for abortion, as it has in most countries, more injured women will compete for those scarce medical resources."
Sri Lanka — where abortion is largely illegal — has reduced its maternal mortality rate by making professional midwives and supervisory nurse-midwives available in rural areas and by providing appropriate drugs and equipment, improved communication and transportation.
As one of his first acts in office, President Barack Obama lifted the Mexico City Policy, which means U.S. tax dollars now fund groups that perform or promote abortion overseas.
"We've seen evidence in the Obama administration of trying to tie legalization of abortion to aid in the developing world," said Bill Poehler, communications director for MCCL.
"We don't believe other countries should be held hostage and (forced to) change their pro-life laws so they can receive aid for health care and other needs."
Source: Citizenlink
Publish Date: May 21, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Analysis shows that modern medicine, not abortion, holds the key to reducing maternal mortality in the developing world.
Abortion supporters claim that legalization of abortion reduces abortion-related deaths, but the evidence suggests that modern medicine and quality health care — not legal abortion — hold the key to reducing maternal mortality in the developing world.
An analysis of World Health Organization and U.N. documents released today by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Global Outreach (MCCL) shows the impact of improved medical care and legalized abortion on maternal mortality rates in several countries.
Scott Fischbach, executive director of MCCL, presented the findings today in Geneva and called on the World Health Assembly to focus on the improvement of women's health care in the developing world.
"We have known for decades that most maternal deaths can be prevented with adequate nutrition, basic health care, and good obstetric care throughout pregnancy, at delivery, and postpartum," Fischbach said in a statement. "Yet some in the international community have focused resources primarily on legalizing abortion, in many cases at the expense of women's lives."
The analysis, "Does Legalizing Abortion Protect Women's Health?" reveals that legal abortion means more abortion. In South Africa, abortions rose from an estimated 1,600 in 1996 — the year before abortion was legalized — to 85,621 in 2005. In the U.S., abortions have increased from an estimated 500,000 a year just before Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 to a peak of 1.4 million in 1990.
In the developing world, the danger of legalized abortion is profound, the analysis found.
For example, in India, abortion is broadly legal, but maternal deaths are common due to dangerous medical conditions.
"Women generally at risk because they lack access to a doctor, hospital or antibiotics before abortion's legalization will face those same circumstances after legalization," Fischbach said. "And if legalization triggers a higher demand for abortion, as it has in most countries, more injured women will compete for those scarce medical resources."
Sri Lanka — where abortion is largely illegal — has reduced its maternal mortality rate by making professional midwives and supervisory nurse-midwives available in rural areas and by providing appropriate drugs and equipment, improved communication and transportation.
As one of his first acts in office, President Barack Obama lifted the Mexico City Policy, which means U.S. tax dollars now fund groups that perform or promote abortion overseas.
"We've seen evidence in the Obama administration of trying to tie legalization of abortion to aid in the developing world," said Bill Poehler, communications director for MCCL.
"We don't believe other countries should be held hostage and (forced to) change their pro-life laws so they can receive aid for health care and other needs."
Source: Citizenlink
Publish Date: May 21, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Congressional Committee Approves Proposal for Global Women's Office, Snubs Pro-Life Amendment
Congressional Committee Approves Proposal for Global Women's Office, Snubs Pro-Life Amendment
Office of Global Women's Issues Ambassador-at-Large Melanne Verveer
The House Foreign Affairs Committee yesterday approved the creation of a new Office of Global Women's Issues. However, the committee voted down efforts by one congressman to ensure that the office would not implement the radical abortion agenda espoused by both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Section 334 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which would take effect starting in Fiscal Year 2010, establishes an Office of Global Women's Issues to coordinate efforts "relating to gender integration and women's empowerment."
Pro-life advocates say they fear that, while there are many positive activities that such an office could engage in, under the leadership of Obama and Clinton it will likely actively participate in worldwide abortion advocacy.
Several weeks ago, Hillary Clinton confirmed to the same committee that the Obama administration was committed to dismantling legal protection for the unborn worldwide under the heading of "reproductive health."
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) offered an amendment to the Act that would authorize the Women's Issues office to act as an instrument for initiatives to help women globally, but without promoting abortion or harming unborn children.
Smith's amendment would have involved the Office in the establishment of pregnancy care centers, and included the explicit goal to fight the practice of forced abortions and sterilizations, and sex-selective abortions.
In general, Smith proposed that the Office recognize that "it is the policy of the United States Government not to lobby sovereign countries, including through multilateral mechanisms, to change their domestic laws and policies to legalize, fund, or promote abortion except in cases of forcible rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother."
"As part of a humane and consistent agenda for women, the Office of Global Women's issues ought to be first in line affirming the inherent value and innate dignity of mothers and their babies both before and after birth," said Smith in a statement concerning the amendment.
However, Chairman Howard Berman (D-CA) opposed Smith's amendment, and it was blocked 22-17 along party lines.
The original authorization for an Office of Global Women's Issues remains in the bill that will likely go to the full House of Representatives for consideration in the coming weeks.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 21, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Office of Global Women's Issues Ambassador-at-Large Melanne Verveer
The House Foreign Affairs Committee yesterday approved the creation of a new Office of Global Women's Issues. However, the committee voted down efforts by one congressman to ensure that the office would not implement the radical abortion agenda espoused by both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Section 334 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which would take effect starting in Fiscal Year 2010, establishes an Office of Global Women's Issues to coordinate efforts "relating to gender integration and women's empowerment."
Pro-life advocates say they fear that, while there are many positive activities that such an office could engage in, under the leadership of Obama and Clinton it will likely actively participate in worldwide abortion advocacy.
Several weeks ago, Hillary Clinton confirmed to the same committee that the Obama administration was committed to dismantling legal protection for the unborn worldwide under the heading of "reproductive health."
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) offered an amendment to the Act that would authorize the Women's Issues office to act as an instrument for initiatives to help women globally, but without promoting abortion or harming unborn children.
Smith's amendment would have involved the Office in the establishment of pregnancy care centers, and included the explicit goal to fight the practice of forced abortions and sterilizations, and sex-selective abortions.
In general, Smith proposed that the Office recognize that "it is the policy of the United States Government not to lobby sovereign countries, including through multilateral mechanisms, to change their domestic laws and policies to legalize, fund, or promote abortion except in cases of forcible rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother."
"As part of a humane and consistent agenda for women, the Office of Global Women's issues ought to be first in line affirming the inherent value and innate dignity of mothers and their babies both before and after birth," said Smith in a statement concerning the amendment.
However, Chairman Howard Berman (D-CA) opposed Smith's amendment, and it was blocked 22-17 along party lines.
The original authorization for an Office of Global Women's Issues remains in the bill that will likely go to the full House of Representatives for consideration in the coming weeks.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: May 21, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Defunding Planned Parenthood
Defunding Planned Parenthood
When the movie "Juno" received four Academy Award nominations and actually won the Oscar for best original screenplay, former Planned Parenthood President Gloria Feldt was worried. In the film, Juno, a pregnant teenager, decides against an abortion, a change of heart partially due to her experience at an abortion clinic.
Feldt admitted to About.com, "The clinic in Juno is terrible." But, she added: "It's a terribly untrue stereotype." When Juno arrives at the clinic, a flippant and heavily pierced receptionist seems to care more about forcing a lavender condom on her than on offering real help for her current dilemma. This is a parody on what we know about Planned Parenthood: They're a lot more about contraception and abortion than about abstinence and adoption.
Feldt described workers in Planned Parenthood clinics as "compassionate" and "dedicated to making women feel comfortable."
However, it's pretty hard to make someone "comfortable" about aborting her baby. Juno decided to opt out. She kept remembering something the pro-life volunteer outside the clinic told her: "It has fingernails."
Despite its name, Planned Parenthood is all about preventing children from being born -- and you and I are helping to foot the bill. By law, taxpayer dollars cannot fund abortion. But organizations with privately funded abortion programs are eligible for public funds if they are used for other purposes. The truth is, Planned Parenthood is, by far, the nation's largest abortion provider, performing more abortions every year. In fact their 2007-08 annual report shows an increase of more than 15,000 abortions in 2007. Even though it turns a huge profit, the organization receives more than $300 million in federal funding annually. Its leaders say they keep the money on the contraception side of the operation.
But, in some states like Texas, authorities are getting wise to Planned Parenthood.
Four clinics in San Antonio were ordered in April to cease and desist from all abortions. It seems they were aborting without licenses. Clinic officials claim they didn't know they needed a license to give out the abortion pill. They do. Because the clinics receive state funding, some Texas lawmakers are asking for an investigation.
Corpus Christi, seeing the need for some budgetary restraint, announced in December that it is cutting out Planned Parenthood. Citizens who pushed for this said the organization is far too wealthy and controversial to be deemed worthy of public support.
And, in the Texas Panhandle, after a 12-year battle, all Planned Parenthood clinics have been shut down. In 1997, there were 19 of them.
A couple of Texas legislators have proposed completely cutting Planned Parenthood from the state budget. The idea is to channel funding from Planned Parenthood clinics, which also offer pap smears, cancer screening and contraception, to general practice clinics.
Other cities and states are looking at defunding Planned Parenthood. In Orange County, Calif., supervisors took steps in April to eliminate funding for "health education" programs at sites where abortions also are performed. This is a trend that should be encouraged.
Contact: Penna Dexter
Source: Baptist Press
Publish Date: May 21, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
When the movie "Juno" received four Academy Award nominations and actually won the Oscar for best original screenplay, former Planned Parenthood President Gloria Feldt was worried. In the film, Juno, a pregnant teenager, decides against an abortion, a change of heart partially due to her experience at an abortion clinic.
Feldt admitted to About.com, "The clinic in Juno is terrible." But, she added: "It's a terribly untrue stereotype." When Juno arrives at the clinic, a flippant and heavily pierced receptionist seems to care more about forcing a lavender condom on her than on offering real help for her current dilemma. This is a parody on what we know about Planned Parenthood: They're a lot more about contraception and abortion than about abstinence and adoption.
Feldt described workers in Planned Parenthood clinics as "compassionate" and "dedicated to making women feel comfortable."
However, it's pretty hard to make someone "comfortable" about aborting her baby. Juno decided to opt out. She kept remembering something the pro-life volunteer outside the clinic told her: "It has fingernails."
Despite its name, Planned Parenthood is all about preventing children from being born -- and you and I are helping to foot the bill. By law, taxpayer dollars cannot fund abortion. But organizations with privately funded abortion programs are eligible for public funds if they are used for other purposes. The truth is, Planned Parenthood is, by far, the nation's largest abortion provider, performing more abortions every year. In fact their 2007-08 annual report shows an increase of more than 15,000 abortions in 2007. Even though it turns a huge profit, the organization receives more than $300 million in federal funding annually. Its leaders say they keep the money on the contraception side of the operation.
But, in some states like Texas, authorities are getting wise to Planned Parenthood.
Four clinics in San Antonio were ordered in April to cease and desist from all abortions. It seems they were aborting without licenses. Clinic officials claim they didn't know they needed a license to give out the abortion pill. They do. Because the clinics receive state funding, some Texas lawmakers are asking for an investigation.
Corpus Christi, seeing the need for some budgetary restraint, announced in December that it is cutting out Planned Parenthood. Citizens who pushed for this said the organization is far too wealthy and controversial to be deemed worthy of public support.
And, in the Texas Panhandle, after a 12-year battle, all Planned Parenthood clinics have been shut down. In 1997, there were 19 of them.
A couple of Texas legislators have proposed completely cutting Planned Parenthood from the state budget. The idea is to channel funding from Planned Parenthood clinics, which also offer pap smears, cancer screening and contraception, to general practice clinics.
Other cities and states are looking at defunding Planned Parenthood. In Orange County, Calif., supervisors took steps in April to eliminate funding for "health education" programs at sites where abortions also are performed. This is a trend that should be encouraged.
Contact: Penna Dexter
Source: Baptist Press
Publish Date: May 21, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
2 points of truth among Obama's 'wild word fraud'
2 points of truth among Obama's 'wild word fraud'
I was at the Grotto on the Notre Dame campus Sunday afternoon when President Barack Obama received his honorary doctor of laws degree and gave his commencement speech.
At the same time, Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life officiated an alternative service for those who couldn't bear to see such a prominent enabler of child murder lauded at a Catholic university.
Whoops, was "prominent enabler of child murder" the sort of "demonizing" Obama preached against in his homily?
I did indeed think at first it was a homily. While listening to Father Pavone with one ear, I listened to Obama with an earpiece in the other ear thanks to a friend who placed her cell phone by her television.
Obama kept fading in and out. I only caught:
Your generation must decide how to save God's creation. … We too often seek advantage over others. … Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest. … The strong too often dominate the weak … admirable conviction about the sacredness of life … women who do carry their children to term [emphasis mine] … co-exist with … civility … to give future generations the same chance that you had … the Golden Rule – the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love … realize the dream of civil rights for all of God's children … all children of God … the same love of family, the same fulfillment of a life well lived …
"The Emerging Brave New World" highlights the gradual dehumanization of human beings that has invaded American culture
Wow, I thought, maybe Notre Dame President John Jenkins was right: Exalting Obama had indeed provided an opportunity to dialogue about abortion. They must have had one powerful conversation during the mile-long limo trip from the South Bend airport to the Joyce Center. Obama had been converted!
But later I filled in the gaps by reading the entire text of Obama's speech and was only reminded what a twisted and deceptive guy we have on our hands as president.
And audacious, but we knew that. Obama took the opportunity presented him on a Catholic podium to smooth over and promote his pro-death agenda, like omitting the word "embryonic" when explaining:
Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in an admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.
How disingenuous to exclude what the moral fight is about. And how disingenuous to pose such a faulty premise, that to save one person's life we must kill another.
There were so many more examples.
But in the midst of wild word fraud, Obama made two profound and true statements.
The first was an insight into how Obama operates. This came as he retold a story from his book "The Audacity of Hope," about a doctor who called him out for shrill descriptions of pro-lifers on his Senate campaign website:
And I didn't change my underlying position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my website.
This is Obama on life issues in a nutshell. He's pro-death to the core, but he wordsmiths to sound reasonable about it.
Obama's other statement gave the real bottom line:
Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it … the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.
Obama was admitting, I think for the first time, that the pro-abortion and pro-life views are irrevocably and diametrically opposed. They're not fixable.
So the best Obama can do is call for pro-lifers to chill, to not "demonize." Why? As one pro-lifer e-mailed me:
Obama wants to turn down the vitriol in the debate, which is totally in the favor of abortion, claiming we need to be more civil to each other, i.e., we should stop demonizing the abortion. Which translates: Don't out me.
It's too late. The dust certainly hasn't settled on this weekend's Notre Dame debacle, so we don't know how it will ultimately impact the fight over abortion one way or the other.
But one thing is for sure: Obama has now been branded as radically pro-abortion. What pro-lifers have unsuccessfully attempted since 2004 when Obama ran for U.S. Senate, he and Notre Dame accomplished in a month.
And polls strangely show this is beginning to matter more and more to the American people.
Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: May 20, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
I was at the Grotto on the Notre Dame campus Sunday afternoon when President Barack Obama received his honorary doctor of laws degree and gave his commencement speech.
At the same time, Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life officiated an alternative service for those who couldn't bear to see such a prominent enabler of child murder lauded at a Catholic university.
Whoops, was "prominent enabler of child murder" the sort of "demonizing" Obama preached against in his homily?
I did indeed think at first it was a homily. While listening to Father Pavone with one ear, I listened to Obama with an earpiece in the other ear thanks to a friend who placed her cell phone by her television.
Obama kept fading in and out. I only caught:
Your generation must decide how to save God's creation. … We too often seek advantage over others. … Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest. … The strong too often dominate the weak … admirable conviction about the sacredness of life … women who do carry their children to term [emphasis mine] … co-exist with … civility … to give future generations the same chance that you had … the Golden Rule – the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love … realize the dream of civil rights for all of God's children … all children of God … the same love of family, the same fulfillment of a life well lived …
"The Emerging Brave New World" highlights the gradual dehumanization of human beings that has invaded American culture
Wow, I thought, maybe Notre Dame President John Jenkins was right: Exalting Obama had indeed provided an opportunity to dialogue about abortion. They must have had one powerful conversation during the mile-long limo trip from the South Bend airport to the Joyce Center. Obama had been converted!
But later I filled in the gaps by reading the entire text of Obama's speech and was only reminded what a twisted and deceptive guy we have on our hands as president.
And audacious, but we knew that. Obama took the opportunity presented him on a Catholic podium to smooth over and promote his pro-death agenda, like omitting the word "embryonic" when explaining:
Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in an admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.
How disingenuous to exclude what the moral fight is about. And how disingenuous to pose such a faulty premise, that to save one person's life we must kill another.
There were so many more examples.
But in the midst of wild word fraud, Obama made two profound and true statements.
The first was an insight into how Obama operates. This came as he retold a story from his book "The Audacity of Hope," about a doctor who called him out for shrill descriptions of pro-lifers on his Senate campaign website:
And I didn't change my underlying position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my website.
This is Obama on life issues in a nutshell. He's pro-death to the core, but he wordsmiths to sound reasonable about it.
Obama's other statement gave the real bottom line:
Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it … the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.
Obama was admitting, I think for the first time, that the pro-abortion and pro-life views are irrevocably and diametrically opposed. They're not fixable.
So the best Obama can do is call for pro-lifers to chill, to not "demonize." Why? As one pro-lifer e-mailed me:
Obama wants to turn down the vitriol in the debate, which is totally in the favor of abortion, claiming we need to be more civil to each other, i.e., we should stop demonizing the abortion. Which translates: Don't out me.
It's too late. The dust certainly hasn't settled on this weekend's Notre Dame debacle, so we don't know how it will ultimately impact the fight over abortion one way or the other.
But one thing is for sure: Obama has now been branded as radically pro-abortion. What pro-lifers have unsuccessfully attempted since 2004 when Obama ran for U.S. Senate, he and Notre Dame accomplished in a month.
And polls strangely show this is beginning to matter more and more to the American people.
Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: May 20, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)