June 12, 2009
You Just Never Know Who Might Walk in Next
I'd like to take a couple of minutes to talk about how we can and should response to those who vigorously (and heatedly) contest our views. It many ways it takes its inspiration from a conversation I was a party to yesterday.
My answer is an elaboration on one thought: First, and foremost, do not respond in kind. This applies regardless of whom the brickbats come from.
Over the years I have been on the receiving end of some scorching correspondence from people who clearly consider themselves far more pro-life than yours truly and who believe that their ideas and approaches are superior.
Using the biblical admonition that a gentle answer turns away wrath, I found that in most instances the real objection was something altogether different than what was expressed. By the end of most exchanges, at worst we agreed to disagree, at best they could see the validity of my perspective, and even occasionally agreed.
Some would say that's fine for disagreements "in the family," but question whether that extends to those outside the fold. I would argue it applies even more so for those (a) who consider themselves neutral, and (b) those who are actively on the other side.
I correspond with a half-dozen reporters and columnists. Probably half would insist they are strict non-partisans. This (for example), in spite of coverage of pro-abortion President Barack Obama that is so reminiscent of a school-girl crush it positively makes you cringe with embarrassment.
In our back and forth, I've tried to point out example after example of where they have simply taken Obama's promises of seeking "common ground" as gospel. I try to make the case that even the most cursory critical glance would show that he is like the general who not only wants to take back all the territory lost in past conflicts, he also wants to invade your country. I can't honestly say it's had any immediate effect, but I'm believe I am planting seeds of, if not doubt, at least skepticism. Our conversations would likely end instantaneously if I adopted a hostile tone.
But what about those who are on the other side? Let me be clear, I am not saying that keeping the conversation at room temperature will suddenly turn them into pro-lifers.
What I am saying is a variation of what I've said for years about "mainstream reporters" which I have tried to use to guide my response to them. It is virtually impossible to penetrate a common self-understanding –-a self-portrait that pictures themselves as a combination of almost disinterest seekers after truth and do-gooders. That's the material you deal with and if I don't take it into account conversations go nowhere.
I only know a couple of hard-core, hard-core pro-abortionists personally, but I read as much of their material as time permits. They insist they are genuinely concerned about women, which is one reason they so adamantly insist that any evidence that abortion is not good for women (increased incidence of breast cancer, poorer subsequent relationships, etc.) cannot possibly be true.
Conversions to our side of the magnitude of Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the founders of NARAL, are few and far between. But lower-level converts are another matter.
However what if, as will almost always be the case, someone stays resolutely pro-abortion ("pro-choice")? Has it just been a waste of time?
No, and let offer two reasons why. First, like the effort to help the reporter who can't see his clear-as-day biases for what they are, it is useful to show pro-abortionists we aren't the cardboard caricature they've created in their mind.
The first time I was ever at the tender mercies of a cadre of pro-abortion feminists was in the 1970s. I was at the University of Minnesota, asking the steering committee of the organizations that distributed funds to student groups for money for our campus pro-life group.
They didn't even pretend to be impartial, or that they would consider my request for a nanosecond. It was an ugly scene that tested my mettle. As angry as I was, I never lost my cool or raised my voice.
Afterwards, one of the members of the jury came up to me while I was cooling my heels in the student union. She had no more use for my group's views than the rest of the sisterhood, but she went out of her way to apologize for the uncivil and unfair manner they had treated my request. Second, you just never know. Over the next decade there will be new issues that make their way through the legislatures and up through the court system. To take just two examples, will all pro-abortionists, especially self-style "pro-choice feminists," be forever and a day comfortable with sex-selection abortions? With cloning human embryos who are brought into existence with a pre-existing expiration date ("clone-and kill")?
None of this suggests we retreat an inch, or that there is the need to. Our cause--finding a better solution to a crisis pregnancy than killing unborn children--is just, which means it is not dependent on public opinion polls. ( I say that even when the data is trending our way, as it is now.) I am more confident of my position today than I was 30+ years ago.
It does suggest that we always and forever keep the doors open. You just never know who might walk in next.
Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Women Must be Told about Risks of Abortion: Pro-Abortion Columnist
The proven risk of having a premature birth caused by previous abortions has lead Barbara Kay, a supporter of abortion availability and columnist for the National Post, to state that abortionists must tell these risks to women seeking an abortion, so that they may make a truly informed decision.
Kay says that "researchers in the field of human reproduction have been quietly beavering away on mounting epidemiological data around IA [Induced Abortion] and its link to preterm birth (PTB) in a future pregnancy. Recent findings in their research remind us of a 'right' generally observed in the breach: the right of women seeking safe abortions to informed consent."
Kay observes that preterm birth "presents a heightened risk for birth defects' and that the risk increases the more premature the birth is."
She writes that "in 2007 Dr. Greg Alexander of the U. S. Institutes of Medicine (a branch of the National Academy of Sciences) identified a 'prior first trimester induced abortion' as an 'immutable medical risk factor associated with preterm birth.' "
Kay also quotes a 2008 Lancet article, where Drs. Jay Iams, Robert Romero, and Robert L. Goldenberg say that "greater public and professional awareness of evidence that repeated uterine instrumentation -- e. g. uterine curettage [including "suction" abortion] or endometrial biopsy -- is associated with increased risk of subsequent preterm birth might over time influence [government] decision-making about the procedure."
Since these studies are so accessible to abortionists, Kay says that if she "were the mother of a post-IA, PTB infant or toddler with autism or cerebral palsy, and had not been informed as a matter of regulatory course of IA's risk for a future PTB, I'd be angry. Litigiously so."
She concludes by asking: "Abortion on demand: empowerment -- or bamboozlement -- of women?"
Click here to read Barbara Kay's Column "The abortion issue we're ignoring"
Contact: Alex Bush
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY
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.
Documentary Explores Debate over Stem-Cell Research
A new documentary from The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network addresses the controversy over life-destroying embryonic stem-cell research versus ethical, adult stem-cell research.
In "Lines That Divide," prominent scientists from both sides of the debate discuss the details surrounding modern-day research.
Wesley J. Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, presents a pro-life perspective.
Click here for the full article.
Cloning for Stem Cells 'Redundant'
Australia's first application for a licence to clone human embryos for stem cell research should be knocked back because recent scientific discoveries have made the procedure redundant, critics say. Ethicists, religious heads and anti-cloning groups yesterday hit out at the joint move by Sydney IVF and Victoria's Monash Immunology and Stem Cell laboratories to seek permission from the National Health and Medical Research Council to clone human embryonic stem cells. The scientists want to implant discarded eggs left over from IVF treatment with diseased cells from an adult to create embryonic stem cells that are an exact replica of the donor, to help develop treatments for diseases.
Click here for the full article.
PETA Cancels Plan for Abortion-Related Billboard Campaign
An animal rights group has abandoned plans to run billboards in Wichita that urge people on both sides of the abortion debate to go vegetarian. "We are disappointed that our artwork has been rejected by the Wichita-area billboard companies," said Lindsay Rajt, campaign manager for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The proposed billboards were prompted by the shooting death of abortion doctor George Tiller last week. One says, "Pro-Life? Go Vegetarian;" the other, "Pro-Choice? Choose Vegetarian."
Click here for the full article.
'Tiller the Killer' Was Excommunicated
George Tiller had previously been excommunicated by a Lutheran congregation on account of his lack of repentance about and refusal to stop his occupation. That Lutheran congregation was a member of my church body, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. Excommunication doesn't happen terribly frequently in this day and age but it's not unheard of. I don't know any of the specifics about his past congregation or what led to the discipline and anticipated learning more about it when it was covered by the mainstream media. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. When the news broke, I had many people who know that I'm Lutheran ask how it was possible that his church had not disciplined him or otherwise encouraged him to stop performing abortions. I had hoped that there would be stories exploring Tiller's religious beliefs and church membership and that the stories would explain the difference between the ELCA and the LCMS. There is obviously quite a difference between a church body that would discipline a practicing abortion doctor and one that would welcome him in membership.
Click here for the full article.
Opposition To Abortion Rights Declining Among Black Voters, Opinion Pieces States
"In recent years, conservative political strategists have painted African Americans as being more opposed to abortion than the white population," but experts believe that there actually "is a declining black support for conservative social policies like abortion," Tracie Powell, a former congressional fellow with the American Political Science Association, writes in a CQ Politics opinion piece. According to Powell, a recent Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey found that 49% of black U.S. residents -- who generally are considered more religious than the entire U.S. population -- are in favor of keeping abortion legal in most or all cases.
Powell continues that experts vary in their explanations of the declining opposition to abortion rights among blacks. She writes that Christopher Metzler, an associate dean at Georgetown University, said that economic concerns, such as the high unemployment rate for black workers, have become more important than abortion for the group. According to Powell, Metzler said that black U.S. residents also have started questioning the pro-life agenda because they received little support from conservatives in return.
Click here for the full article.
Documentary Explores Debate over Stem-Cell Research
A new documentary from The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network addresses the controversy over life-destroying embryonic stem-cell research versus ethical, adult stem-cell research.
In "Lines That Divide," prominent scientists from both sides of the debate discuss the details surrounding modern-day research.
Wesley J. Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, presents a pro-life perspective.
Click here for the full article.
Cloning for Stem Cells 'Redundant'
Australia's first application for a licence to clone human embryos for stem cell research should be knocked back because recent scientific discoveries have made the procedure redundant, critics say. Ethicists, religious heads and anti-cloning groups yesterday hit out at the joint move by Sydney IVF and Victoria's Monash Immunology and Stem Cell laboratories to seek permission from the National Health and Medical Research Council to clone human embryonic stem cells. The scientists want to implant discarded eggs left over from IVF treatment with diseased cells from an adult to create embryonic stem cells that are an exact replica of the donor, to help develop treatments for diseases.
Click here for the full article.
PETA Cancels Plan for Abortion-Related Billboard Campaign
An animal rights group has abandoned plans to run billboards in Wichita that urge people on both sides of the abortion debate to go vegetarian. "We are disappointed that our artwork has been rejected by the Wichita-area billboard companies," said Lindsay Rajt, campaign manager for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The proposed billboards were prompted by the shooting death of abortion doctor George Tiller last week. One says, "Pro-Life? Go Vegetarian;" the other, "Pro-Choice? Choose Vegetarian."
Click here for the full article.
'Tiller the Killer' Was Excommunicated
George Tiller had previously been excommunicated by a Lutheran congregation on account of his lack of repentance about and refusal to stop his occupation. That Lutheran congregation was a member of my church body, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. Excommunication doesn't happen terribly frequently in this day and age but it's not unheard of. I don't know any of the specifics about his past congregation or what led to the discipline and anticipated learning more about it when it was covered by the mainstream media. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. When the news broke, I had many people who know that I'm Lutheran ask how it was possible that his church had not disciplined him or otherwise encouraged him to stop performing abortions. I had hoped that there would be stories exploring Tiller's religious beliefs and church membership and that the stories would explain the difference between the ELCA and the LCMS. There is obviously quite a difference between a church body that would discipline a practicing abortion doctor and one that would welcome him in membership.
Click here for the full article.
Opposition To Abortion Rights Declining Among Black Voters, Opinion Pieces States
"In recent years, conservative political strategists have painted African Americans as being more opposed to abortion than the white population," but experts believe that there actually "is a declining black support for conservative social policies like abortion," Tracie Powell, a former congressional fellow with the American Political Science Association, writes in a CQ Politics opinion piece. According to Powell, a recent Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey found that 49% of black U.S. residents -- who generally are considered more religious than the entire U.S. population -- are in favor of keeping abortion legal in most or all cases.
Powell continues that experts vary in their explanations of the declining opposition to abortion rights among blacks. She writes that Christopher Metzler, an associate dean at Georgetown University, said that economic concerns, such as the high unemployment rate for black workers, have become more important than abortion for the group. According to Powell, Metzler said that black U.S. residents also have started questioning the pro-life agenda because they received little support from conservatives in return.
Click here for the full article.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA is coming to CHICAGO
PRO-LIFE EVENTS
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA is coming to CHICAGO
President Barack Obama is coming to Chicago Monday to speak at the American Medical Association delegates meeting at the Hyatt Regency downtown.
Obama will be trying to convince the AMA doctors to support his new health care plan -- crafted with help from Planned Parenthood!
Eric Scheidler is going to be there to protest Obama's support for abortion and to proclaim the to the AMA and the media that "Abortion is not health care."
You can join him at the Hyatt Regency Monday at 10:30 a.m. He will bring plenty of signs and flyers.
Together we'll call on President Obama to follow through on his promise to seek common ground with pro-lifers and do all he can to help women who CHOOSE LIFE for their babies.
Here are all the details:
EVENT: Protest Obama at AMA Meeting
WHEN: Monday, June 15 at 10:30 a.m.
WHERE: 151 E. Wacker Dr., Chicago
For more information:
Eric Scheidler Pro-Life Action League
Tel: 630-896-1200
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA is coming to CHICAGO
President Barack Obama is coming to Chicago Monday to speak at the American Medical Association delegates meeting at the Hyatt Regency downtown.
Obama will be trying to convince the AMA doctors to support his new health care plan -- crafted with help from Planned Parenthood!
Eric Scheidler is going to be there to protest Obama's support for abortion and to proclaim the to the AMA and the media that "Abortion is not health care."
You can join him at the Hyatt Regency Monday at 10:30 a.m. He will bring plenty of signs and flyers.
Together we'll call on President Obama to follow through on his promise to seek common ground with pro-lifers and do all he can to help women who CHOOSE LIFE for their babies.
Here are all the details:
EVENT: Protest Obama at AMA Meeting
WHEN: Monday, June 15 at 10:30 a.m.
WHERE: 151 E. Wacker Dr., Chicago
For more information:
Eric Scheidler Pro-Life Action League
Tel: 630-896-1200
June 11, 2009
'Choose Life' Specialty License Plate Celebrates its 10th Anniversary: Illinois Still in Battle for Plate Approval; 24 Other States See Profit and Success
Today, June 10, marks the 10th anniversary of the Choose Life specialty license plate. According to a Gainesville Sun article, the plates are available in 24 states and have generated more than $10 million in user fees nationwide. Six of these states, including Arizona and Missouri, approved their own versions of the plate only this year.
Illinoisans, however, remains unable to buy the Choose Life plate, though the Chicago-based Thomas More Society is working to change this. In April of this year, the Thomas More Society filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review and reverse a decision prohibiting the issuance and sale of "Choose Life" specialty license plates in Illinois. The Supreme Court's decision could have a major effect on the availability of these plates in every state in the U.S.
While the odds against the Supreme Court agreeing to hear any given appeal may seem overwhelming (only 1 of every 120 petitions has been granted in recent years), Brejcha and the other Choose Life Illinois lawyers are optimistic.
"If anything, our clients' claim against Illinois is overripe for review," continues Brejcha. "Our petition for review highlights the fact that litigation concerning the 'Choose Life' plates over the last ten years has created a patchwork of conflicting decisions. We will be greatly surprised, as well as disappointed, if the Court fails to grant review."
Background of Illinois "Choose Life" Plates
Over 25,000 Illinois citizens have signed petitions for the "Choose Life" plate, sale proceeds of which were to fund Illinois adoption agencies to help children find lifetime homes with loving families. However, Illinois authorities stymied efforts to get the plate approved, even though scores of other specialty plates, from supporting troops or peace to celebrating college fraternities, were approved routinely.
After the "Choose Life" petitions were submitted, bills introduced in the Illinois General Assembly were diverted to a special subcommittee, chaired by then State Senator Barack Obama, where they died without any hearing.
Contact: Tom Brejcha
Source: Thomas More Society
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Free Abortions in Honor of Tiller Denounced as 'Sick'
Operation Rescue is appalled to learn that Philadelphia Women's Center gave away free abortions on Tuesday as a means of "honoring" slain late-term abortionist George Tiller.
"There seems to be no comprehension of the value of human life with these people. Killing babies for free to honor someone who was murdered can only be described as sick," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
The abortion clinic told the media that an unspecified number of abortions were done free of charge, but there are no further plans to offer additional free abortions.
"There is no such thing as a 'free abortion,'" said Newman. "It costs the life of an innocent baby and puts the woman at risk for increased problems in her life. The loss of each innocent life diminishes us all."
Studies show that women who have received abortions are more at risk for problems such as suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, and mental illness.
"If the people running that abortion clinic really wanted to help women, they would follow the Tiller family's example and close their clinic for good," said Newman.
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Teens for Life Launches Social Networking Site
Teens for Life, the multiple-award winning youth outreach known for producing the world's only quarterly pro-life publication for teens, is breaking new ground again with the launch of teensforlife.com, the world's first social networking site dedicated to raising up a new generation of pro-life teens. The site features an in-depth networking experience for teens that allows them to discuss core issues, exchange ideas, share multimedia, and just hang out with peers online.
"This is the first time that the pro-life movement has actively embraced the power of social networking for the purpose of raising up a new generation of leaders," says TeensforLife.com editor Mike Fichter. "Our goal is to educate, motivate, and activate a new generation to impact its culture by advancing positive and healthy alternatives to abortion."
TeensforLife.com offers visitors a wide range of ever-changing resources to supplement its social networking abilities, including information on crisis pregnancy assistance, how to avoid teen pregnancy by building healthy relationships, milestones in fetal development, and even book and music reviews. A special SpeakOut section gives teens the opportunity to give their feedback on the hottest topics of the day, while an RSS news feed keeps visitors up-to-date on what's happening in life issues around the world.
"The future of the pro-life movement is here, and we're giving it a voice of its own," says Fichter.
TeensforLife.com is currently seeking media partners who will help to publicize the new site by utilizing customized radio, television and print advertising as public service announcement materials. These materials are provided by Teens for Life at no cost. In addition, TeensforLife is seeking corporate, private and foundation partners to help fund computer kiosks that will allow teens at youth events to create their own profile on the TeensforLife.com social network while at the event.
Contact: Mike Fichter
Source: Teens for Life
Publish Date: June 11, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Sotomayor: Never thought about rights of unborn
Sotomayor: Never thought about rights of unborn
President Obama's Supreme Court nominee has made an astonishing admission -- she has never considered whether an unborn child has any rights.
President Obama's Supreme Court nominee has made an astonishing admission -- she has never considered whether an unborn child has any rights.
Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) says he had a "good meeting" with Judge Sonia Sotomayor on Wednesday that covered a broad range of issues, but none of his concerns about the high court nominee were eased.
DeMint, chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, says he remains deeply disturbed with her view of the Second Amendment. "She was unwilling to say the Second Amendment protects a fundamental right that applies to all Americans, which raises serious questions about her view of the Bill of Rights," the senator offers.
According to DeMint, Sotomayor -- a Catholic -- also indicated she does not share her church's commitment to protecting the unborn.
"When I asked if an unborn child has any rights whatsoever, I was surprised that she said she had never thought about it," he says. "This is not just a question about abortion, but about respect due to human life at all stages -- and I hope this is cleared up in her hearings."
Given Sotomayor's comments on gun rights and the unborn, DeMint questions whether the nominee has what he believes is required of a Supreme Court nominee -- an "unwavering commitment to the Constitution and equal justice for all Americans."
Contact: Jim Brown
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: June 11, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Journal of Critical Care Medicine Pushes Futile Care Theory as a Social Duty
The Journal of Critical Care Medicine, has long supported Futile Care Theory–the putative right of doctors to refuse wanted life-sustaining treatment based on their values as to the quality of the patient's life. This imposition is justified as being beneficial to the patient–even if it directly contravenes the patient's desires–and to protect physician autonomy.
But the real agenda is health care rationing and imposing a duty to die– sooner rather than later–based on social policy. This agenda has now been tabled in a new article in the JCCM, on the matter, "Medical Futility, Personal Goods, and Social Policy," by Lisa Day, RN, PhD (May 2009, Vol. 18, No. 3) :
If in determining reasonable treatment for one patient the provider also takes into account the needs of other members of the community, the disproportionate means argument takes on new meaning. How will providing the treatments one patient demands burden or benefit others in the community? Can the resources used to support the life of one dying patient be redistributed to benefit others? These questions come up in critical care units when a dying patient is using intensive care resources while another patient with the potential to benefit in a more commonly valued way waits for a bed to open
Although providers privately struggle with these concerns, they typically do not bring them forward in provider-patient discussions. The fiduciary relationship the provider has with her patient demands loyalty and commitment to the good of the individual. Therefore, a tension exists in the practice of many critical care providers between their commitment to the individual patient and their desire to be good stewards of community resources and to provide care to all in need…
But this solution does not resolve the tension providers feel between responsibility to the patient and responsibility to society. The ultimate question is: Should anyone have the right to the treatment demanded by the patient in the hypothetical advanced directive? In certain circumstances,should the provider's responsibilities to the larger community override her or his responsibilities to the individual patient? These are questions that should be debated in larger social forums rather than at the bedsides of individual patients.
Make no mistake: This is an opening gambit to create a dual–and sometimes conflicting–mandate for physicians; one to patients, but the other to "society." It is the end of professionalism because it will force the physician into divided loyalties. Indeed, if we look back in history at the awful crimes committed in the name of medicine, the skids to horror were greased by transforming physicians into fiduciaries for society as well as to their patients. And in this approach, is born a duty to put yourself out of our misery.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: June 11, 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.
A Nebraska doctor said Wednesday he will perform third-term abortions in Kansas after the slaying of abortion provider George Tiller, but declined to say whether his plans include opening a new facility or offering the procedure at an existing practice. Dr. LeRoy Carhart declined to discuss his plans in detail but insisted 'there will be a place in Kansas for the later second- and the medically indicated third-trimester patients very soon.' Carhart spoke a day after Tiller's family announced his Wichita clinic was permanently shutting its doors.
Click here for the full article.
Two bills in the Legislature, crafted with the help of Planned Parenthood, would change the way that sex education is taught in the state's public schools. One would require public schools to notify parents if the sex-education curriculum teaches only abstinence. Parental notification is required if schools teach about contraception. Another bill, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Chelsa Wagner of Beechview, would require public schools to teach students how to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It requires that teachers note abstinence is the only sure way to prevent both.
Click here for the full article.
Two men who burned down an Albuquerque abortion office have been ordered to serve more than three years in prison and to pay every penny of the nearly $800,000 in damage they caused. On Dec. 6, 2007, Sergio Baca, then 22, and Chad Altman, then 26, broke a window of Dr. Boyd's office, poured gasoline inside and lit a match destroying the office. The motive was revealed to be a woman carrying Baca's unborn child was scheduled to have an abortion at the clinic the next day. Baca and Altman were arrested 11 days later after investigators found a glove at the scene that had Altman's DNA in it. Baca's roommate also reported that Baca smelled heavily of gasoline that night.
Click here for the full article.
New York's Empire State Stem Cell Board is expected to vote Thursday on a plan that would use state money to pay women for their eggs, which would be used for research. It would make New York the only state to tacitly endorse a cash-for-eggs scheme.
Jennifer Lahl, founder and national director of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, said called the plan a "twisted sort of logic."
"The egg donation process has well-documented risks associated with the dangerous drugs taken," she said in a statement. "Added to these dangers are the longer-term risks associated with cancers and damage to the donors' future fertility."
Click here for the full article.
As it has met with dozens of abortion-rights supporters and opponents in recent weeks to collect ideas for a "common ground" approach on abortion and related reproductive issues, the Obama administration has emphasized that it intends to avoid influencing women's decisions about whether or not to have an abortion.
According to the groups involved, the White House is looking for ways to help pregnant women who want to carry their pregnancies to term without pressuring women to make that choice. This is what Obama aides mean when they insist that they're working to "reduce the need for abortion," as opposed to reducing abortions per se. The approach absolves the White House of having to make a judgment about the propriety of abortion. It leaves that decision to individual women.
Click here for the full article.
A Nebraska doctor said Wednesday he will perform third-term abortions in Kansas after the slaying of abortion provider George Tiller, but declined to say whether his plans include opening a new facility or offering the procedure at an existing practice. Dr. LeRoy Carhart declined to discuss his plans in detail but insisted 'there will be a place in Kansas for the later second- and the medically indicated third-trimester patients very soon.' Carhart spoke a day after Tiller's family announced his Wichita clinic was permanently shutting its doors.
Click here for the full article.
Two bills in the Legislature, crafted with the help of Planned Parenthood, would change the way that sex education is taught in the state's public schools. One would require public schools to notify parents if the sex-education curriculum teaches only abstinence. Parental notification is required if schools teach about contraception. Another bill, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Chelsa Wagner of Beechview, would require public schools to teach students how to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It requires that teachers note abstinence is the only sure way to prevent both.
Click here for the full article.
Two men who burned down an Albuquerque abortion office have been ordered to serve more than three years in prison and to pay every penny of the nearly $800,000 in damage they caused. On Dec. 6, 2007, Sergio Baca, then 22, and Chad Altman, then 26, broke a window of Dr. Boyd's office, poured gasoline inside and lit a match destroying the office. The motive was revealed to be a woman carrying Baca's unborn child was scheduled to have an abortion at the clinic the next day. Baca and Altman were arrested 11 days later after investigators found a glove at the scene that had Altman's DNA in it. Baca's roommate also reported that Baca smelled heavily of gasoline that night.
Click here for the full article.
New York's Empire State Stem Cell Board is expected to vote Thursday on a plan that would use state money to pay women for their eggs, which would be used for research. It would make New York the only state to tacitly endorse a cash-for-eggs scheme.
Jennifer Lahl, founder and national director of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, said called the plan a "twisted sort of logic."
"The egg donation process has well-documented risks associated with the dangerous drugs taken," she said in a statement. "Added to these dangers are the longer-term risks associated with cancers and damage to the donors' future fertility."
Click here for the full article.
As it has met with dozens of abortion-rights supporters and opponents in recent weeks to collect ideas for a "common ground" approach on abortion and related reproductive issues, the Obama administration has emphasized that it intends to avoid influencing women's decisions about whether or not to have an abortion.
According to the groups involved, the White House is looking for ways to help pregnant women who want to carry their pregnancies to term without pressuring women to make that choice. This is what Obama aides mean when they insist that they're working to "reduce the need for abortion," as opposed to reducing abortions per se. The approach absolves the White House of having to make a judgment about the propriety of abortion. It leaves that decision to individual women.
Click here for the full article.
June 10, 2009
Congress to Vote This Week on Controversial "Global Women's Issues" Initiative
Congress to Vote This Week on Controversial "Global Women's Issues" Initiative
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote this week on a bill that would create a new "Office for Global Women's Issues" in the State Department.
Given that the House Foreign Affairs Committee rejected pro-life language in delineating the responsibilities of the office, pro-life leaders fear that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly use the office to lobby against international legal protections for the unborn. The National Right to Life Committee is asking pro-lifers to contact their congressmen to oppose the bill.
When asked in an April 22 congressional hearing how the Obama administration would treat international pro-life laws, Clinton confirmed that the Obama administration considered the "right" to abortion an essential part of "reproductive health." She said that the administration "will protect the rights of women, including their rights to reproductive health care."
Last month, Congressman Chris Smith attempted to amend section 334 of the State Department Reauthorization bill, H.R. 2410, establishing an Office of Global Women's Issues to coordinate efforts "relating to gender integration and women's empowerment."
Smith's proposed amendment would have established the office as recognizing 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."
The amendment also would have ensured that the office's mission included the explicit goal to fight the practice of forced abortions and sterilizations, and sex-selective abortions. However, the proposed language was rejected by the Committee down party lines.
The National Right to Life Committee is urging pro-lifers to contact U.S. Representatives to vote down the measure.
"NRLC must oppose passage of H.R. 2410, because the bill will further empower the Obama Administration to pursue its agenda of undermining the pro-life laws of sovereign nations," wrote the pro-life group in a letter to members of Congress June 5.
"To the extent that the Administration succeeds in such efforts, it will greatly increase the number of abortions," the letter continued. "As Stanley K. Henshaw, deputy director of research for the Alan Guttmacher Institute, wrote in 1994, 'In most countries, it is common after abortion is legalized for abortion rates to rise sharply for several years, then stabilize, just as we have seen in the United States.'"
NRLC noted that it would withdraw its opposition to the bill if the Rules committee adopts Congressman Smith's second attempt at a pro-life amendment.
Also read:
House bill would establish HQ for abortion activism
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote this week on a bill that would create a new "Office for Global Women's Issues" in the State Department.
Given that the House Foreign Affairs Committee rejected pro-life language in delineating the responsibilities of the office, pro-life leaders fear that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly use the office to lobby against international legal protections for the unborn. The National Right to Life Committee is asking pro-lifers to contact their congressmen to oppose the bill.
When asked in an April 22 congressional hearing how the Obama administration would treat international pro-life laws, Clinton confirmed that the Obama administration considered the "right" to abortion an essential part of "reproductive health." She said that the administration "will protect the rights of women, including their rights to reproductive health care."
Last month, Congressman Chris Smith attempted to amend section 334 of the State Department Reauthorization bill, H.R. 2410, establishing an Office of Global Women's Issues to coordinate efforts "relating to gender integration and women's empowerment."
Smith's proposed amendment would have established the office as recognizing 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."
The amendment also would have ensured that the office's mission included the explicit goal to fight the practice of forced abortions and sterilizations, and sex-selective abortions. However, the proposed language was rejected by the Committee down party lines.
The National Right to Life Committee is urging pro-lifers to contact U.S. Representatives to vote down the measure.
"NRLC must oppose passage of H.R. 2410, because the bill will further empower the Obama Administration to pursue its agenda of undermining the pro-life laws of sovereign nations," wrote the pro-life group in a letter to members of Congress June 5.
"To the extent that the Administration succeeds in such efforts, it will greatly increase the number of abortions," the letter continued. "As Stanley K. Henshaw, deputy director of research for the Alan Guttmacher Institute, wrote in 1994, 'In most countries, it is common after abortion is legalized for abortion rates to rise sharply for several years, then stabilize, just as we have seen in the United States.'"
NRLC noted that it would withdraw its opposition to the bill if the Rules committee adopts Congressman Smith's second attempt at a pro-life amendment.
Also read:
House bill would establish HQ for abortion activism
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Tiller's Abortion Facility to Close Forever
Tiller's Abortion Facility to Close Forever
"Operation Rescue was just 2 months away from getting Tiller's medical license revoked and that would have accomplished the same goal."
In a statement released today, the attorneys of late-term abortionist George Tiller confirmed that his Wichita abortion facility would shut its doors permanently, following Tiller's murder last month.
"The family of Dr. George Tiller announces that effective immediately, Women's Health Care Services, Inc., will be permanently closed," stated attorneys Lee Thompson and Dan Monnat today. "Notice is being given today to all concerned that the Tiller family is ceasing operation of the clinic and any involvement by family members in any other similar clinic."
The statement went on to praise Tiller's "service and courage" and asserted that Tiller's family would honor his memory through "private charitable activities."
The attorneys also emphasized that the medical records of Tiller's former patients would "remain as fiercely protected now and in the future as they were during Dr. Tiller's lifetime."
George Tiller, who was perhaps the most notorious late-term abortionist in the United States, was shot and killed May 31 at the Lutheran church he regularly attended. Hours later, Scott Roeder of Kansas City was apprehended and charged with the first-degree murder of the abortionist.
Over 60,000 unborn children are believed to have been killed in the Wichita facility at Tiller's hands since he began his operations there in 1975.
"It is a bittersweet moment," wrote Operation Rescue president Troy Newman in an email about the closure of the abortion centre. "Operation Rescue was just 2 months away from getting Tiller's medical license revoked and that would have accomplished the same goal."
Operation Rescue, which moved its headquarters to Wichita in 2002 to focus its resources on shutting down Tiller's sordid business, was the leading source of peaceful resistance against the abortionist's burgeoning business for several years.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
"Operation Rescue was just 2 months away from getting Tiller's medical license revoked and that would have accomplished the same goal."
In a statement released today, the attorneys of late-term abortionist George Tiller confirmed that his Wichita abortion facility would shut its doors permanently, following Tiller's murder last month.
"The family of Dr. George Tiller announces that effective immediately, Women's Health Care Services, Inc., will be permanently closed," stated attorneys Lee Thompson and Dan Monnat today. "Notice is being given today to all concerned that the Tiller family is ceasing operation of the clinic and any involvement by family members in any other similar clinic."
The statement went on to praise Tiller's "service and courage" and asserted that Tiller's family would honor his memory through "private charitable activities."
The attorneys also emphasized that the medical records of Tiller's former patients would "remain as fiercely protected now and in the future as they were during Dr. Tiller's lifetime."
George Tiller, who was perhaps the most notorious late-term abortionist in the United States, was shot and killed May 31 at the Lutheran church he regularly attended. Hours later, Scott Roeder of Kansas City was apprehended and charged with the first-degree murder of the abortionist.
Over 60,000 unborn children are believed to have been killed in the Wichita facility at Tiller's hands since he began his operations there in 1975.
"It is a bittersweet moment," wrote Operation Rescue president Troy Newman in an email about the closure of the abortion centre. "Operation Rescue was just 2 months away from getting Tiller's medical license revoked and that would have accomplished the same goal."
Operation Rescue, which moved its headquarters to Wichita in 2002 to focus its resources on shutting down Tiller's sordid business, was the leading source of peaceful resistance against the abortionist's burgeoning business for several years.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
First Major Pro-Life Prayer-&-Picket Event Since Tiller Death will Focus on NEA Teacher Union Convention in San Diego & NEA State HQs Across America on July 2
First Major Pro-Life Prayer-&-Picket Event Since Tiller Death will Focus on NEA Teacher Union Convention in San Diego & NEA State HQs Across America on July 2
Abortion is primary cause of economic recession, unemployment: especially for teachers
Pro-Lifers are invited to come picket the National Education Association leadership's pro-abortion policies, actions, and agenda at the San Diego Convention Center on July 2 between 10:00AM and 2:00PM and at NEA-State-Affiliate-HQs in cities across America from 11:00AM through 1:00PM (local times).
"Apparently, these peaceful, prayer-and-picket demonstrations against the NEA leadership's pro-abortion agenda will be the first major pro-life event since the death of George Tiller," said Bob Pawson of Pro-Life Educators and Students (PLEAS). "By peacefully and prayerfully picketing the NEA's convention and offices across America, pro-life citizens can publically reaffirm that we express our concern, compassion, and desire for true justice through lawful and constitutional means using reason and rational discourse in the American tradition of the public square."
"Media interest in pro-life demonstrations at the NEA convention and NEA-State-affiliate-offices should be high in the wake of Tiller's demise," said Gingi Edmonds of ProLife Opinion. "We're encouraging pro-life leaders, teachers, parents, students, clergy, and everybody to mobilize their pro-life groups, friends, and family members. President Obama may address NEA's 9,000 delegates to thank them for endorsing and getting him elected."
"Abortion is the primary factor causing America's economic recession," said Pawson, an NEA-NJEA teacher in Trenton, NJ. America is suffering the consequences for killing fifty-million people who are supposed to be among us today as teachers, producers, consumers, taxpayers, leaders, inventors, and problem-solvers. It's no surprise that a nation which slaughters nearly twenty percent of its future customers, investors, and entrepreneurs also kills its own economy. Wrong moral choices have negative consequences. Evil acts generate their own punishment."
"The NEA leadership's support for abortion has led to the destruction of fifty-million students and simultaneously eliminated hundreds of thousands of teaching careers and education-related jobs. Surely, some of those dead students were the ones God sent to cure AIDS, end world-hunger, and create clean-energy technologies," said Pawson. "NEA's leadership portrays itself as the premier advocate for children while collecting millions of dollars in dues from teachers for supposedly protecting their jobs. What hypocrisy!"
Edmonds said, "It is vital that individual pro-lifers reading or hearing this report commit themselves to personally attending and promoting these demonstrations. Your presence is needed and appreciated. Please recruit and activate others. Help rebuke the NEA leadership's abortion activism. Don't wait for leaders: be one."
Pro-Lifers spontaneously organizing demonstrations with twenty-plus picketers at NEA-affiliate-offices in other states and cities are asked to e-mail Pawson detailing location(s) and leadership contact info.
Pro-Life picketers should bring traditional pro-life signs as well as other messages like:
NEA: BE ABORTION-NEUTRAL
REPEAL NEA RES I-16
PRO-LIFE NEA MEMBER
PRO-LIFE TEACHER
PRO-LIFE STUDENT
PRO-LIFE PARENT & TAXPAYER
25 ABORTIONS=1 LOST CLASS
FORMER FETUS & CURRENT STUDENT
ABORTION=UNEMPLOYED TEACHERS
STOP NEA PRO-ABORTION AGENDA
NEA: SAVE FUTURE STUDENTS
SAVING BABIES SAVES TEACHERS' JOBS
Contact: Bob Pawson (NJ), Gingi Edmonds (CA)
Source: Pro-Life Educators And Students
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Abortion is primary cause of economic recession, unemployment: especially for teachers
Pro-Lifers are invited to come picket the National Education Association leadership's pro-abortion policies, actions, and agenda at the San Diego Convention Center on July 2 between 10:00AM and 2:00PM and at NEA-State-Affiliate-HQs in cities across America from 11:00AM through 1:00PM (local times).
"Apparently, these peaceful, prayer-and-picket demonstrations against the NEA leadership's pro-abortion agenda will be the first major pro-life event since the death of George Tiller," said Bob Pawson of Pro-Life Educators and Students (PLEAS). "By peacefully and prayerfully picketing the NEA's convention and offices across America, pro-life citizens can publically reaffirm that we express our concern, compassion, and desire for true justice through lawful and constitutional means using reason and rational discourse in the American tradition of the public square."
"Media interest in pro-life demonstrations at the NEA convention and NEA-State-affiliate-offices should be high in the wake of Tiller's demise," said Gingi Edmonds of ProLife Opinion. "We're encouraging pro-life leaders, teachers, parents, students, clergy, and everybody to mobilize their pro-life groups, friends, and family members. President Obama may address NEA's 9,000 delegates to thank them for endorsing and getting him elected."
"Abortion is the primary factor causing America's economic recession," said Pawson, an NEA-NJEA teacher in Trenton, NJ. America is suffering the consequences for killing fifty-million people who are supposed to be among us today as teachers, producers, consumers, taxpayers, leaders, inventors, and problem-solvers. It's no surprise that a nation which slaughters nearly twenty percent of its future customers, investors, and entrepreneurs also kills its own economy. Wrong moral choices have negative consequences. Evil acts generate their own punishment."
"The NEA leadership's support for abortion has led to the destruction of fifty-million students and simultaneously eliminated hundreds of thousands of teaching careers and education-related jobs. Surely, some of those dead students were the ones God sent to cure AIDS, end world-hunger, and create clean-energy technologies," said Pawson. "NEA's leadership portrays itself as the premier advocate for children while collecting millions of dollars in dues from teachers for supposedly protecting their jobs. What hypocrisy!"
Edmonds said, "It is vital that individual pro-lifers reading or hearing this report commit themselves to personally attending and promoting these demonstrations. Your presence is needed and appreciated. Please recruit and activate others. Help rebuke the NEA leadership's abortion activism. Don't wait for leaders: be one."
Pro-Lifers spontaneously organizing demonstrations with twenty-plus picketers at NEA-affiliate-offices in other states and cities are asked to e-mail Pawson detailing location(s) and leadership contact info.
Pro-Life picketers should bring traditional pro-life signs as well as other messages like:
NEA: BE ABORTION-NEUTRAL
REPEAL NEA RES I-16
PRO-LIFE NEA MEMBER
PRO-LIFE TEACHER
PRO-LIFE STUDENT
PRO-LIFE PARENT & TAXPAYER
25 ABORTIONS=1 LOST CLASS
FORMER FETUS & CURRENT STUDENT
ABORTION=UNEMPLOYED TEACHERS
STOP NEA PRO-ABORTION AGENDA
NEA: SAVE FUTURE STUDENTS
SAVING BABIES SAVES TEACHERS' JOBS
Contact: Bob Pawson (NJ), Gingi Edmonds (CA)
Source: Pro-Life Educators And Students
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Dr. Alveda King Calls Comparison of George Tiller to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 'Offensive Beyond Belief'
Dr. Alveda King Calls Comparison of George Tiller to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 'Offensive Beyond Belief'
Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., today reacted to remarks by late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart that compared the killing of George Tiller to the assassination of her uncle.
"For LeRoy Carhart to mention the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who worked through peaceful and non-violent means, in the same breath with that of George Tiller, whose work ended peace and brought violence to babies in the womb, is offensive beyond belief," said Dr. King. "The analogy is just wrong."
"Dr. Carhart also speaks of hate crimes," added Dr. King. "I would simply ask him, is it not hateful to regard an entire class of people as non-human because they're unwanted?"
Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, also commented, "The message of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was that every human being has equal dignity. LeRoy Carhart and every other abortionist violate that message every time they dismember a baby. The comparison is ridiculous."
Contact: Margaret
Source: Priests for Life
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., today reacted to remarks by late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart that compared the killing of George Tiller to the assassination of her uncle.
"For LeRoy Carhart to mention the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who worked through peaceful and non-violent means, in the same breath with that of George Tiller, whose work ended peace and brought violence to babies in the womb, is offensive beyond belief," said Dr. King. "The analogy is just wrong."
"Dr. Carhart also speaks of hate crimes," added Dr. King. "I would simply ask him, is it not hateful to regard an entire class of people as non-human because they're unwanted?"
Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, also commented, "The message of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was that every human being has equal dignity. LeRoy Carhart and every other abortionist violate that message every time they dismember a baby. The comparison is ridiculous."
Contact: Margaret
Source: Priests for Life
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Quad City Times Cartoon Smears Pro-lifers
Quad City Times Cartoon Smears Pro-lifers
On June 4, the Quad City Times printed an editorial cartoon equating the unfortunate killing of Dr. George Tiller, a notorious late-term abortionist in Wichita, Kansas, with the actions of all pro-lifers. Quad City Right to Life takes special affront at this cartoon since we actually have a Planned Parenthood killing center here in the Quad Cities, but Quad Cities pro-lifers' response has never been anything but peaceful, prayerful, and helpful to the second victim of abortion, the mother.
A response was submitted to the Times, under the signature of both Quad City Right to Life and Helpers of God's Precious Infants, the organization standing outside the abortion clinic every abortion day, rain or shine, since the clinic opened in 1999, ready to offer help to any woman in a distressed pregnancy. A Times-edited version was printed on June 8. Unfortunately, in addition to editing the letter, the Times also edited out the names of both organizations submitting the letter, substituting instead the name and city of Lorrie Bowman personally. A correction was to be made to the letter online, but it has not been done yet.
Click here for the letter (also below)
Anyone wishing to comment or to simply vote "thumbs up" in agreement with the letter from QCRTL.
Cartoon Offended Pro-lifers
from the Quad City Times
By Lorrie Bowman, Bettendorf
Posted: Monday, June 8, 2009
(55 Comments)
Your political cartoon of Thursday, June 4, equating pro-lifers with murderers was not clever or funny. It was a slap in the face to pro-lifers who generously give their money and their time to try to stop someone from making the biggest mistake of her life, killing her unborn child. We also work peacefully and lawfully trying to change the law, not violate it. We do not condone violence, which hurts our cause.
It appears the killer acted alone. His brother and ex-wife, say he's suffered from mental illness and is an anarchist.
Dr. Tiller was the most notorious abortion doctor in the country. By his own admission, he killed tens of thousands of unborn babies, many of them late term. However, we sought his conversion, not his death.
Two years ago, he was visited by post-abortive Dr. Alveda King, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s niece, in an attempt to change his mind.
There has never been a single act of violence like this connected to a mainstream pro-life organization, and we challenge you to put our movement up against any other social reform movement in American history. It was grossly unfair of the Quad-City Times to print this cartoon considering we have an abortion clinic in the Quad-Cities and pro-lifers' conduct there has never been anything but loving and helpful.
Source: Quad City Right to Life
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
On June 4, the Quad City Times printed an editorial cartoon equating the unfortunate killing of Dr. George Tiller, a notorious late-term abortionist in Wichita, Kansas, with the actions of all pro-lifers. Quad City Right to Life takes special affront at this cartoon since we actually have a Planned Parenthood killing center here in the Quad Cities, but Quad Cities pro-lifers' response has never been anything but peaceful, prayerful, and helpful to the second victim of abortion, the mother.
A response was submitted to the Times, under the signature of both Quad City Right to Life and Helpers of God's Precious Infants, the organization standing outside the abortion clinic every abortion day, rain or shine, since the clinic opened in 1999, ready to offer help to any woman in a distressed pregnancy. A Times-edited version was printed on June 8. Unfortunately, in addition to editing the letter, the Times also edited out the names of both organizations submitting the letter, substituting instead the name and city of Lorrie Bowman personally. A correction was to be made to the letter online, but it has not been done yet.
Click here for the letter (also below)
Anyone wishing to comment or to simply vote "thumbs up" in agreement with the letter from QCRTL.
Cartoon Offended Pro-lifers
from the Quad City Times
By Lorrie Bowman, Bettendorf
Posted: Monday, June 8, 2009
(55 Comments)
Your political cartoon of Thursday, June 4, equating pro-lifers with murderers was not clever or funny. It was a slap in the face to pro-lifers who generously give their money and their time to try to stop someone from making the biggest mistake of her life, killing her unborn child. We also work peacefully and lawfully trying to change the law, not violate it. We do not condone violence, which hurts our cause.
It appears the killer acted alone. His brother and ex-wife, say he's suffered from mental illness and is an anarchist.
Dr. Tiller was the most notorious abortion doctor in the country. By his own admission, he killed tens of thousands of unborn babies, many of them late term. However, we sought his conversion, not his death.
Two years ago, he was visited by post-abortive Dr. Alveda King, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s niece, in an attempt to change his mind.
There has never been a single act of violence like this connected to a mainstream pro-life organization, and we challenge you to put our movement up against any other social reform movement in American history. It was grossly unfair of the Quad-City Times to print this cartoon considering we have an abortion clinic in the Quad-Cities and pro-lifers' conduct there has never been anything but loving and helpful.
Source: Quad City Right to Life
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Assisted Suicide Endangers All
Assisted Suicide Endangers All
Last week in Washington state a 66-year-old woman with terminal cancer made history as the first person to undergo physician-assisted suicide since that state legalized the practice in November of 2008.
Proponents of legalized suicide celebrated Washington's approval of this policy as a victory for the "death with dignity" movement. These suicide advocates, in keeping with the rhetorical tactic of their ideological cousins in the pro-abortion movement, equate "dignity" with "choice." Unfortunately, as with the abortion debate, the "choice" rhetoric of the right-to-die movement eclipses critical moral and ethical questions which ought to be at the forefront of the debate.
Is suicide really a way to honor life and preserve dignity? What are the social and cultural implications of normalizing the "right to die?" Will voluntary physician-assisted suicide give way to involuntary physician-assisted suicide where doctors decide whether their patients would be better off dead? Will the "right" to suicide be transmogrified into a "duty" to commit suicide? Will the elderly who consume more than they produce be deemed "resource hogs" that have a duty to die and get out of the way? In an age of scarce economic resources, will the critically ill or the handicapped or the demented be viewed as expendable by their younger, healthier counterparts? How will the medical profession be transformed if those who are trained to cure are given a license to kill? These and many other questions should be asked and answered before we decide it's okay to encourage terminally-ill persons to choose self-destruction in the name of dignity.
But we won't get answers if we allow this debate to be defined solely in terms of the euphemistic "right to choose." Indeed, these questions won't even be asked.
Dying with dignity does not require suicide. The question, "Do you want to suffer and die or die with dignity?" presents a false choice and assumes that there are only two alternatives at the end of life--pain or death. Properly employed, modern medicine has the tools to mitigate pain. Hospice care, for example, employs a multi-disciplinary approach to ensure that terminally-ill patients endure their final time on earth with dignity--free from pain and nourished physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. Hospice care does not seek to stop the dying process. The goal of hospice care is to make a difficult time as comfortable and peaceful as possible for both the patient and their loved ones. The important distinction between palliative care and physician-assisted suicide is that the first respects the inviolability of human life in spite of the difficulties presented by illness while the second rejects the sanctity of life in favor of an expedient escape from pain and fear.
The embrace of the right to physician-assisted suicide endorses a form of radical, atomistic individualism that ignores the fact that people are part of a larger community--including families and society--and that the decisions of individuals impact others as well. One does not have to look very far to see that granting a license to kill to those who are trained to cure undermines the ethics of the medical profession: Holland's embrace of voluntary physician-assisted suicide quickly led to a rash of involuntary "suicides" perpetrated by doctors who presumed to know what end was best for their patients.
We ought not to confuse curing with killing. For thousands of years, physicians have taken an oath to first "do no harm" to their patients. Changing the paradigm to "kill or cure" will wreak havoc on medical ethics and put untold numbers of lives in jeopardy.
The philosophy animating the right-to-die movement is that life's value is measured only by material standards. Once those standards are no longer being met, one's life no longer has value. In contrast, those who view life as a sacred gift from God believe that every stage of life is precious and holds unique meaning. This is true even at the end of life. There is meaning to be found in suffering, not only for the person suffering, but for those providing care and comfort to the sufferer. A person's final time on this earth is a time for reflection and absolution, a time to share love and forgiveness. For those providing care, this time provides an invaluable opportunity to provide comfort and succor in a most profound way, and it affirms the fragile and precious nature of life.
Euthanasia means "good death"--but where should we draw the line? Exchanging a "sanctity of life" ethic for a "quality of life" ethic will put the weakest among us at great risk. If our society adopts the notion that the terminally-ill are mere vessels of pain and decay--no longer worthy of our best efforts at care and comfort--it will set a dangerous precedent that will inevitably impact other vulnerable members of our society.
When quality of life becomes the reigning criteria, then not only the terminally-ill, but the disabled, the elderly, and the infirm become prime candidates for "dignified" death by suicide. Consider the elderly for a moment: A significant proportion of elderly residents in nursing homes are afflicted with age-related disabilities and dementia. They often don't know who they are, or where they are. Frequently, they don't recognize their children and, in child-like fashion, they may require assistance with even the most basic activities of daily living. A compelling argument can be made that their "quality of life" has been diminished. How long will it be before doctors, family members, and legal guardians who embrace the quality of life calculus decide that the lives of such individuals (who are also expensive to maintain) are no longer "dignified" and are unworthy of living? This terrifying prospect has already become a reality for some vulnerable individuals right here in America. It will only get worse unless we seriously reevaluate the merits of the right-to-die movement.
As with other issues involving life's most critical questions, the right to die is not a simple matter of "choice." Its implications stretch much further than the wishes of any one individual. It is incumbent upon policy makers to understand these implications, and to not be swayed by the misleading rhetoric of choice, or the allure of the bottom line. They will also do well to remember that the idea that there are some lives "not worth living" undergirded Adolph Hitler's Aryan-supremacy world view. His policy of eliminating the "unworthy" began with the mentally handicapped and physically disabled but spread to millions of Jews.
The world has seen what happens when we embrace the notion that there are those among us whose lives are not worth living. We must not repeat this mistake again.
Contact: Ken Connor
Source: ProLifeBlogs
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Last week in Washington state a 66-year-old woman with terminal cancer made history as the first person to undergo physician-assisted suicide since that state legalized the practice in November of 2008.
Proponents of legalized suicide celebrated Washington's approval of this policy as a victory for the "death with dignity" movement. These suicide advocates, in keeping with the rhetorical tactic of their ideological cousins in the pro-abortion movement, equate "dignity" with "choice." Unfortunately, as with the abortion debate, the "choice" rhetoric of the right-to-die movement eclipses critical moral and ethical questions which ought to be at the forefront of the debate.
Is suicide really a way to honor life and preserve dignity? What are the social and cultural implications of normalizing the "right to die?" Will voluntary physician-assisted suicide give way to involuntary physician-assisted suicide where doctors decide whether their patients would be better off dead? Will the "right" to suicide be transmogrified into a "duty" to commit suicide? Will the elderly who consume more than they produce be deemed "resource hogs" that have a duty to die and get out of the way? In an age of scarce economic resources, will the critically ill or the handicapped or the demented be viewed as expendable by their younger, healthier counterparts? How will the medical profession be transformed if those who are trained to cure are given a license to kill? These and many other questions should be asked and answered before we decide it's okay to encourage terminally-ill persons to choose self-destruction in the name of dignity.
But we won't get answers if we allow this debate to be defined solely in terms of the euphemistic "right to choose." Indeed, these questions won't even be asked.
Dying with dignity does not require suicide. The question, "Do you want to suffer and die or die with dignity?" presents a false choice and assumes that there are only two alternatives at the end of life--pain or death. Properly employed, modern medicine has the tools to mitigate pain. Hospice care, for example, employs a multi-disciplinary approach to ensure that terminally-ill patients endure their final time on earth with dignity--free from pain and nourished physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. Hospice care does not seek to stop the dying process. The goal of hospice care is to make a difficult time as comfortable and peaceful as possible for both the patient and their loved ones. The important distinction between palliative care and physician-assisted suicide is that the first respects the inviolability of human life in spite of the difficulties presented by illness while the second rejects the sanctity of life in favor of an expedient escape from pain and fear.
The embrace of the right to physician-assisted suicide endorses a form of radical, atomistic individualism that ignores the fact that people are part of a larger community--including families and society--and that the decisions of individuals impact others as well. One does not have to look very far to see that granting a license to kill to those who are trained to cure undermines the ethics of the medical profession: Holland's embrace of voluntary physician-assisted suicide quickly led to a rash of involuntary "suicides" perpetrated by doctors who presumed to know what end was best for their patients.
We ought not to confuse curing with killing. For thousands of years, physicians have taken an oath to first "do no harm" to their patients. Changing the paradigm to "kill or cure" will wreak havoc on medical ethics and put untold numbers of lives in jeopardy.
The philosophy animating the right-to-die movement is that life's value is measured only by material standards. Once those standards are no longer being met, one's life no longer has value. In contrast, those who view life as a sacred gift from God believe that every stage of life is precious and holds unique meaning. This is true even at the end of life. There is meaning to be found in suffering, not only for the person suffering, but for those providing care and comfort to the sufferer. A person's final time on this earth is a time for reflection and absolution, a time to share love and forgiveness. For those providing care, this time provides an invaluable opportunity to provide comfort and succor in a most profound way, and it affirms the fragile and precious nature of life.
Euthanasia means "good death"--but where should we draw the line? Exchanging a "sanctity of life" ethic for a "quality of life" ethic will put the weakest among us at great risk. If our society adopts the notion that the terminally-ill are mere vessels of pain and decay--no longer worthy of our best efforts at care and comfort--it will set a dangerous precedent that will inevitably impact other vulnerable members of our society.
When quality of life becomes the reigning criteria, then not only the terminally-ill, but the disabled, the elderly, and the infirm become prime candidates for "dignified" death by suicide. Consider the elderly for a moment: A significant proportion of elderly residents in nursing homes are afflicted with age-related disabilities and dementia. They often don't know who they are, or where they are. Frequently, they don't recognize their children and, in child-like fashion, they may require assistance with even the most basic activities of daily living. A compelling argument can be made that their "quality of life" has been diminished. How long will it be before doctors, family members, and legal guardians who embrace the quality of life calculus decide that the lives of such individuals (who are also expensive to maintain) are no longer "dignified" and are unworthy of living? This terrifying prospect has already become a reality for some vulnerable individuals right here in America. It will only get worse unless we seriously reevaluate the merits of the right-to-die movement.
As with other issues involving life's most critical questions, the right to die is not a simple matter of "choice." Its implications stretch much further than the wishes of any one individual. It is incumbent upon policy makers to understand these implications, and to not be swayed by the misleading rhetoric of choice, or the allure of the bottom line. They will also do well to remember that the idea that there are some lives "not worth living" undergirded Adolph Hitler's Aryan-supremacy world view. His policy of eliminating the "unworthy" began with the mentally handicapped and physically disabled but spread to millions of Jews.
The world has seen what happens when we embrace the notion that there are those among us whose lives are not worth living. We must not repeat this mistake again.
Contact: Ken Connor
Source: ProLifeBlogs
Publish Date: June 10, 2009
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.
Obama-Clinton's worldwide abortion propaganda unit
The US House of Representatives is due to vote this week on the establishment of an Office of Global Women's Issues within the US State Department. The office will be responsible for coordinating efforts "relating to gender integration and women's empowerment in United States foreign policy." The head of the new office is Melanne Verveer (pictured), former chief of staff to Hillary Clinton, and reported to be pro-abortion Catholic. With Barack Obama as President and Mrs Clinton as Secretary of State, we can expect this new office to engage in a worldwide campaign to make abortion on demand a universal human right.
This is yet more evidence that, for Obama and Clinton, a pro-abortion position is not just something to be expected of a Democratic party administration. They now appear to be making the promotion of a so-called right to abortion among the highest priorities of US domestic and foreign policy, something the mainstream media has generally failed to report.
Click here for the full article.
OPINION: Sotomayor's abortion ties
Don't believe disinformation that she's pro-life
Rush Limbaugh is being too easy on Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Pro-life groups should not follow the famed radio host in assuming the Supreme Court nominee will have empathy for their legal or moral positions.
Mr. Limbaugh has been telling conservatives that Judge Sotomayor may not merit strong opposition after all, despite what he calls her record of "racist" statements. "I have to say that there's a better-than-50-50 shot she's pro-life," he said on June 5. "I could see being in favor of this nomination were she pro-life. Certainly could."
Mr. Limbaugh is almost certainly misreading the record. Americans who think the 1973 Roe v. Wade case legalizing abortion was wrongly decided -- and think the Supreme Court repeatedly compounded its error by limiting the power of states to regulate abortion counseling and the provision of abortion to minors -- should calmly but actively urge their senators to oppose Judge Sotomayor's nomination.
Click here for the full article.
NYC Law Makes It Easier To Press Charges Against Pro-Life Protesters Outside Clinics
A New York City law that will go into effect in July could make it easier for Pro-Life protesters to be arrested for restricting access to abortion clinics or harassing people trying to enter the facilities, the New York Times reports.
Current law allows authorities to make arrests only if the person directly affected, such as a woman entering a clinic, is willing to press charges. However, the new law would allow third parties, such as clinic workers, to press charges if they witnessed the activity, the Times reports. New York City's Dr. Emily's Women's Health Center and NARAL Pro-Choice New York spearheaded efforts to pass the legislation in response to Pro-Life demonstrators who target women on their way to clinics and attempt to persuade them to carry their pregnancies to term. Clinic workers report that the protesters also have harassed women as they left the subway or surrounded them as they walked to the clinic. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg signed the law in April. Joan Malin, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of New York City, said the group is "not against people demonstrating. But there is a line between freedom of speech and harassment and bullying" (Bosman, New York Times, 6/6).
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Group Interested in Buying Kansas Clinic
The leader of an anti-abortion group says the organization is interested in buying the now-closed clinic of slain abortion provider George Tiller.
Tiller's family announced Tuesday that his clinic in Wichita, Kansas, was shutting down permanently. The doctor was fatally shot on May 31.
Operation Rescue President Troy Newman said he would love to make an offer for the property and that his group had discussed the idea.
Click here for the full article.
Atlanta Clinic Asks to Keep Abortion Case Closed to Public
A Metro Atlanta clinic was facing a lawsuit Tuesday. The lawsuit stems from an abortion and the clinic is asking a judge to stop the flow of information about the case. The clinic cites recent violence and increased tension over the issue of abortion rights. The lawsuit is now before a DeKalb County judge. The issue is now the public's right to know in a highly-charged environment. The case focuses on the Northside Women's Clinic. The clinic and two doctors have been sued. The lawsuit follows the prosecution of a Hall County woman forging parental acknowledgement papers for an abortion for her son's girlfriend. Georgia law requires parental notification for children under 18 to have an abortion.
Click here for the full article.
Pregnant With Girl or Boy? At-Home Test May Tell You
Expecting moms can determine whether they're carrying a boy or a girl as early as 10 weeks after conception, according to makers of an over-the-counter gender prediction test. IntelliGender, the Plano, Texas, creator of the "Boy or Girl Gender Prediction Test," says scientists isolated certain hormones that when combined with a "proprietary mix of chemicals" react differently if a woman is carrying a boy or a girl. It claims that within 10 minutes of taking the urine test, a woman will be able to tell her baby's gender. The specimen will turn green if it's a boy, and orange if it's a girl.
Click here for the full article.
Obama-Clinton's worldwide abortion propaganda unit
The US House of Representatives is due to vote this week on the establishment of an Office of Global Women's Issues within the US State Department. The office will be responsible for coordinating efforts "relating to gender integration and women's empowerment in United States foreign policy." The head of the new office is Melanne Verveer (pictured), former chief of staff to Hillary Clinton, and reported to be pro-abortion Catholic. With Barack Obama as President and Mrs Clinton as Secretary of State, we can expect this new office to engage in a worldwide campaign to make abortion on demand a universal human right.
This is yet more evidence that, for Obama and Clinton, a pro-abortion position is not just something to be expected of a Democratic party administration. They now appear to be making the promotion of a so-called right to abortion among the highest priorities of US domestic and foreign policy, something the mainstream media has generally failed to report.
Click here for the full article.
OPINION: Sotomayor's abortion ties
Don't believe disinformation that she's pro-life
Rush Limbaugh is being too easy on Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Pro-life groups should not follow the famed radio host in assuming the Supreme Court nominee will have empathy for their legal or moral positions.
Mr. Limbaugh has been telling conservatives that Judge Sotomayor may not merit strong opposition after all, despite what he calls her record of "racist" statements. "I have to say that there's a better-than-50-50 shot she's pro-life," he said on June 5. "I could see being in favor of this nomination were she pro-life. Certainly could."
Mr. Limbaugh is almost certainly misreading the record. Americans who think the 1973 Roe v. Wade case legalizing abortion was wrongly decided -- and think the Supreme Court repeatedly compounded its error by limiting the power of states to regulate abortion counseling and the provision of abortion to minors -- should calmly but actively urge their senators to oppose Judge Sotomayor's nomination.
Click here for the full article.
NYC Law Makes It Easier To Press Charges Against Pro-Life Protesters Outside Clinics
A New York City law that will go into effect in July could make it easier for Pro-Life protesters to be arrested for restricting access to abortion clinics or harassing people trying to enter the facilities, the New York Times reports.
Current law allows authorities to make arrests only if the person directly affected, such as a woman entering a clinic, is willing to press charges. However, the new law would allow third parties, such as clinic workers, to press charges if they witnessed the activity, the Times reports. New York City's Dr. Emily's Women's Health Center and NARAL Pro-Choice New York spearheaded efforts to pass the legislation in response to Pro-Life demonstrators who target women on their way to clinics and attempt to persuade them to carry their pregnancies to term. Clinic workers report that the protesters also have harassed women as they left the subway or surrounded them as they walked to the clinic. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg signed the law in April. Joan Malin, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of New York City, said the group is "not against people demonstrating. But there is a line between freedom of speech and harassment and bullying" (Bosman, New York Times, 6/6).
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Group Interested in Buying Kansas Clinic
The leader of an anti-abortion group says the organization is interested in buying the now-closed clinic of slain abortion provider George Tiller.
Tiller's family announced Tuesday that his clinic in Wichita, Kansas, was shutting down permanently. The doctor was fatally shot on May 31.
Operation Rescue President Troy Newman said he would love to make an offer for the property and that his group had discussed the idea.
Click here for the full article.
Atlanta Clinic Asks to Keep Abortion Case Closed to Public
A Metro Atlanta clinic was facing a lawsuit Tuesday. The lawsuit stems from an abortion and the clinic is asking a judge to stop the flow of information about the case. The clinic cites recent violence and increased tension over the issue of abortion rights. The lawsuit is now before a DeKalb County judge. The issue is now the public's right to know in a highly-charged environment. The case focuses on the Northside Women's Clinic. The clinic and two doctors have been sued. The lawsuit follows the prosecution of a Hall County woman forging parental acknowledgement papers for an abortion for her son's girlfriend. Georgia law requires parental notification for children under 18 to have an abortion.
Click here for the full article.
Pregnant With Girl or Boy? At-Home Test May Tell You
Expecting moms can determine whether they're carrying a boy or a girl as early as 10 weeks after conception, according to makers of an over-the-counter gender prediction test. IntelliGender, the Plano, Texas, creator of the "Boy or Girl Gender Prediction Test," says scientists isolated certain hormones that when combined with a "proprietary mix of chemicals" react differently if a woman is carrying a boy or a girl. It claims that within 10 minutes of taking the urine test, a woman will be able to tell her baby's gender. The specimen will turn green if it's a boy, and orange if it's a girl.
Click here for the full article.
June 9, 2009
Urgent Congressional Alert
Urgent Congressional Alert
On Wednesday, June 10, or Thursday, June 11, the U.S. House of Representatives is expected to take up H.R. 2410, a bill that would create a new "Office for Global Women's Issues" in the State Department. In congressional testimony on April 22, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a strong pro-abortion advocate, left no doubt that this new sub-agency would be involved in seeking to legalize abortion on demand in foreign countries. Clinton said that the Obama Administration is "entitled to advocate [legal abortion] . . . anywhere in the world," and that the Adminstration believes "reproductive health includes access to abortion."
Please take a few minutes to urge your representative to oppose this bill. We make it easy for you -- just click here.
Then, enter your zip code into the "Call Now" box. You will then be shown the name and phone number of your representative in the U.S. House, along with suggestions on what you should say when you call the representative's staff in Washington to oppose the bill.
We also provide an easy-to-use form that allows you to send us a quick e-mail report on how your conversation went.
Click here for more information on H.R. 2410 and read the letter sent by NRLC to members of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
On Wednesday, June 10, or Thursday, June 11, the U.S. House of Representatives is expected to take up H.R. 2410, a bill that would create a new "Office for Global Women's Issues" in the State Department. In congressional testimony on April 22, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a strong pro-abortion advocate, left no doubt that this new sub-agency would be involved in seeking to legalize abortion on demand in foreign countries. Clinton said that the Obama Administration is "entitled to advocate [legal abortion] . . . anywhere in the world," and that the Adminstration believes "reproductive health includes access to abortion."
Please take a few minutes to urge your representative to oppose this bill. We make it easy for you -- just click here.
Then, enter your zip code into the "Call Now" box. You will then be shown the name and phone number of your representative in the U.S. House, along with suggestions on what you should say when you call the representative's staff in Washington to oppose the bill.
We also provide an easy-to-use form that allows you to send us a quick e-mail report on how your conversation went.
Click here for more information on H.R. 2410 and read the letter sent by NRLC to members of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Brief Linked to Sotomayor Endorses "Fundamental Right" to Abortion
Brief Linked to Sotomayor Endorses "Fundamental Right" to Abortion
More light has been shed on the pro-abortion leanings of Supreme Court hopeful Sonia Sotomayor after news erupted of a brief Sotomayor apparently endorsed that urged the Supreme Court to uphold the "right" to abortion.
The amicus curiae brief, reported late last month by U.S. News and World Report's Bonnie Erbe, addressed the Supreme Court concerning the 1989 case Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. The case involved a complaint by various Missouri abortion providers against a state law defining conception as the beginning of life and disallowing public facilities to be used for abortions.
The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), on whose Board of Directors Sonia Sotomayor served at the time, was among the many pro-abortion interest groups that signed the brief.
In summarizing the interests of the petitioning parties, the brief states: "All Amici share an urgent concern that the Court clearly and unequivocally reaffirm Roe v. Wade.... They fear that any tampering with the right to abortion recognized in Roe will have a powerful, adverse impact on the liberty, equality and health of poor women and women of color."
The brief also argues that laws requiring abortions to be performed in hospitals would place undue burden on minority and low-income women seeking abortions.
"If, as a member of PRLDEF's board, Judge Sotomayor had objected to any of this language, she could have attempted to stop the group from lending its name to the amicus brief, and she did not," wrote Erbe. "Big sigh of relief from the pro-choice crowd!"
"Now we know why President Obama said that Judge Sotomayor shared his view of 'the Constitution' and why the White House reassured pro-abortion organizations," commented Americans United for Life Senior Counsel Clarke Forsythe.
"If Judge Sotomayor holds the position that she signed onto via the PRDF's brief, then, if an abortion-related case comes up on the docket, it will lead to her reading the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) into the Constitution by judicial interpretation."
The brief is significant as one more clue amid a relatively small pile of evidence that shines light on Sotomayor's thoughts on abortion. However, in the days since President Obama nominated her to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, a clearer picture has emerged of Sotomayor as a steadily liberal nominee who is expected to uphold Roe v. Wade.
After meeting with Sotomayor last week, pro-abortion senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) agreed that the nominee made it "very clear" that she would not favor overturning Roe v. Wade.
A confirmation hearing for Sotomayor is expected to be scheduled in July.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
More light has been shed on the pro-abortion leanings of Supreme Court hopeful Sonia Sotomayor after news erupted of a brief Sotomayor apparently endorsed that urged the Supreme Court to uphold the "right" to abortion.
The amicus curiae brief, reported late last month by U.S. News and World Report's Bonnie Erbe, addressed the Supreme Court concerning the 1989 case Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. The case involved a complaint by various Missouri abortion providers against a state law defining conception as the beginning of life and disallowing public facilities to be used for abortions.
The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), on whose Board of Directors Sonia Sotomayor served at the time, was among the many pro-abortion interest groups that signed the brief.
In summarizing the interests of the petitioning parties, the brief states: "All Amici share an urgent concern that the Court clearly and unequivocally reaffirm Roe v. Wade.... They fear that any tampering with the right to abortion recognized in Roe will have a powerful, adverse impact on the liberty, equality and health of poor women and women of color."
The brief also argues that laws requiring abortions to be performed in hospitals would place undue burden on minority and low-income women seeking abortions.
"If, as a member of PRLDEF's board, Judge Sotomayor had objected to any of this language, she could have attempted to stop the group from lending its name to the amicus brief, and she did not," wrote Erbe. "Big sigh of relief from the pro-choice crowd!"
"Now we know why President Obama said that Judge Sotomayor shared his view of 'the Constitution' and why the White House reassured pro-abortion organizations," commented Americans United for Life Senior Counsel Clarke Forsythe.
"If Judge Sotomayor holds the position that she signed onto via the PRDF's brief, then, if an abortion-related case comes up on the docket, it will lead to her reading the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) into the Constitution by judicial interpretation."
The brief is significant as one more clue amid a relatively small pile of evidence that shines light on Sotomayor's thoughts on abortion. However, in the days since President Obama nominated her to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, a clearer picture has emerged of Sotomayor as a steadily liberal nominee who is expected to uphold Roe v. Wade.
After meeting with Sotomayor last week, pro-abortion senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) agreed that the nominee made it "very clear" that she would not favor overturning Roe v. Wade.
A confirmation hearing for Sotomayor is expected to be scheduled in July.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
50,000 People Weigh in on Embryonic-Research Guidelines
50,000 People Weigh in on Embryonic-Research Guidelines
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has received nearly 50,000 comments from concerned citizens regarding draft guidelines for embryonic stem-cell research. The guidelines were released shortly after President Barack Obama announced the removal of restrictions on federal funding for the destructive research.
While there was no indication how many of the comments were from life advocates, it is clear this is an issue the public feels strongly about.
"It's encouraging to see people speak out on the research guidelines," said Dawn Vargo, bioethics analyst at Focus on the Family Action. "Pro-life voices are needed in the stem-cell debate, particularly since our taxpayer dollars should be going toward proven treatments, like that of adult stem-cell therapy."
The NIH will review the comments and plans to issue final guidelines by July 7.
Contact: Erin Blad
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has received nearly 50,000 comments from concerned citizens regarding draft guidelines for embryonic stem-cell research. The guidelines were released shortly after President Barack Obama announced the removal of restrictions on federal funding for the destructive research.
While there was no indication how many of the comments were from life advocates, it is clear this is an issue the public feels strongly about.
"It's encouraging to see people speak out on the research guidelines," said Dawn Vargo, bioethics analyst at Focus on the Family Action. "Pro-life voices are needed in the stem-cell debate, particularly since our taxpayer dollars should be going toward proven treatments, like that of adult stem-cell therapy."
The NIH will review the comments and plans to issue final guidelines by July 7.
Contact: Erin Blad
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-life 'smear' suspected in DOJ's Tiller inquiry
Pro-life 'smear' suspected in DOJ's Tiller inquiry
One pro-life leader is questioning the motive behind the Justice Department's announcement of a probe to determine if others were involved in the murder of abortionist George Tiller.
Late Friday afternoon, the DOJ made it clear that it believes other individuals or groups may have been involved in Tiller's shooting on Sunday, May 31. The agency's press release stated it will "work tirelessly to determine the full involvement of any and all actors in this horrible crime, and to ensure that anyone who played a role in the offense is prosecuted to the full extent of federal law."
Is it a legitimate investigation -- or a political payoff from the Obama administration to the pro-abortion movement? Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, believes politics could be a motive. But she suspects there may be more behind the announced investigation than meets the eye.
"This may be more of a nefarious effort than it appears on its face," she exclaims, "that in fact, the Department of Justice may be trying to smear pro-lifers, as if we all belong in the same camp, as if we all advocate violence, when it's [actually] just the opposite."
In conjunction with the investigation, Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered federal marshals to offer protection to "appropriate people and facilities" involved in abortion around the U.S. Wright points out, by contrast, that numerous attacks against U.S. military facilities have not garnered the same reaction.
"There have been a multitude of violent acts against military recruiters and at military recruiting stations throughout the United States," she emphasizes. "These are recent attacks -- and one occurred the day after George Tiller was murdered, [an act in which] one of our young soldiers was killed by a Muslim jihadist." Yet not one marshal, she adds, has been dispatched to protect those facilities.
The group Move America Forward lists more than 60 anti-military offenses committed by groups in the U.S. since 2003.
Contact: Charlie Butts and Jody Brown
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
One pro-life leader is questioning the motive behind the Justice Department's announcement of a probe to determine if others were involved in the murder of abortionist George Tiller.
Late Friday afternoon, the DOJ made it clear that it believes other individuals or groups may have been involved in Tiller's shooting on Sunday, May 31. The agency's press release stated it will "work tirelessly to determine the full involvement of any and all actors in this horrible crime, and to ensure that anyone who played a role in the offense is prosecuted to the full extent of federal law."
Is it a legitimate investigation -- or a political payoff from the Obama administration to the pro-abortion movement? Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, believes politics could be a motive. But she suspects there may be more behind the announced investigation than meets the eye.
"This may be more of a nefarious effort than it appears on its face," she exclaims, "that in fact, the Department of Justice may be trying to smear pro-lifers, as if we all belong in the same camp, as if we all advocate violence, when it's [actually] just the opposite."
In conjunction with the investigation, Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered federal marshals to offer protection to "appropriate people and facilities" involved in abortion around the U.S. Wright points out, by contrast, that numerous attacks against U.S. military facilities have not garnered the same reaction.
"There have been a multitude of violent acts against military recruiters and at military recruiting stations throughout the United States," she emphasizes. "These are recent attacks -- and one occurred the day after George Tiller was murdered, [an act in which] one of our young soldiers was killed by a Muslim jihadist." Yet not one marshal, she adds, has been dispatched to protect those facilities.
The group Move America Forward lists more than 60 anti-military offenses committed by groups in the U.S. since 2003.
Contact: Charlie Butts and Jody Brown
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: June 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Eugenic Sex Selection Abortions Coming to a Clinic Near You
Eugenic Sex Selection Abortions Coming to a Clinic Near You
It is extremely ironic that the right to abortion has materially impacted the "right" to procreation. The thinking appears to be along these lines: The right to terminate a pregnancy means that women also have the right to ensure that they only bear the kind of baby they want when they choose to carry to term. We see this especially in IVF preimplantation testing, which has now–as reported here at SHS–moved to destroying embryos that test for the wrong sex, hair, and eye color.
Well, now information to permit this eugenic cleansing will soon be available to women who became pregnant through intercourse. A test kit is about to be marketed that would permit a pregnant woman to learn the sex of her fetus. From the story:
A new test to reveal the gender of a fetus in early pregnancy has sparked a row over whether it will lead to sex-selection abortions. The American-designed IntelliGender test kit, which can be used from eight weeks after conception, went on sale in Australia last month. Its Australian distributor hopes to launch it in New Zealand within a fortnight…He expected they would sell for about $125.
They do not test pregnancy, so do not require state approval under the Medicines Act, unlike pregnancy tests. To use the new test, a pregnant woman mixes her urine with the kit's chemicals in the supplied container. If it turns green or black, the fetus is a boy; orange or yellow indicate a girl. The kits are claimed to be 90 per cent accurate, but because patents have not yet been issued, the maker will not reveal the supporting data or the science of how they work.
How ironic that a procedure intended by its supporters to liberate women is likely to become a tool–as ultra sounds have on a mass scale in India and China–enabling the sexist destruction of (mostly) women-to-be. But it won't matter. Abortion has helped open the door to a eugenic culture in which one of the first casualties–at least for some–has been unconditional parental love of their child.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
It is extremely ironic that the right to abortion has materially impacted the "right" to procreation. The thinking appears to be along these lines: The right to terminate a pregnancy means that women also have the right to ensure that they only bear the kind of baby they want when they choose to carry to term. We see this especially in IVF preimplantation testing, which has now–as reported here at SHS–moved to destroying embryos that test for the wrong sex, hair, and eye color.
Well, now information to permit this eugenic cleansing will soon be available to women who became pregnant through intercourse. A test kit is about to be marketed that would permit a pregnant woman to learn the sex of her fetus. From the story:
A new test to reveal the gender of a fetus in early pregnancy has sparked a row over whether it will lead to sex-selection abortions. The American-designed IntelliGender test kit, which can be used from eight weeks after conception, went on sale in Australia last month. Its Australian distributor hopes to launch it in New Zealand within a fortnight…He expected they would sell for about $125.
They do not test pregnancy, so do not require state approval under the Medicines Act, unlike pregnancy tests. To use the new test, a pregnant woman mixes her urine with the kit's chemicals in the supplied container. If it turns green or black, the fetus is a boy; orange or yellow indicate a girl. The kits are claimed to be 90 per cent accurate, but because patents have not yet been issued, the maker will not reveal the supporting data or the science of how they work.
How ironic that a procedure intended by its supporters to liberate women is likely to become a tool–as ultra sounds have on a mass scale in India and China–enabling the sexist destruction of (mostly) women-to-be. But it won't matter. Abortion has helped open the door to a eugenic culture in which one of the first casualties–at least for some–has been unconditional parental love of their child.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Ethicist and Women Bioethics Leaders Criticize New York Stem Cell Board for Pursuing Cash-for-Eggs Scheme
Ethicist and Women Bioethics Leaders Criticize New York Stem Cell Board for Pursuing Cash-for-Eggs Scheme
"Cash-strapped and college-aged women will be exploited by the state in this scheme."
New York's Empire State Stem Cell Board (ESSCB) is considering a plan that would pay women to provide human eggs for research purposes.
Bucking a national trend seen in states like California and Massachusetts, which prohibit payment for eggs for research, the ESSCB Ethics Committee voted at its May 12 meeting to recommend that state research funds be provided to researchers who pay women for their eggs, making New York the only state in the union to tacitly endorse a cash-for-eggs scheme. At its upcoming meeting on June 11, the ESSCB will consider providing state money for direct payments to women to try to obtain human eggs for research.
"In a desperate quest and unprecedented measure to obtain women's eggs to create embryos for research purposes, New York will waste taxpayers money on unproven science, and women who take the bait will be risking their health and future fertility," said Fr. Thomas Berg, a member of the ESSCB's Ethics Committee, and Executive Director of the Westchester Institute, a Catholic think tank. "I can assure you, it won't be the upper-class set who responds to state inducement and risks potentially life-threatening side-effects of human egg harvesting; it will be the vulnerable classes of cash-strapped and college-aged women who will be exploited by the state in this scheme," said Fr. Berg.
Jennifer Lahl, founder and national director for the Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, addressed the risks that are involved in the egg harvesting procedure: "The egg donation process has well documented risks associated with the dangerous drugs taken to produce abnormally large numbers of eggs along with the risks of anesthesia and surgery to remove the eggs. Added to these dangers are the longer term risks associated with cancers and damage to the donors' future fertility.
"In an effort to encourage cures for the sick, the NYESSCB is considering a dangerous campaign to permit them to compensate healthy young women for their eggs. It is a twisted sort of logic that seeks cures for some while ignoring the risks to healthy young women," said Ms. Lahl.
Dorinda Bordlee, Vice President and Senior Counsel for the Bioethics Defense Fund, also criticized the ESSCB plan in light of recent scientific advances in the field of stem cell research. "It is outrageously irresponsible for the New York Stem Cell board to incentivize the exploitive practice of paying cash-strapped young women thousands of dollars to be injected with high doses of hormones to produce eggs for embryonic stem cell research. This unethical move that endangers women's health is completely unnecessary given the breakthrough methods that produce patient-specific stem cells without the need for cloning, embryos or eggs," said Ms. Bordlee.
Fr. Thomas Berg discusses more fully the exploitation and consent issues in a special commentary, "Scrambled Ethics," posted June 2 on National Review Online.
The Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person was founded in 1998 to renew, deepen, and promote the Western tradition of moral reflection. The institute pursues its objectives in cultural, political, and academic settings. Through seminars, lecture series, and research fellowships, the Westchester Institute seeks to reinvigorate contemporary moral discourse at all levels.
Contact: Daniel Kane
Source: Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person
Publish Date: June 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
"Cash-strapped and college-aged women will be exploited by the state in this scheme."
New York's Empire State Stem Cell Board (ESSCB) is considering a plan that would pay women to provide human eggs for research purposes.
Bucking a national trend seen in states like California and Massachusetts, which prohibit payment for eggs for research, the ESSCB Ethics Committee voted at its May 12 meeting to recommend that state research funds be provided to researchers who pay women for their eggs, making New York the only state in the union to tacitly endorse a cash-for-eggs scheme. At its upcoming meeting on June 11, the ESSCB will consider providing state money for direct payments to women to try to obtain human eggs for research.
"In a desperate quest and unprecedented measure to obtain women's eggs to create embryos for research purposes, New York will waste taxpayers money on unproven science, and women who take the bait will be risking their health and future fertility," said Fr. Thomas Berg, a member of the ESSCB's Ethics Committee, and Executive Director of the Westchester Institute, a Catholic think tank. "I can assure you, it won't be the upper-class set who responds to state inducement and risks potentially life-threatening side-effects of human egg harvesting; it will be the vulnerable classes of cash-strapped and college-aged women who will be exploited by the state in this scheme," said Fr. Berg.
Jennifer Lahl, founder and national director for the Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, addressed the risks that are involved in the egg harvesting procedure: "The egg donation process has well documented risks associated with the dangerous drugs taken to produce abnormally large numbers of eggs along with the risks of anesthesia and surgery to remove the eggs. Added to these dangers are the longer term risks associated with cancers and damage to the donors' future fertility.
"In an effort to encourage cures for the sick, the NYESSCB is considering a dangerous campaign to permit them to compensate healthy young women for their eggs. It is a twisted sort of logic that seeks cures for some while ignoring the risks to healthy young women," said Ms. Lahl.
Dorinda Bordlee, Vice President and Senior Counsel for the Bioethics Defense Fund, also criticized the ESSCB plan in light of recent scientific advances in the field of stem cell research. "It is outrageously irresponsible for the New York Stem Cell board to incentivize the exploitive practice of paying cash-strapped young women thousands of dollars to be injected with high doses of hormones to produce eggs for embryonic stem cell research. This unethical move that endangers women's health is completely unnecessary given the breakthrough methods that produce patient-specific stem cells without the need for cloning, embryos or eggs," said Ms. Bordlee.
Fr. Thomas Berg discusses more fully the exploitation and consent issues in a special commentary, "Scrambled Ethics," posted June 2 on National Review Online.
The Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person was founded in 1998 to renew, deepen, and promote the Western tradition of moral reflection. The institute pursues its objectives in cultural, political, and academic settings. Through seminars, lecture series, and research fellowships, the Westchester Institute seeks to reinvigorate contemporary moral discourse at all levels.
Contact: Daniel Kane
Source: Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person
Publish Date: June 8, 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.
Dutch euthanasia requests on the rise
Official requests for euthanasia in The Netherlands totaled 2,331 in 2008, a 10 percent increase over the previous year.
The statistic was based on the yearly report from the European country's five regional euthanasia monitoring committees, according to a DutchNews account based on a Nos TV report May 29.
But the total number of Dutch deaths by euthanasia is probably much higher, bioethics specialist Wesley Smith said.
Click here for the full article.
P. Parenthood asks Calif. funds be restored
The country's leading abortion provider is calling on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to restore $36 million in proposed cuts to family planning funds.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America made the request of Schwarzenegger after the Republican governor proposed the cuts in response to the state's financial crisis. Planned Parenthood said no family planning funds from the government pay for abortions. Pro-life advocates, however, contend government grants for family planning free Planned Parenthood to use other money for abortion services.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Groups Push For State-Level Restrictions On Access
The Washington Post on Monday examined how Pro-Life advocates are pressing state legislatures to approve measures designed to restrict access to abortion and compel women seeking the procedure to reconsider. The Post reports that the election of President Obama, who supports abortion rights, and the Democratic majority in Congress have made it less likely that there will be new federal restrictions on abortion or an overturning of Roe v. Wade. In response, Pro-Life groups have pushed to enact more state-level restrictions, such as parental consent for minors and waiting periods. According to the Post, state legislatures in 2008 considered around 400 measures to restrict abortion. Gretchen Borchelt, senior counsel at the National Women's Law Center, said, "The states are the battlegrounds and certainly the testing grounds of new kinds of restrictions." She added, "State legislatures can be more creative in what they're trying to push and see what works."
Click here for the full article.
Obama's Elite Agenda: Black Abortion for Profit
Speaking before Rockefeller sponsored Planned Parenthood's 'Action fund' banquet July 17th 2007, candidate Barack Obama made his public announcement that his 'first act as President' would be signing FOCA ("Freedom of Choice Act") It was. The "Freedom of Choice" act amounts to de-regulation of the abortion industry and provides free federally funded abortions on demand. Obama is that 'colored minister with social-service background and engaging personality' Sanger envisioned. Planned Parenthood's slogan last year — "why should I be punished with a baby?"– was featured in television commercial campaigns.
Click here for the full article.
More Premature Babies Surviving
Survival chances have greatly improved for premature babies, even those born extremely early, work reveals. About 70% of babies born alive between 22 and 26 weeks gestation in Sweden now survive past the age of one, largely thanks to medical intervention. But the authors say their study in the Journal of the American Medical Association does not answer the bigger ethical question over intervention. Over half of the babies that survived experienced serious health problems.
Click here for the full article.
Slain Kansas Abortionist's Clinic to Close
The family of slain abortion provider George Tiller says his Wichita, Kan., clinic will be "permanently closed."
The Tiller family says in a statement released by his attorneys on Tuesday that it is ceasing operation of the clinic and any involvement by family members in any other similar clinic.
Click here for the full article.
Dutch euthanasia requests on the rise
Official requests for euthanasia in The Netherlands totaled 2,331 in 2008, a 10 percent increase over the previous year.
The statistic was based on the yearly report from the European country's five regional euthanasia monitoring committees, according to a DutchNews account based on a Nos TV report May 29.
But the total number of Dutch deaths by euthanasia is probably much higher, bioethics specialist Wesley Smith said.
Click here for the full article.
P. Parenthood asks Calif. funds be restored
The country's leading abortion provider is calling on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to restore $36 million in proposed cuts to family planning funds.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America made the request of Schwarzenegger after the Republican governor proposed the cuts in response to the state's financial crisis. Planned Parenthood said no family planning funds from the government pay for abortions. Pro-life advocates, however, contend government grants for family planning free Planned Parenthood to use other money for abortion services.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Groups Push For State-Level Restrictions On Access
The Washington Post on Monday examined how Pro-Life advocates are pressing state legislatures to approve measures designed to restrict access to abortion and compel women seeking the procedure to reconsider. The Post reports that the election of President Obama, who supports abortion rights, and the Democratic majority in Congress have made it less likely that there will be new federal restrictions on abortion or an overturning of Roe v. Wade. In response, Pro-Life groups have pushed to enact more state-level restrictions, such as parental consent for minors and waiting periods. According to the Post, state legislatures in 2008 considered around 400 measures to restrict abortion. Gretchen Borchelt, senior counsel at the National Women's Law Center, said, "The states are the battlegrounds and certainly the testing grounds of new kinds of restrictions." She added, "State legislatures can be more creative in what they're trying to push and see what works."
Click here for the full article.
Obama's Elite Agenda: Black Abortion for Profit
Speaking before Rockefeller sponsored Planned Parenthood's 'Action fund' banquet July 17th 2007, candidate Barack Obama made his public announcement that his 'first act as President' would be signing FOCA ("Freedom of Choice Act") It was. The "Freedom of Choice" act amounts to de-regulation of the abortion industry and provides free federally funded abortions on demand. Obama is that 'colored minister with social-service background and engaging personality' Sanger envisioned. Planned Parenthood's slogan last year — "why should I be punished with a baby?"– was featured in television commercial campaigns.
Click here for the full article.
More Premature Babies Surviving
Survival chances have greatly improved for premature babies, even those born extremely early, work reveals. About 70% of babies born alive between 22 and 26 weeks gestation in Sweden now survive past the age of one, largely thanks to medical intervention. But the authors say their study in the Journal of the American Medical Association does not answer the bigger ethical question over intervention. Over half of the babies that survived experienced serious health problems.
Click here for the full article.
Slain Kansas Abortionist's Clinic to Close
The family of slain abortion provider George Tiller says his Wichita, Kan., clinic will be "permanently closed."
The Tiller family says in a statement released by his attorneys on Tuesday that it is ceasing operation of the clinic and any involvement by family members in any other similar clinic.
Click here for the full article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)