Illinois Federation for Right to Life

September 4, 2009

"Dr. Death" Says he was Convinced to Embrace Life - But Would not Return the Favor

Although Jack Kevorkian says his lawyer had managed to talk "Dr. Death" himself out of committing suicide in prison, the doctor admits that, should his lawyer come to him for help in committing suicide, he will not return the favor.

Kevorkian made this and other revelations in one of his first in-depth interviews since the lifting of his parole restriction against discussing death.

Kevorkian, infamously known as "Dr. Death," has boasted of helping end the lives of over 130 suicidal people - many of whom had no diagnosed physical illness. He was released from jail in 2007, eight and a half years into a 10-25 year prison sentence for the second-degree murder of 52-year-old Lou Gherig's disease sufferer Thomas Youk.

In the wake of his latest murder charge, Kevorkian promised to no longer help kill suicidal individuals, but has vowed instead to dedicate himself to advocating for the legalization of euthanasia.

"The reformer is generally called crazy until he's proven right," he told FOX News Detroit interviewer Brad Edwards.

The interview notes that GlimerIQs, reportedly a collection of paintings, music, and philosophy Kevorkian completed while in prison, is due out this month. The cover features an image of a man screaming out of a black abyss while scraping with reddened claws at two narrow walls.

Kevorkian said he contemplated starving himself to death while in prison before his longtime lawyer and trusted advisor, Mayer Morgenroth, talked him out of it. Kevorkian has hepatitis C - whose sufferers, he claims, "as a rule" succumb to cancer.

But Kevorkian admitted that, if a terminally-ill Morgenroth expressed a wish to die, the outcome would be different.

"He says, 'Jack, I want to check out [commit suicide].' Do you help him?" Edwards asked.

"If nobody else would, I will - I would," Kevorkian replied. "What can they do to me, but what's already happened?"

Although Kevorkian's gruesome legacy has prompted euthanasia groups to uphold him as an early champion of "the right of consenting adults to choose the time and manner of their deaths," it was not for altruistic purposes that Kevorkian launched his controversial career.

Attorney and bioethics critic Wesley J. Smith points out that Kevorkian sought to perform experiments on living people as he was euthanizing them, as he had long held an avid interest in death and dying.

"Toward this end, he had spent years attempting to convince condemned prisoners and the authorities to permit him to cut open those being executed," Smith wrote in a 2006 article in the Daily Standard.

"Only after that effort failed did he turn his focus to the sick, disabled, and depressed, in the hope that through assisting their deaths he would eventually be permitted to conduct this macabre and useless research."

Kevorkian is scheduled to host a lecture entitled "Civil Rights, Civil Disobedience, and Criminal Justice" at Kutztown University on September 20. Also, a documentary on Kevorkian entitled "You Don't Know Jack," starring Al Pacino, is expected to be released next spring.

Toward the end of the interview, Kevorkian alluded strongly to "one more coming which I can't talk about now," which he said was "bigger than 'rights,' or euthanasia." "I can't talk about it til it happens," he said. It was not clear in what context Kevorkian gave his statements.

After his release from jail last year, Kevorkian claimed he would run for U.S. Congress, but nothing of his previous aspirations appeared in the interview video.

Oakland County prosecutor Dave Gorcyca, whose office prosecuted Kevorkian, said at the time of the doctor's claim that it was "probably more of a publicity stunt." "To call attention to himself is standard protocol for Jack when he doesn't have the limelight focused on him," said Gorcyca.

Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: September 3, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY

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.

Montana Attorney General Approves Constitutional Pro-Life Initiative

The attorney general has approved ballot language for a proposed change to the state constitution. Constitutional Initiative 102 defines a "person" as beginning of a human being's biological development. A similar proposal fell short in 2008 of getting the required number of signatures for the ballot. Abortion foes now will have to start that process over to qualify for the 2010 ballot. It would take more than 40,000 petition signatures. Backers say similar efforts are under way in other states. Abortion foes now will have to start that process over to qualify for the 2010 ballot. It would take more than 40,000 petition signatures. Backers say similar efforts are under way in other states.
Click here for the full article.

Coalition For Life Opens New Facility

Coalition for Life hosted a community open house Thursday at its new facility at the corner of Carter Creek and East 29th Street in Bryan. The site will offer free pregnancy tests and counseling for women considering an abortion. The location of the Coalition for Life building is no coincidence. It's just a block away from the Planned Parenthood clinic which is a frequent protest site for Coalition members.
Click here for the full article.

Indian Woman Fights for 'Rape' Baby

The story of a pregnant teenager has been making the headlines in India. Lakshmi (not her real name) is 19 years old, but her mental age is said to be only around eight. She became pregnant after allegedly being raped in a government-run care home, and the state authorities petitioned the local courts to allow them to carry out an abortion. Their contention was that she wouldn't survive the trauma of childbirth, and that she wouldn't be able to take care of a baby. That court ruled that an abortion should go ahead.
Click here for the full article.

Couple Face Jail After Drugs Used to Murder Unborn Child

When Tegan Simone Leach became pregnant late last year, she and her boyfriend Sergie Brennan asked their mothers what to do. On the advice of their families, the Cairns couple decided to end the pregnancy. But rather than organise an abortion through a public hospital or private clinic, it was decided Leach should take the abortion drugs misoprostol and RU-486 at home. Brennan's sister allegedly smuggled the drugs from the Ukraine in December. The couple now face an anxious wait to discover if they will be committed to stand trial. Leach, 19, has been charged under Queensland's Criminal Code with procuring her own miscarriage. Brennan, 21, has been charged with supplying Leach with abortifacients. If convicted, Leach faces only seven years in jail, while Brennan faces only three years in jail.
Click here for the full article.

UN Calls For More Money For Birth Control

A lack of financing for global birth control programs has ended in an overwhelming number of unwanted pregnancies and death due to complications from childbirth. This has lead the UN to call for the world to focus on improving women's health and provide easier access to contraception. "It would cost the world only 23 billion dollars per year to stop women from having unintended pregnancies and dying in childbirth," said Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
Click here for the full article.

Documentary Follows Post-Abortive Women

Feminists for Life of America (FFL) has a new series of videos on its Web site called Exposing Coercion: Pregnant Women Stand Up.

The clips outline the heart-wrenching testimonies of college-age women who have been pressured by medical professionals, parents and boyfriends into having an abortion.

Serrin M. Foster, president of FFL, said the video highlights the need to provide tools and resources for women.

"The videos give us a bird's-eye view of how women have been treated by those they count on most," she said. "It's instructional for us as we try to help women in need."
Click here for the full article.

September 3, 2009

Humans never 'too expensive ... too inconvenient'

Christians must defend the sanctity of life from conception to natural death, Southern Baptist ethicist Richard Land said in a chapel message at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

That includes combating government policies assaulting the sanctity of life, Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said, making specific reference to legislation backed by President Obama's administration titled America's Affordable Health Choices Act, H.R. 3200.

The health care bill permits government-funded abortions and could pave the way for euthanasia, Land stated.

He also decried a federal manual for military veterans that he said "focuses on death."

Drawing from Matthew 4:1-11, Land said Satan seeks to entice people toward evil and opposes the intrinsic value God has placed on the life of a human being.

"It is sometimes easy for us to forget that the world is not a good world," Land said in his message at the seminary's Fort Worth, Texas, campus Aug. 27. "It is not a neutral world. It is a world that is racked with spiritual warfare."

Land read Article Three of the Baptist Faith and Message, a statement of generally held convictions in the Southern Baptist Convention. The article addresses the Bible's view on man as "the special creation of God, made in His own image."

The article concludes: "The sacredness of human personality is evident in that God created man in His own image, and in that Christ died for man; therefore, every person of every race possesses full dignity and is worthy of respect and Christian love."

Land described human beings as "different from any other part of creation, because it is human beings who are designed and created in the image of God."

"So, there are some things that must never be done to a human being. Our civilization is based upon that founding belief."

Land said America's founding fathers operated under the presupposition that human beings are special, guaranteeing in the nation's founding documents that men have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

"If you are a human being, you have the right to life," Land said. "That is the sanctity of life ethic upon which Western civilizations and the civilization of the United States have been based." But, he noted, "It's been under serious challenge throughout most of the 20th century by a so-called quality of life ethic."

Land cited "Your Life, Your Choices," an advice manual published by the Department of Veteran Affairs during President Clinton's administration that veterans have derisively nicknamed "The Death Book." The manual, recalled by President George W. Bush's administration but reinstated under President Obama, instructs veterans how to prepare a living will.

"The book fosters dark thoughts about a difficult life somehow being less of a life," Land said.

"On page 21, the death book poses questions to veterans on which they are to answer whether life was 'difficult but acceptable,' 'worth living but just barely' or 'not worth living.' The most positive choice is 'difficult but acceptable.' ...

"I thought about many words to describe this book -- atrocious, outrageous, disgusting, immoral, unethical, wrong, pernicious -- but as I spun the wheel on my moral compass, I kept coming back to the same word: evil.... To give this book to any fellow human being is evil, and your tax money paid for it and is paying for it. There's no attempt to ask people, 'What would it take for you to want to live?' Instead, the book focuses on death."

The Veterans Affairs website reports an online version of "Your Life, Your Choices" is being revised and will be released next spring.

Voicing concern about the public health plan associated with H.R. 3200, Land said while abortions are not listed as an essential benefit, they are allowed under the benefits.

"If abortion is not specifically excluded, it's covered," Land said. "That means that you will have, for the first time since the passing of the Hyde Amendment, not only abortion on demand, but you being forced to pay for the abortions with your tax money."

Land noted the bill also includes 8 percent revenue penalties for companies with group plans and a 2.5 percent income tax increase for individuals with private plans that do not provide for abortions.

"Baby boomers have killed their unborn babies in record numbers -- one out of every three babies conceived -- because they considered them too embarrassing, too expensive, too ill or too inconvenient," Land said.

"But unless we turn this tide of death around, Boomers, Busters and Millennials will be allowed and assisted in dying before their natural time because the government has made the decision that they are too expensive, too embarrassing, too ill or too inconvenient."

Land advised Christians to pray for God to change the hearts and minds of lawmakers. He also encouraged Christians to inform family and friends about the proposed legislation. A document analyzing the health care bill can be found on the ERLC's website at http://erlc.com/documents/pdf/20090731-affordable-health-choices-act-exposed.pdf.

Encouraging Christians to contact their congressmen, senators and the president, Land said individuals must make it clear they want the government to promote a sanctity of life ethic rather than a quality of life ethic.

Land said, "Our Baptist Faith and Message tells us that we're to defend the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death, not a government-imposed death because you're too expensive, too ill or too inconvenient."

Contact: Keith Collier
Source: BP
Publish Date: September 3, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

“Right to Die” Means a Physician Duty to Kill?

"Right to Die" Means a Physician Duty to Kill?

Bioethicist Jacob Appel can be relied on to promote the most radical bioethics agendas, assisted suicide for the mentally ill, fetal farming, you name it. And now he has argued that if Montana affirms a constitutional right to assisted suicide in Montana, the state has a duty to make sure that doctors are willing to do the deed. Why? Doctors have a monopoly on a limited commodity–the practice of medicine–and hence they should be able to be forced to participate in the taking of patients' lives in assisted suicide. From his column:

However, it [medical license and professional autonomy] belies any claim that doctors should have the same right to choose their customers as barbers or babysitters. Much as the government has been willing to impose duties on radio stations (eg. indecency codes, equal time rules) that would be impermissible if applied to newspapers, Montana might reasonably consider requiring physicians, in return for the privilege of a medical license, to prescribe medication to the dying without regard to the patient's intent.

This is taking the duty to die and transforming it into a duty to kill. And it reflects a profound misunderstanding of the government's role. The government is not a guarantor that, for example, anyone will read this blog–which is a classic example of a citizen exercising his First Amendment right to free speech. The government, absent a compelling interest, just can't prevent me from writing. Similarly, if the Montana Supreme Court goes the wrong way, Montana law won't be able to prevent physicians from engaging in assisted suicide. But that doesn't mean it should be able to compel them help kill.

The culture of death, however, brooks no dissent. Apple continues:

The right to die is not an abstract principle. This right — or its absence — has a profound effect on the fundamental welfare of nearly every individual and family in the nation during the most vulnerable moments of their lives. If the Montana Supreme Court guarantees citizens the right to aid in dying, and I am both hopeful and confident that the court will do so, then it is also incumbent upon the justices to ensure a mechanism by which patients can exercise their rights. To do otherwise — to offer a theoretical right to die that cannot be meaningfully exercised — will be both a hollow gesture and a cruel taunt to the terminally ill.

No, it is to support their intrinsic human dignity and the Hippocratic "do no harm" values of medicine. And under that theory, I should be able to have the government force everyone in the country to read this blog.

Don't think it can't happen here. Medicine is being quickly transformed into an order-taking technocracy. Victoria, Australia law requires doctors to perform abortions on request or refer to a doctor who will. Assisted suicide legislators in California tried to pass a law that would have required doctors to sedate and dehydrate terminally ill patients on demand.

Appel's advocacy is a glimpse of a possible future in which any physician seeking to adhere to traditional Hippocratic values will be kicked out of medicine.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: September 3, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NHS Meltdown: Death Panels!

Pallliative care experts in the UK are charging that terminally ill patients are being intentionally misdiagnosed as being close to death in order to enable doctors to stop treatment and instead dehydrate the patient to death. My contacts in the UK have been warning me about the "Liverpool Care Pathway" for some time and now, here it is in the Telegraph. From the story:

Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors warn today. In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death. Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.

But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn. As a result the scheme is causing a "national crisis" in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke's cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.

"Forecasting death is an inexact science,"they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death "without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong. As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."

Here's the thing: Every hospice expert I have spoken with say that palliative sedation is rarely necessary to stop suffering. If some 16% of dying patients die under sedation as the story states, something is very wrong.

I am sorry, but this is a direct consequence of the rejection of human exceptionalism and the embrace a quality of life ethic. Indeed, it shows where utilitarianism leads, where in the drive to stop suffering we end up turning on the sufferer. Think about it: How often these days do we hear bioethicists bemoaning the "drawing out of the dying process," when what we are really discussing is extending life?

Not coincidentally to our discussion of Obamacare, it was pushed by the NICE utilitarian bioethics board–the very kind that the highly influential former Sen. Tom Daschle wants for America–which could arise from the proposed cost/benefit boards in the current health care plans:

Developed by Marie Curie, the cancer charity, in a Liverpool hospice it was initially developed for cancer patients but now includes other life threatening conditions. It was recommended as a model by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government's health scrutiny body, in 2004. It has been gradually adopted nationwide and more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England currently use the system.

If these allegations are true, it is a scandal of virtually unprecedented proportions: A detailed investigation should be conducted. And if people were truly sedated and dehydrated to death without consent before their time, heads should, figuratively roll, medical licenses should be revoked, and–if the facts warrant–criminal charges filed.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: September 2, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

The Negro Project: 'Initiated by Margaret Sanger, Perpetuated by Barack Obama' says Day Gardner of National Black Pro-Life Union

n a time when America is spiraling down into an abyss of debt, joblessness and economic turmoil, President Barack Hussein Obama is continuing his big push to kill as many children as possible -- a disproportionate number of them black.

In less than nine months he has overturned the Mexico City policy which means American tax dollars will be used to pay for foreign abortions. Most of those killed will be the children of my beautiful brothers and sisters in Africa.

He has also been working tirelessly to force physicians to either kill "unwanted children" or refer their patients to other baby killers.

He has worked to ensure that even more children are killed by removing the ban from embryonic stem cell experiments where children are used as lab rats--their little bodies cut up and sold to the highest bidder.

President Obama's most recent effort is to push a health care bill that will mandate taxpayer funding of abortions. He has gone on record to deny this fact which leaves many Americans wondering if he has bothered to read the 1000 plus-page monster circulating Congress. I can't help wondering if he has any idea what an abortion looks like. Does he understand that little babies, many of them very close to being born are gruesomely killed by suffocation, decapitation or dismemberment?

Since 1973, when Roe vs. Wade was decided, abortion has killed more than 50 million of America's children-17 million of them were black. Today, for every black baby born, another black baby is killed by abortion.

The Alan Guttmacher Institute and the Center for Disease Control, (CDC), show that Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion chain, has planted its clinics -- more than 75 percent --strategically in our urban and minority dense neighborhoods.

I find Mr. Obama's abortion push especially strange because the abortion industry purposefully targets black people. Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger, initiated the Negro Project in 1939 to ensure that black people like President Obama and me were killed off before being born.

Every day Planned Parenthood manages to convince pregnant black girls, especially in urban areas to abort by making them believe their pitiful lives will be better if their unwanted, unloved, worthless black ghetto child dies. They are wrong! We come from a strong stock of people who survived slavery and Jim Crow. We don't have to kill our children to have better lives!

So, how can President Obama support an industry that goes to such great lengths to kill black children? Could it be that he owes favors to the abortion industry? Unfortunately, the answer is he was bought off during his campaign. He climbed onto his White House throne by stepping on the backs of aborted babies.

Abortion is wrong, Mr. Obama and it's wrong to expect tax payers to fund the blatant killing of children.

If we are truly the America that holds life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness so dear -- then we must obliterate the scourge of abortion from our midst otherwise we are no better than the those who perpetrate the conflict in Darfur, Rwanda, or any other country where human beings are enslaved, butchered or denied their rights just because they are meeker or weaker.

Mr. President--abortion is not healthcare. There is nothing healthy about a procedure that mentally, emotionally and physically scars women--and there is nothing healthy about a dead baby.

Contact: Day Gardner
Source: National Black Pro-Life Union
Publish Date: September 3, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Mexican State of Michoacan Approves Living Wills that Exclude Euthanasia

The Mexican state of Michoacan has approved a new "Anticipated Will" law that allows families and patients to opt out of extraordinary medical treatments in the case of terminal illness, while guaranteeing basic medical and palliative care.

The law, which received multi-party support and was endorsed by Archbishop of the state's capital, Morelia, reportedly excludes assisted suicide and both active and passive euthanasia, including the withholding of food and fluids.

The law gives terminal patients the right to substitute curative treatments for palliative care and to determine the limit of treatments they are to receive. If a terminally ill patient is unable to make such decisions, family members are permitted to do so.

Doctors who administer deadly doses of medications or otherwise undertake procedures to cause the death of the patient are punished under the law, as well as those who refuse to give palliative care.

The legislation, initiated by the socialist Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) received the general support of the liberal Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and the right-wing National Action Party (PAN). The vote reflected a growing trend for parties at the state level to work together on human life issues. Recent votes in favor of pro-life constitutional amendments have also received support from across the political spectrum.

However, representatives of the smaller New Alliance (NA) and Green Ecologist (PVEM) parties refused to vote for the measure, expressing concern over provisions allowing relatives to withhold treatment.

Contact: Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: September 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Britain's New End of Life Protocol = Death Sentence for British Patients

Practice causing "national wave of discontent" as family members watch loved ones killed by dehydration.

A group of British physicians specializing in palliative and end of life care has sounded the alarm that some terminally ill patients are being killed under an ethics protocol recently approved by the country's health care rationing body. Patients in Britain are being misdiagnosed as "close to death" and sedated and dehydrated to death the doctors said in a letter to the Daily Telegraph this week.

Under a National Health Service (NHS) protocol called the Liverpool Care Pathway, patients are being labelled as dying "without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong" the physicians said in their letter. Under the guidelines, the diagnosis that a patient is close to death must be made by the entire medical team, including a senior doctor. This diagnosis, under existing rules, then allows a patient to be sedated and to have food and hydration and other treatment, such as antibiotics, withdrawn until death.

Under the Pathway protocol, patients can be diagnosed as "close to death" if they become confused or have difficulty swallowing. But the doctors warn that these symptoms can be caused by the sedating medication and dehydration, creating a self-fulfilling diagnosis.

In the letter, Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics at the University of London, Dr. Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke's cancer centre in Guildford and four others, said that the practice is causing a "national wave of discontent" as family members watch their loved ones killed by dehydration.

John Smeaton of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children commented that the "practice of consigning vulnerable patients to a death pathway" is the result of years of changes to the legal system that is building up to the effectively legalisation of euthanasia.

"The government's 2005 Mental Capacity Act," Smeaton said, "extended the possible scope of this practice. The inherent right to life of all patients, whether they are terminally ill or not, must be defended in the face of the government's war against the weak."

Barbara Wilding, Britain's longest serving female chief constable, said last month that the growing public approval of assisted suicide is a threat to elderly people. Wilding said that "a growing rift" between the generations is becoming a significant challenge for police who are concerned that increasing relaxation of assisted suicide laws could be exploited by families to kill "burdensome elderly relatives".

Wilding told the Daily Telegraph, "From a policing perspective we need to be very careful on this to make sure it does not become a way of getting rid of a burden. I will be watching any change in legislation very carefully".

The Liverpool Care Pathway, described by its formulators as a "template" to guide the care of the dying, was approved in 2004 by the notorious National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government's health scrutiny body in charge of rationing health services. The NICE is known to be heavily biased in favour of dehydrating patients to death, as was revealed in the case of Leslie Burke, a British man who attempted unsuccessfully to obtain court guarantees that he would not be killed by this method once his motor neurone disease had rendered him unable to communicate.

The Pathway has been adopted nationwide with more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England using it to allocate health care resources.

In August, the BBC reported that some physicians in Britain and abroad are concerned with the increasing use of "continuous deep sedation" in treating the terminally ill. Deep sedation, in which a patient is kept continuously unconscious or at a low level of consciousness, is ethically used in cases where pain is treatable by no other means. It can have the effect of reducing life expectancy by suppressing respiration but classical ethics allows this if it is an undesired and unintended secondary effect to the relief of pain.

But reports from the Netherlands show that the use of continuous deep sedation until death was becoming more widespread in that country where direct euthanasia is legal. In 2001, researchers found that in six European countries deep sedation was used in 8.5 percent of all deaths in patients with cancer and other diseases. In most cases patients under deep sedation were also denied fluids.

In the Czech republic, where assisted suicide is illegal, it was revealed that some doctors were using large doses of morphine to kill patients in order "not to prolong" patients' suffering.

Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: September 3, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Britain's New End of Life Protocol = Death Sentence for British Patients

NEWS SHORTS FOR THURSDAY

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.

Pregnant Women Express Fears Over Swine Flu Vaccine

Almost half of all pregnant women say they will refuse to be vaccinated against swine flu once the jab is available, suggesting there is widespread concern about its safety, a poll has revealed. Pregnant women are one of the target groups for vaccination identified by experts advising the government. In July, a study in the US showed they are more at risk of complications if they get the virus and more likely to end up in hospital than other people. Six pregnant women in the US died of swine flu complications between 15 April and 18 May.
Click here for the full article.

Fifteenth Mexican state protects unborn by changing its constitution

The Queretaro State Congress in Mexico reformed its constitution Tuesday with a 21-0 vote guaranteeing protection for human life from conception to natural death. The decision makes it the fifteenth Mexican state to enact such legislation.

The new law, which was supported by some 60,000 signatures from Queretaro voters,establishes the right to life as "the first of all fundamental rights" and declares that the State has the duty protect human life from all attacks.

State representatives said the reform was in accord with the Mexican Constitution and with the international treaties ratified by Mexico.
Click here for the full article.

Texas Physician Opens Online Service to Combat Abortion Industry

Twenty years ago a young resident physician was called in to save the life of an aborted baby boy. The memories of the child's fight for his life stirred Ron Bryce, M.D., and his wife Lydia, to join the pro-life movement in earnest with financial and political support.

"Abortion became deeply personal to me after that experience," Bryce recalls. "My little patient gave it a human face." Now the Bryce's are taking their war to the streets by helping individuals directly fight the abortion industry. "It's very frustrating for regular citizens who are repulsed by abortion to watch what's going on in Washington," said Bryce. "We decided to create a service that would empower them to save babies' lives, one property at a time."

That is when Pro-Life Properties of Texas, LLC, was born. It is an online document preparation service to help individuals prepare, and file, pro-life deed restrictions on their properties.
Click here for the full article.

Abortion doc reports threat; arrest follows

Warren Hern said he has received multiple death threats since entering the abortion business in 1973 but began taking them more seriously after fellow late-term abortion doctor George Tiller was killed at his Wichita, Kan., church in May.

Hern, of Boulder, Colo., reported the latest threat to authorities, resulting in the arrest of a senior citizen in Spokane, Wash.

Donald Hertz, 70, arrested Aug. 26 for threatening Hern's family, has been charged with communicating a threat via interstate commerce and violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. If found guilty, Hertz could receive a prison sentence of as much as six years and a maximum fine of $350,000.
Click here for the full article.

September 2, 2009

Illinois pro-life clinic to offer women alternative to Planned Parenthood

The Waterleaf clinic being blessed by Fr. Thomas Milota

Pro-life advocates in Aurora, Illinois are planning to open a women's center in a strip mall a block away from a Planned Parenthood clinic to counsel women who have had abortions and to help pregnant women continue their pregnancies and raise their children.

The Waterleaf Women's Center was dedicated on Sunday afternoon by Catholic clergy and about 75 supporters. It plans to open for business in several weeks, the Naperville Sun says.

Three local women began searching for office space and raising funds for the project in January.

Waterleaf board president Kelly Gorsky told the Naperville Sun that the center's core mission is to urge pregnant women not to have abortions. It has set a goal of preventing one abortion per week.

Gorsky said fundraising for the project has gone well. The center will offer pregnancy tests and free counseling services.

The center's clients will speak to professional or volunteer counselors who can refer them to services such as adoption agencies or financial assistance programs.

"We want women to know that there's a whole network of people that can help," Gorsky continued, adding that the center will work closely with Project Gabriel, a Catholic-run program that provides needy mothers with anything from cash assistance to free babysitting.

Waterleaf board member Maura Marcotte, a trained counselor, said financial hardship is a significant reason women consider abortions. Providing post-pregnancy support will be a key task.

Cyndi Crane, a Waterleaf board member who will work as a full time counselor, said the center will give clients information about the risks of abortion but will never try to frighten or intimidate clients.

"We're a resource center that's here just to present the facts and let (clients) know what kind of help is available," she told the Naperville Sun.

Crane added that the center will also offer counseling to women who have had abortions, pledging that she would not abandon a client "no matter what choice they make."

According to the Waterleaf Women's Center website, Crane is president of the center and a single mother who eighteen years ago chose to give birth to her daughter, Jillian, despite doctors' recommendations to have an abortion.

Board members acknowledged that proximity to the abortion clinic was a major factor in their work to open the center.

The Planned Parenthood clinic opened amid controversy in 2007. Opponents charged that the building had been deceptively presented as an office complex when in fact it was an abortion clinic.

The Waterleaf Women's Center website is at http://www.waterleafwc.org

Source: CNA
Publish Date: September 2, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

FDA delays embryonic stem cell trial

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's postponement of a human trial using embryonic stem cells resulted from the development of cysts in animals undergoing tests.

The Geron Corp. acknowledged the reason for the delay in an Aug. 27 news release, saying cysts had developed at the injury sites in lab animals. The Menlo Park, Calif., biotechnology firm announced Aug. 18 the Food and Drug Administration had placed a hold on the proposed trial on human beings with spinal cord injuries but did not provide details regarding the reason for the postponement.

Geron received the FDA's permission in January to proceed with the first U.S. embryonic stem cell experiments in human beings. At the time, the company announced its plan to inject embryonic stem cells at the point of damage in as many as 10 paralyzed patients. The injections would occur within 14 days of the patients' spinal cords being injured.

Pro-life advocates and others oppose embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) based on what it does to donor embryos and potentially to patients. ESCR's drawbacks include:

-- Extracting stem cells from an embryo destroys the tiny human being.

-- ESCR, unlike trials with adult stem cells, has yet to produce any therapies in human beings.

-- It has been plagued by the development of tumors in lab animals.

Southern Baptist bioethicist C. Ben Mitchell said the FDA hold on Geron's trial "shows once again that not only is it unethical to destroy embryos for their stem cells" but ESCR "results in serious worries about safety."

"To conduct human trials would be morally unconscionable," said Mitchell, Graves professor of moral philosophy at Union University in Jackson, Tenn., and a consultant to the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

In its Aug. 27 announcement, Geron said earlier experiments with animals showed a "very low frequency of injected animals developed microscopic cysts" at the injury site. The cysts did not proliferate, were limited to the injury site and did not affect the animals negatively, according to Geron. Also, no teratomas, which are tumors that may or may not be malignant, developed in the animals.

Geron reported, however, a "just completed animal study showed a higher frequency of cysts." Another recently finished animal trial did not produce any cysts, according to Geron.

The firm is cooperating with the FDA in an effort to begin the human trial, Geron said.

Because of their ability to develop into other cells and tissues, stem cells provide hope for producing cures for a variety of diseases. The biotech industry has long promoted research with embryonic stem cells because of their pluripotency, which means they can transform into any cell or tissue. ESCR has not proven nearly as effective as experiments with other types of stem cells, however.

Trials using adult stem cells have produced therapies for at least 73 ailments in human beings, despite the fact such cells are not considered pluripotent, according to Do No Harm, a coalition promoting ethics in research. Among the afflictions treated by adult stem cells are cancer, juvenile diabetes, multiple sclerosis, heart damage, Parkinson's, sickle cell anemia and spinal cord injuries, according to Do No Harm.

Scientists have discovered induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells in the last two years, producing great promise for cures without the ethical problems of ESCR. In iPS research, scientists convert adult cells into cells that have nearly the identical properties of embryonic ones.

Neither procuring stem cells from non-embryonic sources nor transforming adult stem cells into embryonic-like ones harms the donor.

Since the FDA gave Geron the go-ahead to conduct a human trial with embryonic stem cells, President Obama has overturned a ban on federal grants for stem cell research that results in the destruction of an embryo. President Bush issued the ban in 2001, but he permitted funds for experiments with stem cell lines, or colonies, already in existence at the time of his order.

At the time the FDA approved a human trial with embryonic stem cells, the lines used by Geron were eligible for federal money, according to the Associated Press.

Guidelines issued by the National Institutes of Health in July limit federal funds to research involving embryos produced by in vitro fertilization for reproductive purposes and donated by couples who no longer want them. The couples must provide voluntary, written permission.

A suit filed Aug. 19 in federal court contends the guidelines violate a 13-year-old congressional ban on funds for research that destroys embryos. The plaintiffs say the guidelines violate the 1996 Dickey-Wicker Amendment, a rider to the spending bill for the Department of Health and Human Services. The amendment prohibits federal funds for "(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or (2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero...."

Contact: Tom Strode
Source: BP
Publish Date: September 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

America's youth guide debate on abortion issue

America's youth guide debate on abortion issue

A recent study shows support for legal abortion has dropped in the United States.

Michael Dimock is a spokesman for Pew Research Center, who conducted the study earlier this year. "Today about the same number of people [46 percent] side with keeping abortion legal in most cases, as opposed to illegal in most cases [44 percent]," he notes. "In previous polls, the pro-choice position outweighed the pro-life position by a substantial margin."

Pollsters broke down the results according to religious groups where there is more of a shifting of views than in politics. "But you're seeing more of a shift in a conservative direction among Protestants, both evangelical and mainline Protestants, more so than among Catholics or other religious groups," Dimock points out.

Dimock believes America's youth will establish the future on the abortion issue. He tells OneNewsNow young people are more liberal on such issues as homosexuality.

"[However,] when it comes to abortion, there's not an overwhelming age disparity," Dimock says. "Younger people aren't substantially more supportive of abortion rights or pro-life than [are] older folks."

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: September 2, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Attorney General Needs to Examine Abortion Industry for Civil Rights Violations

Dr. Alveda King, Director of African American Outreach for Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said today that the Justice Department's new drive to investigate the possibly racist policies of federal fund recipients should include Planned Parenthood.

"The acting head of the Obama administration's Civil Rights Division wants to crack down on groups that receive federal money and whose policies have a negative impact on minorities," said Dr. King. "I can save her a lot of time. All she has to do is look at the abortion industry and its leading money maker, Planned Parenthood, to find suspicious characters."

"I would say wiping out one-quarter of the African American population qualifies as a negative impact on a minority group," added Dr. King. "There is no greater violator of civil rights than the abortion industry and if the Obama Justice Department is serious about investigating discrimination perpetrated by recipients of federal money, it should start with the billion dollar abortion giant, Planned Parenthood."

Contact: Margaret
Source: Priests for Life
Publish Date: September 2, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Family Attacked for Too Many Children: "Thrilled to be Preparing for Baby Number 19

Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar told US news service MSNBC they are delighted to discover the impending arrival of their 19th child. Described by the Today program as "glowing," Michelle Duggar said, "I'm feeling sick and tired, which is a good way to be feeling about right now."

"I always tell myself that's a good way to be because that means good things are happening."

The baby is due to arrive around March 18, 2010.

The family stars in the reality TV show "18 Kids and Counting" airing on TLC. The family are members of the Quiverfull movement among US Protestants that rejects the modern anti-child philosophy and allows God to decide how large their families will be.

The news of Michelle's pregnancy, only eight months after the birth of their last child Jordyn-Grace, was followed by that of the family's eldest son, Josh, who announced that his new wife Anna is expecting their first child, who is due on October 18. "Children are a blessing and a gift if you raise them right, and I think my parents have definitely shown that," Josh Duggar said.

But not everyone is smiling. When the story was published on the website of the left-leaning Huffington Post, commenters did not hesitate to express their hostility to the Duggar's openness to life. 1081 commenters responded with nearly uniform outrage that the Duggars, who have no financial problems, live in a large house they built themselves and are not in debt, have the audacity to be happy with their large family.

"Nothing but pure selfishness," said one. "How about adopting a klan of white children who actually NEED homes?" followed another.

Commenters focused on the "threat" the Duggar children posed to the environment and accused the Duggar parents of using their older children as "unpaid servants and de facto parents" calling them "greedy and slothful." Some called the Duggars' religious beliefs a cult that "expounds the subjugation of women."

"You should pity these poor children with no childhood and no future, who pay everyday for their parents' desire to collect children the way the crazy lady down the street collects cats."

But one writer was more skeptical: "Funny how my fellow liberals preach tolerance and choice until they disagree with someone else's decisions."

The Duggars have produced a book about their experiences, including their decision to stop using artificial hormonal birth control, and have been featured on several US television documentaries. They have also appeared on numerous national and international TV shows including The Early Show, The Today Show, The View, Fox & Friends, Italian Public Television, the Korean Broadcasting System, Discovery Home & Health in the UK and Australia, Jimmy Kimmel Live, Fox News Network and CNN.

Click here for a video of the Duggers.

Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: September 2, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Pharmacy owners win preliminary injunction

Two Illinois pharmacy owners have gained at least a temporary victory in their effort to conduct their practice according to their pro-life consciences.

The Seventh Judicial Circuit Court in Springfield, Ill., has granted a preliminary injunction protecting Luke VanderBleek and Glenn Kosirog from having to abide by former Gov. Rob Blagojevich's 2005 order requiring pharmacists to fill all prescriptions. The injunction will remain in effect until there is a final ruling in the case.

The decision means the pharmacies owned by the two men will not be required to dispense the "morning-after" pill Plan B and other drugs to which they object.

Plan B, for which girls 16 and younger must have a prescription, works to restrict ovulation in a female. It also can act after conception, thereby causing an abortion, pro-lifers point out. This mechanism of the drug blocks implantation of a tiny embryo in the uterine wall.

VanderBleek and Kosirog "are suffering irreparable harm in the form of an ongoing chill of their free exercise rights and rights of conscience under federal and state law, as well as unlawful coercion based on their religious and moral beliefs," Judge John Belz noted in his Aug. 21 ruling, according to the American Center for Law and Justice, which represents the pharmacists.

The plaintiffs "have a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims," Belz stated.

Earlier court decisions recognized individual pharmacists' freedom of conscience, but Belz's ruling provided a win for pharmacy owners.

Contact: Tom Strode
Source: BP
Publish Date: September 2, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY

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.

The Population Control Freak tonight on CBS

I reported on Monday that wackjob science czar John Holdren is scheduled to make a second appearance on David Letterman's late-night CBS show. (He first appeared last spring to stir up global warming hysteria.)

Just a reminder to set your Tivos. It's still a go, according to the Letterman Show website.
Click here for the full article.

Federal Judge OK's 'Noise Rule' Against Pro-lifers On 'Public Property

A religious group will not be allowed to spread their anti-abortion message via loudspeaker in Laguna Beach, after a federal judge upheld an anti-noise regulation. The city prohibits sound amplification equipment within 100 yards of hospitals, churches, schools, courthouses and City Hall while those buildings are in use, 30 minutes before opening and after closing. The equipment may also not be used between 5 p.m. and 9 a.m. Steve Klein, the main plaintiff in the case, argued the city's ordinance prevented him from exercising his freedom of speech under the First Amendment. The city disagreed, saying he was welcome to spread his message as long as he didn't use a loudspeaker during prohibited times or in unauthorized locations.
Click here for the full article.

Health Care Reform: Will It Pay For The Abortion Pill?

Questions have been raised as to whether or not proposed health care reform will pay for abortions. Because there is no actual bill ready to be passed into law, it is premature to say what will or will not be covered. A second question has been asked as to whether the abortion pill would be covered. The best way to address this is to advise readers as to what current insurers do about the abortion pill. Mifepristone is sold in the U.S. by Danco Laboratories under the brand name Mileptrx. It is a synthetic steroid used to produce a pharmaceutical abortion.
Click here for the full article.

The Abortion Movement Was Designed Primarily to Kill Black Babies

The left often celebrate the abhorrent practice of abortion as 'a woman's right to choose.' However, the movement which seems to be the cornerstone of liberalism was actually designed to eradicate black people. Abortion on demand has in fact, been responsible for a genocide in the black community. In 1921, Margaret Sanger founded the American Birth Control League which eventually became known as Planned Parenthood. Sanger was a racist who advocated eugenics, so-called 'selective breeding', euthanasia, sterilization, and abortion. She published several books in which she often referred to blacks as "genetically unfit" and "human weeds."
Click here for the full article.

Ministry of Culture demands pro-lifers pay back money used for march

Brazil's Ministry of Culture is demanding that pro-lifers who were involved in the Third National March for Life this past Sunday in Brasilia pay back the public funding they were given for the event.

The Ministry claims organizers of the event "omitted information in the presentation of the plan" by not indicating that the march was a protest against the attempts to legalize abortion in Brazil.

Pro-life leaders denounced the claims as completely false and said their intentions were clearly spelled out to Ministry officials, who granted approval for the use of funds for the march.

The National Movement of Citizens for Life (NMCL) rejected the government's demand that some $60,000 from the public coffers be returned and said, "The minister's actions reveal an anti-democratic attitude because he is denying the right to protest of more than 90 percent of the Brazilian population, which believes life should be defended from the moment of conception."
Click here for the full article.

Culture of death always leads to failure, Argentinean cardinal states

The Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, told the thousands of faithful gathered Monday at the Shrine of St. Ramon to defend life from the moment of conception to natural death, in order to overcome the "culture of death" that is afflicting today's society.

During his homily, the cardinal urged Catholics to "stand up" against "the culture of death." The "culture of life," he said, believes that "life has value from the moment of conception" and should be cared for in childhood, so that that new life "grows up healthy, receives a good education and has enough to eat, and is instilled with principles of moral values."

"We must stand up and say: this is the culture of life, this is life, the complete opposite of the culture of death," which "always leads to failure," the cardinal said.
Click here for the full article.

September 1, 2009

Thomas More Society of Chicago Demands Immediate Enforcement of Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act

Thomas More Society of Chicago Demands Immediate Enforcement of Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act

Illinois Supreme Court Urged to Order Enforcement, Without Delay, of Illinois Law Requiring Physicians to Notify Minor's Parents before Performing an Abortion

Today, the Thomas More Society, a public interest law firm based in Chicago, has filed in the Illinois Supreme Court an original action for "writ of mandamus," asking the Justices to order the immediate enforcement, without further delay, of the Parental Notice of Abortion Act of 1995 ("Parental Notice Act" or "the Act"), and directing the members of the Illinois State Medical Disciplinary Board, the Acting Secretary of the Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation, and the Director of the Division of Professional Regulation to expunge and negate their recommendation and order, handed down earlier this month, suspending enforcement of the Parental Notice Act for ninety days. The Society alleges that these administrative officials acted without legal authority and in defiance of legally required procedures in unilaterally announcing that they would wait three months before enforcing this duly enacted Illinois law and that their illegal action could only be remedied – on a timely basis – by the Supreme Court's direct and immediate intervention.

The Act requires a physician to notify one of the minor's parents (legal guardian, step-parent or grandparent living in the same household) before he or she performs an abortion upon a minor, unless the minor petitions the circuit court for a waiver of the notice requirement. Waivers may be granted if the minor can establish, in a "bypass hearing," that she is mature enough to make a decision to obtain an abortion without notifying her parents or that notice would not be in her best interests. Enacted in 1995, the parental notice law was in legal limbo for over a decade until, on September 20, 2006, the Illinois Supreme Court adopted a rule, constitutionally required under federal law, providing for expedited, confidential "bypass" appeals. Once the new Rule 303A was adopted and after further litigation, on July 14, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the constitutionality of the Act and the Illinois Supreme Court's implementing rule. A few weeks later, when the Court of Appeals issued its mandate, the Parental Notice Act became fully effective and enforceable.

Yet, on August 4, the members of the Illinois State Medical Disciplinary Board, which is responsible for enforcing the Parental Notice Act against physicians who willfully violate it, issued a recommendation that the Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation suspend enforcement of the law for ninety days, beginning on August 5, 2009. The only stated reason was to give physicians more time to comply with the law. The very next day, this recommendation was adopted by the Acting Secretary of the Department and the Director of the Division of Professional Regulation.

The Thomas More Society's complaint for writ of mandamus was brought on behalf of ten Illinois citizens and taxpayers, several of whom are also the parents of minor daughters of child bearing age who would want to be notified before their daughters had an abortion. The Society alleges that the defendants acted without any legal authority and, further, that their action constituted a "rule" that could not take effect without prior compliance with the notice and public comment provisions of the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act. "The performance of an abortion upon a minor in Illinois without first notifying one of her parents is illegal," said Tom Brejcha, President & Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Society. "Physicians who perform abortions in Illinois have had fourteen years to 'get ready' and 'gear up' to implement the law, more than enough time to comply with the law. This further delay is a clear usurpation of power and an affront to the People of Illinois, the Illinois General Assembly, Governor Edgar who signed this bipartisan law and the Illinois Supreme Court which adopted Rule 303A in 2006." The lawsuit asks the Illinois Supreme Court to enter a writ of mandamus directing the defendants to expunge their order suspending enforcement of the law and to enforce the law without further delay.

Contact: Tom Brejcha
Source: Thomas More Society
Publish Date: August 31, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Did you know the World Health Organization ranks The Pill as a Group I carcinogen?

Perhaps the best-kept secret of modern medicine is the link between oral contraceptives and increased breast cancer risk.

While combined oral contraceptives, better known as The Pill, rank as Group I carcinogens according to a 2005 report released by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an arm of the World Health Organization, doctors continue to routinely prescribe the pill for a variety of conditions, ranging from acne to birth control (American Cancer Society, 2008).

Combined oral contraceptives are composed of estrogen and progesterone or progestin, a synthetic form of progesterone. Estrogen and progesterone are female sex hormones; estrogen thickens the lining of the uterus, and progesterone/progestin prepares the endometrium for implantation of the egg. (National Cancer Institute, 2006).

The reasoning behind a combination of estrogen and progesterone/progestin is that estrogen given on its own increases the risk of uterine cancer. Taking a combination of the 2 confers protection from uterine cancer but increases breast cancer risk.

In short, the science behind the increased breast cancer risk stems from 2 primary mechanisms. In both instances, progesterone/progestin becomes a double-edged sword, as it confers protection from increased uterine cancer risk but "gives permission" for estrogen to negatively affect breast DNA.

First, the combination of estrogen plus progesterone/progestin functions as a genotoxin, meaning it directly damages DNA in the breast. Several estrogen metabolites, or breakdown products, including 4-hydroxy-catechol-estrogen quinine, have been proven to function in this manner (Lanfranchi, 2007).

Second, estrogen functions as a mitogen, or cancer promoter, and estrogen promotes cancer in 2 ways. As seen in the graph, it stimulates an explosion of rapid proliferation of cells in breast lobules, causing a greater likelihood of mutations with the increased rate of division.

Additionally, estrogen promotes speedier development of any already-cancerous cells in the breast (Lanfranchi, 2007).

Why doesn't the American public know about the increased risk? Why is the teenage girl on the pill for acne unaware of the health risks involved? Women deserve better.

Contact: Anne Marie
Source: JillStanek.com
Publish Date: August 31, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Thomas More Society of Chicago Demands Immediate Enforcement of Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act

IL pharmacists fight for conscience rights

The American Center for Law and Justice is preparing to go to court to protect the conscience rights of two pharmacists in Illinois.

The case of Morr-Fitz, Inc. v. Blagojevich pits pharmacists Luke VanderBleek and Gleen Kosirog against a ruling by Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, requiring pharmacists to dispense birth control pills and the morning after pill, despite their religious objections. American Center for Law and Justice attorney Frank Manion is handling the case.

"It was an edict by the now infamous Governor Blagojevich. I mean, we are still cleaning up the constitutional debris left by Governor Blagojevich on this issue," he explains. "He simply, out of thin air, created a rule he called an emergency regulation, essentially striking down all of the existing conscience protections in Illinois in federal and state law."

His emergency was apparently based on one incident of an individual being turned away from a pharmacy in Chicago where she sought the morning after pill. Manion says it was hardly an emergency, considering the number of pharmacies in Chicago.

Frank Manion (ACLJ)"Governors can do that sort of thing. It's up to legislatures to rein them in," he points out. "And when the legislatures won't do it, I guess it's up to the courts, and that's why we're in the courts."

A preliminary junction favoring the pharmacists was recently issued, suggesting pharmacists are likely to win. Manion hopes to ensure that pro-life pharmacists and pharmacy owners receive the legal protection they are entitled in the U.S. Constitution and state laws.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: September 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

A time for truth on abortion

Star ParkerFormer Alaska Governor Sarah Palin missed a great opportunity to personally kick off an issue of enormous importance to her state and to the nation.

She was scheduled to appear with me at an Alaska Family Council event in Anchorage to launch Alaska's Parental Involvement Initiative, which will require parental notification of teenage girls under age 18 before they can get an abortion. But, the schedules of we mortals cannot retard the imperatives of history, so, despite Mrs. Palin's absence, we've gone to war with the army we have.

Currently 35 states have laws that require either parental consent or notification in order for a teenage girl to receive an abortion. Alaska passed one in 1997.

However, after ten years on the books, in 2007 the Alaska Supreme Court, arguing that sharing this information with parents violated the privacy of their teenage daughters, found the law unconstitutional. So now a 13-year-old can get an abortion without the knowledge of her parents.

A large percentage of these abortions are paid for with state Medicaid funds, but no one seems to think that parents' privacy is being violated using their tax funds to pay for these.

Research shows the remedial benefits of parental involvement when a pregnant teenager considers abortion.

And research shows the profound psychological damage caused by teenage abortion. But, perhaps we should be wondering who we are today that we need to gather data to address an issue as intuitively obvious as whether a teenage girl may abort her child without her parents knowing.

Of course there are exceptional considerations, like abusive parents. But the Alaska initiative deals with this, as did a similar initiative in California, which was defeated last November.

No, this is not about being reasonable. It is about ideology. And what we have are opposing worldviews that cannot be reconciled. It's about choosing one or the other.

One view is secular, materialistic, and sees only individuals and the rights they claim.

The other view is about truths that precede individuals, and social realities of which individuals are a part, like family.

This contrast and conflict could not have been more clearly laid out than in an exchange at a congressional hearing last April between pro-life New Jersey Congressman Chris Smith and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Smith was questioning current administration policies to promote abortion internationally. As part of his questioning, he waxed philosophic and asked Mrs. Clinton about her recent acceptance of Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger award. Sanger founded Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion-provider.

He pointed out to Mrs. Clinton that Sanger was a eugenicist and racist who said "The most merciful thing a family does for one of its infant members is to kill it."

The Secretary of State listened stoically and then replied: "We have a fundamental disagreement....We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health, and reproductive health includes access to abortion."

A century and a half ago, a fundamental conflict in values in our nation came to a head. In one view, black African slaves were not human, so the question of slavery was about political, not moral, reality. The other view saw the slaves as human and slavery as a moral outrage. The conflict fomented at the nation's grass roots until it exploded in the national arena.

The parental involvement ballot initiative in Alaska is about Americans again grappling at our grassroots with crucial basic questions that divide us that must be resolved.

Are we a people that see the unborn, family, and individuals as all part of the fundamental fabric of life? Or are we a materialistic, secular nation of individuals making political claims on each other?

Contact: Star Parker
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: September 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.