September 23, 2013
New Poll shows majority of the public dislikes ObamaCare, even more feel uninformed
September 22, 2013
40 Days for Life 2013
September 20, 2013
Mandated waiting period for a tattoo ... but not for abortion?
Pro-Life Efforts Provide Care and Protection for Women and Children
In fact, the legal victories Ms. Jahr criticizes have saved many lives, and pro-life events, like March for Life, serve to establish new and continuing support for Pregnancy Resource Centers and other organizations that care for women and children.
Dr. Michael New, assistant professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn and Jeanneane Maxon, vice president for external affairs and corporate counsel at Americans United for Life, both presented well-reasoned responses to the misguided assertion that resources spent on legal battles and pro-life rallies are a disservice to the unborn.
New, using a resource published by the Family Research Council, pointed out that Jahr:
… seems oblivious to the fact that pro-lifers fund a vast network of pregnancy resource centers that provide medical, emotional, and financial support to thousands of women facing unplanned pregnancies every year. A 2010 study by the Family Research Council identified nearly 2,000 US pregnancy care centers that annually assist more than 2.3 million women with pregnancy support, abstinence counseling, and public health access. A conservative estimate of community cost savings for these services, which are predominantly privately funded, during 2010 is more than $100 million annually." The number of pregnancy resources centers continues to grow exponentially while the number of abortion facilities reaches historic lows, many closing due to safety concerns.
New also makes a strong point correlating stricter abortion regulation and protection of the unborn, noting "[t]hese incremental laws serve both a protective and an educational purpose. For instance, the debate over banning partial-birth abortion clearly demonstrated the extremely permissive nature of abortion policy in theUnited States. Perhaps pro-life efforts to protect the unborn are more extensive than Jahr realizes."
Jeanneane Maxon responded eloquently by highlighting her experience working with Pregnancy Resource Centers. She recounted that at the time Jahr's op-ed was published Maxon was attending a CareNet conference, an organization that supports over 1,000 pregnancy resource centers around the country.
I was surrounded by more than a thousand staff members and volunteers who have given countless hours of time, and countless dollars, to compassionately care for women facing an abortion decision. From age seven, I've witnessed and shared in the loving responsibility of providing whatever assistance a pregnant mother might need, as my own mother worked tirelessly as an executive director of a pregnancy care center. Pro-life Americans understand this kind of daily dedication -- responding with money, time and treasure to nurture the potential of every unborn life with tangible resources.
I, too, have been involved with Pregnancy Resource Centers since I was a child and as an adult, became a trained counselor. There are no more selfless, caring, and loving people than the men and women I served with at Pregnancy Resource Centers. We worked not only to promote life, but we also provided a shoulder to cry on, transportation, clothing, diapers, and countless other resources to women throughout pregnancy and well beyond.
Women in crisis pregnancies and their unborn children are also protected by the very laws groups like the Family Research Council and Americans United for Life advocate. Maxon notes that legislation pushing for stronger clinic regulations and more informed consent for women serves to create effective and much-needed protections.
Maxon also noted that events such as the March for Life are a necessary component in effectively aiding women and children in crisis: "(A)t the March for Life thousands upon thousands of people from all walks of life -- charities, churches, synagogues, non-profits, individuals, and business leaders -- join together to reconfirm their belief in something larger than themselves. Family celebrations are a perfect way to recommit to the reality of life and all it demands. Sometimes the best way to show your love for people is a party or a memorial, a celebration of the hope that draws us together."
Far from being a disservice to women or the unborn, pro-life legal efforts and pro-life events serve to create stronger protections for women and unborn children and also serve to educate the public -- generating more supporters, funds, and loving care.
Contact: Anna Higgins, FRC Blog
Seminar at UN to push for pro-life, pro-family development efforts
September 19, 2013
DEFUND OBAMACARE - call your Senator today!
Democratic Leader Harry Reid needs 60 votes to fund Obamacare, but there are only 54 Democrats in the Senate! If Republicans hold strong, they can stop it. This is the last opportunity we're going to have to stop Obamacare - CALL & EMAIL YOUR SENATORS and demand they REPEAL Obamacare! USE THIS LINK:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
September 17, 2013
Thousands of pro-life mourners gathered at hundreds of graves of aborted babies on Saturday
Here's how to stop ObamaCare
Support for ObamaCare plunges to 39%
No Illinois U.S. House members sign onto bill that would defund Obamacare
September 13, 2013
No to Ad Hoc Death Panels
2/3rds oppose physician-assisted suicide in poll conducted by New England Journal of Medicine surveying its own members
“I Just Wanted My Pregnancy”: Women duped into aborting her baby gives first interview to CNN’s “New Day”
Abortion clinic closings on rise in U.S., 44 tallied year to date
September 12, 2013
Life Chain continues to pray across U.S. to end abortion
September 11, 2013
Lawmaker reviews rule change allowing Illinois minors secret STD vaccinations
September 9, 2013
National Right to Life Urges OPM Acting Director To Tell the President: We Cannot Break the Law on Abortion
National Right to Life Urges OPM Acting Director To Tell the President: We Cannot Break the Law on Abortion
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of state right-to-life organizations, today formally urged that the director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) tell the White House that the agency cannot break the law by paying for health plans for federal employees that cover elective abortion – not even to accommodate the White House's desire to placate pro-abortion pressure groups.
The counsel came within NRLC's formal comment on a proposed rule published by OPM on August 8, with a deadline for public comment today.
A component of the "Affordable Care Act" (Obamacare) requires that Members of Congress and certain congressional staff buy their health plans on the new exchanges, starting January 1, 2014. OPM's proposed rule spells out how this transition will occur, without interrupting the contributions made by the government to the cost of such plans (approximately 75% of the premium cost).
NRLC's letter, a detailed critique submitted to OPM by NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson and Senior Legislative Counsel Susan T. Muskett, J.D., cites multiple evidences that OPM intends to allow the federal employees affected by the change to purchase plans that cover elective abortion. If this occurs, it will violate an explicit congressional prohibition, the Smith Amendment, which for most of the past 30 years has prohibited OPM from any administrative involvement in purchasing any health plan for federal employees that covers abortion (except in cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest).
The NRLC letter notes that OPM spokespersons have engaged in "blatant misdirection" in recent weeks, "attempting to mislead journalists and others into thinking that the new protests [against the proposed rule] are a reiteration of objections to the manner in which the new 'refundable premium assistance tax credits' will be used to subsidize private health plans that cover abortion" under Obamacare. That issue, while extremely important in its own right, has nothing whatever to do with the impending violation of the Smith Amendment, the NRLC letter explains.
The NRLC comment letter concludes:
If OPM proceeds on the course indicated – expending funds for administrative expenses in connection with federal employee health plans that cover elective abortions, those involved will be violating the plain language of a valid limitation on appropriations. This would be a lawless act, and in NRLC's view, would implicate the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341. The Anti-Deficiency Act is a longstanding federal law that provides, in certain circumstances, civil and criminal liability for expenditure of congressional funds outside the limits set by Congress.
Those who dislike the policy that the Smith Amendment imposes, the President included, are free to urge Congress to repeal it. NRLC will continue to forcefully argue to Congress that federal agencies should not be engaged in any aspect of administering health plans that cover elective abortions, and that therefore the Smith Amendment should be preserved. Lawmakers may vote and be held accountable by constituents for how they vote on that question. That is the system provided by the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution does not confer on any President a retroactive, line-item veto, by which he may arbitrarily nullify specific provisions of duly enacted laws, when he finds those specific provisions inconvenient or offensive to various pressure groups to which he is politically indebted.
Therefore, NRLC urges that the OPM Acting Director inform the White House that she cannot be a party to a blatant violation of law, notwithstanding the pro-abortion pressure groups the White House feels bound to accommodate, and that OPM therefore must exclude from the program any health plan that covers abortion (except where the life of the mother is endangered, or in cases of rape or incest).
The complete text of the NRLC comment is posted on the NRLC website here.
Source: National Right to Life


























