BREAKING NEWS!
Judge Files Charges Against "Notre Dame 88" Attorneys
The Judge who took herself off of case voluntarily now files ethics charges against "ND 88" attorneys for arguing she may have been seen as "biased"
In an incredible turn of events, Judge Jenny Pitts Manier filed formal ethics charges against the ND88 attorneys, in response to their arguments that a reasonable person may perceive that the judge was biased against the "ND 88."
Click here for more.
January 27, 2010
Illinois Pro-Life Conference Draws Prominent Young Advocate
Illinois Pro-Life Conference Draws Prominent Young Advocate
Lila Rose of Live Action, Who Exposed Planned Parenthood's Misinformation and Scandal, to Appear at SpeakOut Illinois 2010
The SpeakOut Illinois coalition of pro-life organizations will hold their annual conference on Saturday, January 30, 2010 at the DoubleTree Oak Brook Hotel and feature Lila Rose, president of California-based Live Action, a youth-led movement dedicated to building a culture of life and ending abortion. Rose, a UCLA student, and Live Action engage in investigative journalism to expose the threats against the unborn. Her undercover videos on "Exposing Planned Parenthood" have resonated with pro-life advocates across the nation.
SpeakOut Illinois is a unique coalition of more than thirty pro-life organizations in northern Illinois, including activists such as the Pro-Life Action League, Crisis Pregnancy Centers, pro-life law firm the Thomas More Society, politically active pro-life groups and religiously affiliated organizations such as Lutherans for Life and Catholic Citizens of Illinois.
In addition to Lila Rose, former Kansas attorney general Phill Kline will discuss his lengthy legal battle with Planned Parenthood. The Henry Hyde Lie Leadership Award will be presented to Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM). Ruse works extensively in the international arena to protect the sanctity of life.
"Planning and executing this conference enables us to truly come together for the pro-life movement," said Ann Scheidler, vice president of the Pro-Life Action League and coordinator of SpeakOut Illinois. "We can learn about and support each other's ministries while aligning our efforts to reflect on the tragedy of Roe v. Wade."
Concurrent with SpeakOut Illinois is TeenSpeak, a conference for teens designed to help them live out their pro-life beliefs. TeenSpeak will also feature Rose and is sponsored by Generations for Life, the youth outreach division of the Pro-Life Action League.
"We hope other pro-life minds will join us at SpeakOut Illinois 2010," said Scheidler. "It is but one way to strengthen the voice for life in Illinois and make an impact on the pro-life movement this year."
For more information, the day’s schedule and to register, visit http://speakoutillinois.org/
Contact: Stephanie Lewis
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Lila Rose of Live Action, Who Exposed Planned Parenthood's Misinformation and Scandal, to Appear at SpeakOut Illinois 2010
The SpeakOut Illinois coalition of pro-life organizations will hold their annual conference on Saturday, January 30, 2010 at the DoubleTree Oak Brook Hotel and feature Lila Rose, president of California-based Live Action, a youth-led movement dedicated to building a culture of life and ending abortion. Rose, a UCLA student, and Live Action engage in investigative journalism to expose the threats against the unborn. Her undercover videos on "Exposing Planned Parenthood" have resonated with pro-life advocates across the nation.
SpeakOut Illinois is a unique coalition of more than thirty pro-life organizations in northern Illinois, including activists such as the Pro-Life Action League, Crisis Pregnancy Centers, pro-life law firm the Thomas More Society, politically active pro-life groups and religiously affiliated organizations such as Lutherans for Life and Catholic Citizens of Illinois.
In addition to Lila Rose, former Kansas attorney general Phill Kline will discuss his lengthy legal battle with Planned Parenthood. The Henry Hyde Lie Leadership Award will be presented to Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM). Ruse works extensively in the international arena to protect the sanctity of life.
"Planning and executing this conference enables us to truly come together for the pro-life movement," said Ann Scheidler, vice president of the Pro-Life Action League and coordinator of SpeakOut Illinois. "We can learn about and support each other's ministries while aligning our efforts to reflect on the tragedy of Roe v. Wade."
Concurrent with SpeakOut Illinois is TeenSpeak, a conference for teens designed to help them live out their pro-life beliefs. TeenSpeak will also feature Rose and is sponsored by Generations for Life, the youth outreach division of the Pro-Life Action League.
"We hope other pro-life minds will join us at SpeakOut Illinois 2010," said Scheidler. "It is but one way to strengthen the voice for life in Illinois and make an impact on the pro-life movement this year."
For more information, the day’s schedule and to register, visit http://speakoutillinois.org/
Contact: Stephanie Lewis
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
BREAKING: Baby Isaiah Granted Another Three Weeks for Medical Assessment
BREAKING: Baby Isaiah Granted Another Three Weeks for Medical Assessment
Baby Isaiah May has been granted at least another three weeks of life, after an Alberta provincial court ruled that he should remain on life support until February 19th while lawyers have him assessed by medical experts.
Isaiah was born to Isaac and Rebecka May on October 24th. During a long and arduous labour, Isaiah suffered severe oxygen deprivation because his umbilical was wrapped around his neck. The Mays were flown into Stollery Children's Hospital in Edmonton, where he has been ever since.
The Mays have cared for Isaiah at the hospital, and say they have watched him improve steadily; so they were shocked on January 13th when they received a letter from the hospital saying that he had not improved, and that “there is no hope of recovery for Isaiah.” The letter stated that his ventilator would be removed on January 20th.
The Mays took the hospital and Alberta Health Services to court last Wednesday asking for a 90-day injunction against the hospital's order.
The case has drawn international attention, with a flood of support for the May family. Their Facebook group, “Prayers for Baby Isaiah James,” has grown to almost 25,000 members, up from less than 5,000 one week ago.
Developing…
Contact: Patrick B. Craine
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Baby Isaiah May has been granted at least another three weeks of life, after an Alberta provincial court ruled that he should remain on life support until February 19th while lawyers have him assessed by medical experts.
Isaiah was born to Isaac and Rebecka May on October 24th. During a long and arduous labour, Isaiah suffered severe oxygen deprivation because his umbilical was wrapped around his neck. The Mays were flown into Stollery Children's Hospital in Edmonton, where he has been ever since.
The Mays have cared for Isaiah at the hospital, and say they have watched him improve steadily; so they were shocked on January 13th when they received a letter from the hospital saying that he had not improved, and that “there is no hope of recovery for Isaiah.” The letter stated that his ventilator would be removed on January 20th.
The Mays took the hospital and Alberta Health Services to court last Wednesday asking for a 90-day injunction against the hospital's order.
The case has drawn international attention, with a flood of support for the May family. Their Facebook group, “Prayers for Baby Isaiah James,” has grown to almost 25,000 members, up from less than 5,000 one week ago.
Developing…
Contact: Patrick B. Craine
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Surprise, surprise: Edwards wanted mistress to abort their baby
Surprise, surprise: Edwards wanted mistress to abort their baby
Yesterday the Wall Street Journal posted excerpts from the forthcoming book, The Politician: An insider's account of John Edwards's pursuit of the presidency and the scandal that brought him down.
The book was written by former Edwards' confidante Andrew Young, who for a time even took a bullet for Edwards and claimed he was the father of Reille Hunter's baby. Last week Edwards finally manned up and admitted his paternity.
WSJ described an excerpt from the book indicating Edwards wanted Hunter to abort:
According to Young, Hunter called him in May 2007 to say she was pregnant. Young says that when he informed Edwards, the senator told him to "handle it," to which he replied: "I can't handle this one." Young writes that Edward unloaded on Hunter as a "crazy slut," said they had an "open relationship," and put his paternity chances at "one in three."
Young says that Edwards asked him for help persuading Hunter to have an abortion. Young writes that Hunter believed the baby to be "some kind of golden child, the reincarnated spirit of a Buddhist monk who was going to help save the world."
Fortunately, Hunter resisted this all too typical coercive attempt by a sexually exploitative and irresponsible man to abort his own baby.
Of course Edwards is a pro-abort, which as we see is incredibly self-serving for men.
Edwards was ready to sacrifice his own baby for political and personal expediency.
This is all the more unimaginable when remembering Edwards' 16-year-old son Wade was killed in a car accident, and Elizabeth had to undergo fertility treatments to conceive their youngest 2 children, Jack and Emma Claire.
John Edwards demonstrates the pro-abort mentality: Only wanted, convenient children are precious.
Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Yesterday the Wall Street Journal posted excerpts from the forthcoming book, The Politician: An insider's account of John Edwards's pursuit of the presidency and the scandal that brought him down.
The book was written by former Edwards' confidante Andrew Young, who for a time even took a bullet for Edwards and claimed he was the father of Reille Hunter's baby. Last week Edwards finally manned up and admitted his paternity.
WSJ described an excerpt from the book indicating Edwards wanted Hunter to abort:
According to Young, Hunter called him in May 2007 to say she was pregnant. Young says that when he informed Edwards, the senator told him to "handle it," to which he replied: "I can't handle this one." Young writes that Edward unloaded on Hunter as a "crazy slut," said they had an "open relationship," and put his paternity chances at "one in three."
Young says that Edwards asked him for help persuading Hunter to have an abortion. Young writes that Hunter believed the baby to be "some kind of golden child, the reincarnated spirit of a Buddhist monk who was going to help save the world."
Fortunately, Hunter resisted this all too typical coercive attempt by a sexually exploitative and irresponsible man to abort his own baby.
Of course Edwards is a pro-abort, which as we see is incredibly self-serving for men.
Edwards was ready to sacrifice his own baby for political and personal expediency.
This is all the more unimaginable when remembering Edwards' 16-year-old son Wade was killed in a car accident, and Elizabeth had to undergo fertility treatments to conceive their youngest 2 children, Jack and Emma Claire.
John Edwards demonstrates the pro-abort mentality: Only wanted, convenient children are precious.
Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Abortion Language, Special Deals Made Senate Health Care Bill a 'Foul Piece of Work,’ Republican Says
Abortion Language, Special Deals Made Senate Health Care Bill a 'Foul Piece of Work,' Republican Says
Language in the Senate health-care bill allowing tax dollars to go to health plans that cover abortion played a large role in the legislation's apparent demise, according to Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).
So did "carve outs" -- or special agreements Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made with certain senators to give their states extra Medicaid funding in exchange for voting in favor of the bill
"It just got to be such a foul piece of work that the American people couldn't tolerate these kinds of things," King told CNSNews.com. "And by the way, to jump across the line and be in a position where we would compel American taxpayers to pay taxes against their will to fund abortions in America, that's a line across which many of us wouldn't cross."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced last week (Jan. 21) that there were not enough votes to pass the Senate-version of the bill in the House of Representatives.
At the annual March for Life last Friday (Jan. 22), CNSNews.com asked King: "The Senate health care bill allowed tax money to go to health-care plans which cover abortion. (D)o you think that the abortion language is a factor in the bill's demise?"
"(I)t clearly was a factor," King replied. "(T)he Stupak language laid out a parameter. And when it went from the House over to the Senate, they had to deal with the Stupak amendment. And when (Nebraska Democratic Sen.) Ben Nelson had offered the Stupak language as an amendment, and it was defeated by a vote of 45 to 54, then they had to find a way to get Ben Nelson's vote, and in the middle of the night they contrived some language that was rejected by the pro-life community almost instantaneously, and I (was) among them. That scrambled the situation."
Click here for the video.
King was referring to an amendment offered by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) to the House version of the bill, which passed in the House in November, explicitly barred federal funds from paying for any part of a health-insurance plan that covers abortion, except in the cases of rape, incest, or risk to the mother's life.
Language that mirrored the Stupak amendment, sponsored by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) was rejected in the Senate. The Legislation that passed there, and which was expected to go into conference committee with the House, mandated that at least one of the health plans provided through the government-regulated insurance exchanges for people getting coverage with subsidies had to provide coverage of elective abortion.
King also credited what he called the "Cornhusker kick-back" -- a deal reached by Nebraska's Nelson and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to give Nebraska a special dispensation for full Medicare payments, in exchange for Nelson's vote in favor of the bill.
Added to that was an agreement Reid reached with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), dubbed the "Louisiana Purchase" -- for $300 million in extra Medicare funding for Louisiana -- as well as the exemption of Medicare Advantage for Florida obtained by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and the $10 billion that was earmarked to go to Maine for community health clinics.
King told a story to illustrate the depth of support that pro-lifers feel for their cause.
"(I)n fact, I take you back to early in the '80s, my congressman at that time was Fred Grandy, who came to my hometown, did a town hall meeting. He presented a health-care proposal that he had put together, and there were about 80 people in the room. He asked how many of us were employers. There were 12 of us. How many of us provided health insurance for our employees? I was the only one. And then he leaned down and he asked me: 'How much will this change the way you do business, if this policy I'm proposing becomes law?' And my answer to him was, 'Probably not very much unless you're going to compel me to fund abortion. If that's the case, I quite likely will no longer be an employer.' And the church erupted in applause," King said.
"That's the first time I knew that I was in a pro-life community," King said. "I hadn't thought about (what) my neighbors thought. I just said what I thought. That's what the American people think today. We're not going to compel Americans to fund abortions with their tax dollars. We're going to keep marching, working, and praying, that we can put an end to elective abortion in America."
King said forcing Americans to fund abortions would be "inhuman," "cruel," and an "immoral extortion of tax dollars."
"I think it's immoral to compel people – taxpayers -- to fund an act that is abhorrent to their moral standards," King said. "And I would not ask someone to do that. I wouldn't compel someone to do that. That is cruel and inhuman to put a taxpayer through that. In fact, it's an immoral extortion of tax dollars."
Click here for the video.
The Senate bill, meanwhile, did contain a provision that created a theoretical firewall to keep states from covering abortions. However, critics like King pointed out that taxpayer subsidies not used to cover abortions in one state could be used to pay for abortions in another state.
The opt-out is "a sham because it does nothing to prevent one state's tax dollars from paying for elective abortions in other states," said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) in a Dec. 21 statement. "Health reform should be an opportunity to protect human life – not end it."
On Jan. 21, Pelosi announced that House Democrats did not have enough votes to pass the Senate version of health care reform.
"I don't see the votes for it at this time," said Pelosi at a Capitol Hill press conference. "The members have been very clear."
The March for Life is an annual pro-life rally held in Washington, D.C., since 1974 to remember and protest the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which legalized abortion on demand across the United States.
Contact: Karen Schuberg
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Language in the Senate health-care bill allowing tax dollars to go to health plans that cover abortion played a large role in the legislation's apparent demise, according to Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).
So did "carve outs" -- or special agreements Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made with certain senators to give their states extra Medicaid funding in exchange for voting in favor of the bill
"It just got to be such a foul piece of work that the American people couldn't tolerate these kinds of things," King told CNSNews.com. "And by the way, to jump across the line and be in a position where we would compel American taxpayers to pay taxes against their will to fund abortions in America, that's a line across which many of us wouldn't cross."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced last week (Jan. 21) that there were not enough votes to pass the Senate-version of the bill in the House of Representatives.
At the annual March for Life last Friday (Jan. 22), CNSNews.com asked King: "The Senate health care bill allowed tax money to go to health-care plans which cover abortion. (D)o you think that the abortion language is a factor in the bill's demise?"
"(I)t clearly was a factor," King replied. "(T)he Stupak language laid out a parameter. And when it went from the House over to the Senate, they had to deal with the Stupak amendment. And when (Nebraska Democratic Sen.) Ben Nelson had offered the Stupak language as an amendment, and it was defeated by a vote of 45 to 54, then they had to find a way to get Ben Nelson's vote, and in the middle of the night they contrived some language that was rejected by the pro-life community almost instantaneously, and I (was) among them. That scrambled the situation."
Click here for the video.
King was referring to an amendment offered by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) to the House version of the bill, which passed in the House in November, explicitly barred federal funds from paying for any part of a health-insurance plan that covers abortion, except in the cases of rape, incest, or risk to the mother's life.
Language that mirrored the Stupak amendment, sponsored by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) was rejected in the Senate. The Legislation that passed there, and which was expected to go into conference committee with the House, mandated that at least one of the health plans provided through the government-regulated insurance exchanges for people getting coverage with subsidies had to provide coverage of elective abortion.
King also credited what he called the "Cornhusker kick-back" -- a deal reached by Nebraska's Nelson and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to give Nebraska a special dispensation for full Medicare payments, in exchange for Nelson's vote in favor of the bill.
Added to that was an agreement Reid reached with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), dubbed the "Louisiana Purchase" -- for $300 million in extra Medicare funding for Louisiana -- as well as the exemption of Medicare Advantage for Florida obtained by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and the $10 billion that was earmarked to go to Maine for community health clinics.
King told a story to illustrate the depth of support that pro-lifers feel for their cause.
"(I)n fact, I take you back to early in the '80s, my congressman at that time was Fred Grandy, who came to my hometown, did a town hall meeting. He presented a health-care proposal that he had put together, and there were about 80 people in the room. He asked how many of us were employers. There were 12 of us. How many of us provided health insurance for our employees? I was the only one. And then he leaned down and he asked me: 'How much will this change the way you do business, if this policy I'm proposing becomes law?' And my answer to him was, 'Probably not very much unless you're going to compel me to fund abortion. If that's the case, I quite likely will no longer be an employer.' And the church erupted in applause," King said.
"That's the first time I knew that I was in a pro-life community," King said. "I hadn't thought about (what) my neighbors thought. I just said what I thought. That's what the American people think today. We're not going to compel Americans to fund abortions with their tax dollars. We're going to keep marching, working, and praying, that we can put an end to elective abortion in America."
King said forcing Americans to fund abortions would be "inhuman," "cruel," and an "immoral extortion of tax dollars."
"I think it's immoral to compel people – taxpayers -- to fund an act that is abhorrent to their moral standards," King said. "And I would not ask someone to do that. I wouldn't compel someone to do that. That is cruel and inhuman to put a taxpayer through that. In fact, it's an immoral extortion of tax dollars."
Click here for the video.
The Senate bill, meanwhile, did contain a provision that created a theoretical firewall to keep states from covering abortions. However, critics like King pointed out that taxpayer subsidies not used to cover abortions in one state could be used to pay for abortions in another state.
The opt-out is "a sham because it does nothing to prevent one state's tax dollars from paying for elective abortions in other states," said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) in a Dec. 21 statement. "Health reform should be an opportunity to protect human life – not end it."
On Jan. 21, Pelosi announced that House Democrats did not have enough votes to pass the Senate version of health care reform.
"I don't see the votes for it at this time," said Pelosi at a Capitol Hill press conference. "The members have been very clear."
The March for Life is an annual pro-life rally held in Washington, D.C., since 1974 to remember and protest the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which legalized abortion on demand across the United States.
Contact: Karen Schuberg
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Tim Tebow Defends Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad under Fire
Tim Tebow Defends Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad under Fire
College football superstar Tim Tebow is standing fast behind a pro-life ad developed by Focus on the Family and set to air on CBS on Super Bowl Sunday. Although the ad has not been released, abortion advocacy groups are already demanding that it be scrapped, since it likely features the story of how Tebow’s mother chose life when doctors were urging her abort her now-famous son.
The college football superstar, who just ended his last season quarterbacking for the Florida Gators, has been an anomaly among top-tier athletes. Tebow makes no bones about his Christian faith, his pro-life convictions, and the fact that he wants to save himself for marriage.
But Tebow’s pro-life convictions spring from an unusually personal source: back in 1987, his mother contracted amoebic dysentery while pregnant with him in the Philippines, and doctors recommended abortion. Had Pam Tebow taken that advice, Tebow fans would never have seen the football phenomenon win the Heisman Trophy in 2007 and carry the Gators to victory in two major championships.
At a Sunday press conference in Mobile, Tebow told the gaggle of reporters: "I know some people won't agree with [the ad], but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe, and I'm never shy about that."
"I don't feel like I'm very preachy about it, but I do stand up for what I believe. Unfortunately in today's society not many athletes tend to do that. So I'm just standing for something."
But Tebow’s standing for pro-life values has outraged abortion advocacy groups, who fear the effect the Focus on the Family ad could have on millions of Super Bowl viewers on Feb. 7. Tebow’s story is already credited with having influenced a number of women to choose not to abort their babies.
The Women’s Media Center has been coordinating efforts with the National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority to pressure CBS, the broadcasting station hosting the Super Bowl this year, to revoke the 30-second ad called “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.”
"An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year -- an event designed to bring Americans together," Jehmu Greene, president of the Women's Media Center, told the Associated Press.
Last year, the National Football League and NBC (then broadcasting the Super Bowl) elected to nix an advertisement sponsored by the Catholic watchdog group Fidelis, which hailed the success of President Obama overcoming the difficult circumstances of his early life and featured the message "Life: Imagine the Potential."
However one pro-life group says that feminist groups’ obsession with the as-yet-unseen content of the Tebow ad highlights an abysmal ideological attitude when it comes to defending women’s rights and dignity.
“In the three and a half years that I advised FCC Chairman Kevin Martin on indecency issues, I can’t recall one time that NOW ever spoke out about the sexually graphic or misogynistic content on CBS,” Penny Nance, CEO for Concerned Women for America told LifeSiteNews.com. “I find it laughable that NOW has a problem with Tim Tebow sharing his own story. If NOW really cared about women they would stop flacking for the abortion industry and start working on behalf of women.”
Focus on the Family has dismissed the controversy over the upcoming ad.
"There’s nothing political and controversial about it,” said Gary Schneeberger, a spokesman for Focus on the Family. “When the day arrives, and you sit down to watch the game on TV, those who oppose it will be quite surprised at what the ad is all about."
With the Super Bowl set to kick off in about two weeks, CBS, which has already reviewed and approved the ad’s script, has given no indication of yanking the Tebow ad.
Also read: CBS Stands Behind Acceptance Of Focus On Family Spot
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
College football superstar Tim Tebow is standing fast behind a pro-life ad developed by Focus on the Family and set to air on CBS on Super Bowl Sunday. Although the ad has not been released, abortion advocacy groups are already demanding that it be scrapped, since it likely features the story of how Tebow’s mother chose life when doctors were urging her abort her now-famous son.
The college football superstar, who just ended his last season quarterbacking for the Florida Gators, has been an anomaly among top-tier athletes. Tebow makes no bones about his Christian faith, his pro-life convictions, and the fact that he wants to save himself for marriage.
But Tebow’s pro-life convictions spring from an unusually personal source: back in 1987, his mother contracted amoebic dysentery while pregnant with him in the Philippines, and doctors recommended abortion. Had Pam Tebow taken that advice, Tebow fans would never have seen the football phenomenon win the Heisman Trophy in 2007 and carry the Gators to victory in two major championships.
At a Sunday press conference in Mobile, Tebow told the gaggle of reporters: "I know some people won't agree with [the ad], but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe, and I'm never shy about that."
"I don't feel like I'm very preachy about it, but I do stand up for what I believe. Unfortunately in today's society not many athletes tend to do that. So I'm just standing for something."
But Tebow’s standing for pro-life values has outraged abortion advocacy groups, who fear the effect the Focus on the Family ad could have on millions of Super Bowl viewers on Feb. 7. Tebow’s story is already credited with having influenced a number of women to choose not to abort their babies.
The Women’s Media Center has been coordinating efforts with the National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority to pressure CBS, the broadcasting station hosting the Super Bowl this year, to revoke the 30-second ad called “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.”
"An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year -- an event designed to bring Americans together," Jehmu Greene, president of the Women's Media Center, told the Associated Press.
Last year, the National Football League and NBC (then broadcasting the Super Bowl) elected to nix an advertisement sponsored by the Catholic watchdog group Fidelis, which hailed the success of President Obama overcoming the difficult circumstances of his early life and featured the message "Life: Imagine the Potential."
However one pro-life group says that feminist groups’ obsession with the as-yet-unseen content of the Tebow ad highlights an abysmal ideological attitude when it comes to defending women’s rights and dignity.
“In the three and a half years that I advised FCC Chairman Kevin Martin on indecency issues, I can’t recall one time that NOW ever spoke out about the sexually graphic or misogynistic content on CBS,” Penny Nance, CEO for Concerned Women for America told LifeSiteNews.com. “I find it laughable that NOW has a problem with Tim Tebow sharing his own story. If NOW really cared about women they would stop flacking for the abortion industry and start working on behalf of women.”
Focus on the Family has dismissed the controversy over the upcoming ad.
"There’s nothing political and controversial about it,” said Gary Schneeberger, a spokesman for Focus on the Family. “When the day arrives, and you sit down to watch the game on TV, those who oppose it will be quite surprised at what the ad is all about."
With the Super Bowl set to kick off in about two weeks, CBS, which has already reviewed and approved the ad’s script, has given no indication of yanking the Tebow ad.
Also read: CBS Stands Behind Acceptance Of Focus On Family Spot
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
'Nothing Happened Here' -- Except a Botched Abortion Ending in Fatality
'Nothing Happened Here' -- Except a Botched Abortion Ending in Fatality
Mother of four dies after abortionist severs an artery during an abortion
Alexandra Nunez, a 37-year old single mother of four, died after a botched abortion Monday at the A-1 Women's Center in New York City.
Police, who are continuing to investigate the death, said that the abortionist severed an artery during Nunez's abortion, leading to massive bleeding and eventually cardiac arrest. Nunez was rushed to a nearby hospital where she died.
A-1 Women's Center, located in a run-down building in a predominately Hispanic neighborhood of Jackson Heights, was only recently licensed in July of last year to do surgical procedures that required anesthesia. It is operated by an abortionist Salomon Epstein, who has a long history of being protested by pro-life groups.
An unidentified clinic worker told reporters that everything had "gone well" at the abortion clinic, which also doubles as a plastic surgery center. "Nothing happened here," she said.
"Nothing happened there -- except fatal injuries during a botched abortion which cost a woman her life," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "It is so typical of abortion clinics to hide the truth, but this time, the truth is out. The clinic is under investigation, and we will be forwarding information about this tragedy to the New York State Medical Board and demand disciplinary action against the abortionist."
Operation Rescue recently launched the Abortion Whistleblowers campaign, offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of an abortionist who is breaking the law.
"We urge anyone working at A-1 Women's Center to come forward and tell what they know in the interest of protecting other women from suffering Ms. Nunez's fate."
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Mother of four dies after abortionist severs an artery during an abortion
Alexandra Nunez, a 37-year old single mother of four, died after a botched abortion Monday at the A-1 Women's Center in New York City.
Police, who are continuing to investigate the death, said that the abortionist severed an artery during Nunez's abortion, leading to massive bleeding and eventually cardiac arrest. Nunez was rushed to a nearby hospital where she died.
A-1 Women's Center, located in a run-down building in a predominately Hispanic neighborhood of Jackson Heights, was only recently licensed in July of last year to do surgical procedures that required anesthesia. It is operated by an abortionist Salomon Epstein, who has a long history of being protested by pro-life groups.
An unidentified clinic worker told reporters that everything had "gone well" at the abortion clinic, which also doubles as a plastic surgery center. "Nothing happened here," she said.
"Nothing happened there -- except fatal injuries during a botched abortion which cost a woman her life," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "It is so typical of abortion clinics to hide the truth, but this time, the truth is out. The clinic is under investigation, and we will be forwarding information about this tragedy to the New York State Medical Board and demand disciplinary action against the abortionist."
Operation Rescue recently launched the Abortion Whistleblowers campaign, offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of an abortionist who is breaking the law.
"We urge anyone working at A-1 Women's Center to come forward and tell what they know in the interest of protecting other women from suffering Ms. Nunez's fate."
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: January 27, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY
NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to Life is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
CBS Stands Behind Acceptance Of Focus On Family Spot
CBS Tuesday (Jan. 26) stood behind its decision to take a Super Bowl ad from Focus on the Family that has drawn fire from reproductive choice organizations. The network said it does not reject advocacy ads out of hand, and added that it would consider "responsibly produced ads from all groups" for the "few" remaining spots in the broadcast. "We have for some time moderated our approach to advocacy submissions after it became apparent that our stance did not reflect public sentiment or industry norms on the issue," CBS said in an e-mailed statement Tuesday. "In fact, most media outlets have accepted advocacy ads for some time. At CBS, our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a process that ensures all ads -- on all sides of an issue -- are appropriate for air.
Click here for the full article.
Super Bowl Ad Exposes NOW's Anti-Christian Bigotry
"It is amazing to watch the venom and hatred that is being directed at Tim and Pam Tebow and Focus on the Family by the National Organization of Women (NOW) for a Super Bowl ad that they have not seen," said Dr. Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission. "This backlash exposes the irrational hatred of NOW who apparently despises any hint of a positive Christian message. CBS is to be commended for their willingness to not censor a wonderful story of a mother's courage and love."
Click here for the full article.
The 'A' Word Debated In Court (See Video)
Attorneys in the case against Scott Roeder discuss use of the word "abortion" during testimony.
Click here for the video.
Activists Blame Teen Births on Abstinence Education
The teen pregnancy rate in the U.S. rose 3 percent in 2006, the first increase in more than a decade. A report from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute claims abstinence education is to blame because funding for such programs rose to $120 million from 2000 to 2003.
Scott Phelps, executive director of the Abstinence and Marriage Education Partnership, said the assertion makes no sense.
"This slight increase of 3 percent follows a 14-year decline of 34 percent," he said. "In other words, teen birth rates have dropped substantially in the past 14 years. They have no data to support the claim."
Click here for the full article.
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to Life is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
CBS Stands Behind Acceptance Of Focus On Family Spot
CBS Tuesday (Jan. 26) stood behind its decision to take a Super Bowl ad from Focus on the Family that has drawn fire from reproductive choice organizations. The network said it does not reject advocacy ads out of hand, and added that it would consider "responsibly produced ads from all groups" for the "few" remaining spots in the broadcast. "We have for some time moderated our approach to advocacy submissions after it became apparent that our stance did not reflect public sentiment or industry norms on the issue," CBS said in an e-mailed statement Tuesday. "In fact, most media outlets have accepted advocacy ads for some time. At CBS, our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a process that ensures all ads -- on all sides of an issue -- are appropriate for air.
Click here for the full article.
Super Bowl Ad Exposes NOW's Anti-Christian Bigotry
"It is amazing to watch the venom and hatred that is being directed at Tim and Pam Tebow and Focus on the Family by the National Organization of Women (NOW) for a Super Bowl ad that they have not seen," said Dr. Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission. "This backlash exposes the irrational hatred of NOW who apparently despises any hint of a positive Christian message. CBS is to be commended for their willingness to not censor a wonderful story of a mother's courage and love."
Click here for the full article.
The 'A' Word Debated In Court (See Video)
Attorneys in the case against Scott Roeder discuss use of the word "abortion" during testimony.
Click here for the video.
Activists Blame Teen Births on Abstinence Education
The teen pregnancy rate in the U.S. rose 3 percent in 2006, the first increase in more than a decade. A report from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute claims abstinence education is to blame because funding for such programs rose to $120 million from 2000 to 2003.
Scott Phelps, executive director of the Abstinence and Marriage Education Partnership, said the assertion makes no sense.
"This slight increase of 3 percent follows a 14-year decline of 34 percent," he said. "In other words, teen birth rates have dropped substantially in the past 14 years. They have no data to support the claim."
Click here for the full article.
January 26, 2010
U.S. House vote on pro-abortion Senate health bill
U.S. House vote on pro-abortion Senate health bill
Do not be fooled, the Democrats' disastrous plan to take away your healthcare is not dead in Congress.
Everyone should immediately re-contact every member of a state's delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives, with this question: Will you vote NO on the Senate-passed health care bill (H.R. 3590) if Speaker Pelosi brings it to the House floor? (See the January 25 Associated Press story below for details.) The Senate bill would result in direct federal funding of abortion, federal subsidies for private abortion insurance, and federal pro-abortion mandates. For further details, see the up-to-date action alert posted here and an NRLC letter to the U.S. House of Representatives posted here.
Dem Leaders Coalesce On Strategy To Salvage Obama's Health Care Overhaul
Do not be fooled, the Democrats' disastrous plan to take away your healthcare is not dead in Congress.
Everyone should immediately re-contact every member of a state's delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives, with this question: Will you vote NO on the Senate-passed health care bill (H.R. 3590) if Speaker Pelosi brings it to the House floor? (See the January 25 Associated Press story below for details.) The Senate bill would result in direct federal funding of abortion, federal subsidies for private abortion insurance, and federal pro-abortion mandates. For further details, see the up-to-date action alert posted here and an NRLC letter to the U.S. House of Representatives posted here.
Associated Press
Monday, January 25, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
Dem Leaders Coalesce On Strategy To Salvage Obama's Health Care Overhaul
WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic congressional leaders are coalescing around their last, best hope for salvaging President Barack Obama's sweeping health care overhaul.
Their plan is to pass the Senate bill with some changes to accommodate House Democrats, senior Democratic aides said Monday. Leaders will present the idea to the rank and file this week, but it's unclear whether they have enough votes to carry it out.
Last week's victory by Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts cost Democrats the 60th vote they need to maintain undisputed control of the Senate, jeopardizing the outcome of the health care bill just when Obama had brokered a final deal on most of the major issues.
The new strategy is as politically risky as it is bold. There is widespread support for Obama's goals of expanding coverage to nearly all Americans while trying to slow costs. But polls show the public is deeply skeptical of the Democratic bills, and Republicans would certainly accuse Democrats of ignoring voters' wishes.
Obama initially voiced doubts last week that a comprehensive bill was still viable, but he now seems to be pushing for it. Asked Monday if the president was backing away from his pursuit of major changes, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs responded: "No."
"I think the president believes that the circumstances that led him to undertake greater security for people in their health care ... existed last year, last week, and this week," Gibbs added.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said last week she does not have the votes to pass the Senate bill without changes. Democratic congressional aides, speaking on condition of anonymity because the issue is in flux, said the latest strategy involves using a special budget procedure to revise the Senate bill.
The procedural route -- known as reconciliation -- would allow a majority of 51 senators to amend their bill to address some of the major substantive concerns raised by the House. That would circumvent the need for a 60-vote majority to hold off Republican delaying tactics.
The remaining alternatives are unappealing: scaling back the health care bill to less controversial, smaller pieces, or setting it aside altogether.
Momentum is growing to pass the Senate bill with compromises agreed on by the president and congressional leaders, said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a liberal advocacy group. "Are they there yet? No," he said.
Among those arguing for a quick strike on health care is David Plouffe, the political adviser who helped elect Obama president and has just been summoned back by the White House to help coordinate this year's elections.
"I know that the short-term politics are bad," Plouffe argued in a Washington Post op-ed. "But politically speaking, if we do not pass it, the GOP will continue attacking the plan as if we did anyway, and voters will have no ability to measure its upside." Among the immediate benefits: allowing dependent children to stay on their parents' coverage into their mid-twenties, and assistance for seniors in the Medicare prescription coverage gap.
How the new legislative strategy would work has not been fully determined. Would the House vote with only an assurance the Senate will make fixes?
One problem is that it may not be possible to resolve all the significant differences between the House and Senate bills through the special budget procedure. Only changes that affect taxes and government spending would normally be allowed to pass with a majority of 51 senators, rather than a 60-vote majority.
It's unclear that other major disputes - for example, how to restrict taxpayer funding for abortions -- could be settled similarly. On abortion, the House bill is more restrictive than the Senate version.
"Provisions that have no budgetary effect would clearly run afoul," said James R. Horney, a former Senate Democratic budget aide now with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
That means Democrats might be able to resolve differences between the House and Senate on economic issues: taxing high-cost insurance plans, closing the coverage gap in the Medicare prescription benefit, and providing subsidies to help middle-income households pay insurance premiums. Yet they still could be left with a bill that cannot pass both the House and Senate.
Abortion opponents say they will count any House vote for the current Senate bill as favoring new government subsidies for abortion. "I suggest they do it the other way around, fix it first and then pass it," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life. "Members will be held accountable for what they actually vote for. It really doesn't do to say, 'I voted for something, but I was against it.'"
Associated Press writer Erica Werner contributed to this report.
Alert! Mark your calendars!
Alert! Mark your calendars!
The Illinois Federation for Right to Life Legislative Day is March 9, 2010 in Springfield! Don't miss this opportunity to spend the day with your fellow pro-life activists from all over the State of Illinois. We need to meet, unite and fight for life! This is the year to come together to turn the State of Illinois around. It's happening all over this nation, and we can make it happen here! Join us as we begin the victory of 2010! Watch for our flyers with details, but for now mark your calendar, start your prayers and plan to attend!
The Illinois Federation for Right to Life Legislative Day is March 9, 2010 in Springfield! Don't miss this opportunity to spend the day with your fellow pro-life activists from all over the State of Illinois. We need to meet, unite and fight for life! This is the year to come together to turn the State of Illinois around. It's happening all over this nation, and we can make it happen here! Join us as we begin the victory of 2010! Watch for our flyers with details, but for now mark your calendar, start your prayers and plan to attend!
Scheidler: Jenkins Remains Utterly Immovable on ND 88
Scheidler: Jenkins Remains Utterly Immovable on ND 88
Says talking to Jenkins about the issue like talking to a "stone"
Joseph Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League says that prior to last week he had sent letters "begging and pleading" for a chance to meet with Father John Jenkins, President of Notre Dame, but he was never given the chance to do so.
So when he saw Father Jenkins at the March for Life in Washington last Thursday, he thought that it was "too good a chance to miss."
Jenkins had agreed to attend this year's March for Life as part of the pro-life measures he began on campus in response to the outcry caused by his invitation of President Obama to speak at last year's Notre Dame commencement.
However, Jenkins' announcement that he intended to participate in the March for Life did little to assuage the criticisms of pro-life activists, in large part because of his continued refusal to ask that the charges against the 88 peaceful pro-life protestors who were arrested on the campus last year be dropped.
The 88 pro-lifers face up to a year in prison and a $5,000 fine if they are found guilty of the charge of trespassing. Currently an online petition effort, demanding that Fr. Jenkins request that the charges be dropped, has been signed by over 5,000 concerned individuals.
However, according to Scheidler, Fr. Jenkins remains obstinate in his refusal to do so, saying that talking to Jenkins about the issue was like talking to a "stone."
Scheidler told LifeSiteNews (LSN) that he told Fr. Jenkins "that many, many of my friends wanted me to talk to him about removing the charges of the Notre Dame 88. So [Father Jenkins] said, 'Well, now you've told me what they want,' and that was it."
"So I thought, 'Well, that wasn't very good,'" said Scheidler. "So I went back and I said, 'You know, I not only was a student at Notre Dame but I taught at Notre Dame, and I'm very fond of Notre Dame. And I am really concerned that these 88 people were arrested for simply going on the campus doing something that they should do,' or something to that effect. And he said 'Alright, now you've said that.' And he was very off-putting."
Joseph Scheidler is among those listed as "Notable Alumni" on the Notre Dame website. Other Notre Dame alumni are of a similar opinion as Scheidler; according to ReplaceJenkins.com donations totaling over $16 million from over 1,500 alumni have been withheld from Notre Dame because of Father Jenkins' actions.
According to Scheidler, the whole impression Father Jenkins gave was that, "You can talk to me all day about this, and my mind's made up."
"I think he's going to stand his ground on this," he continued. "Although, you know, anything could happen. But I wouldn't want to be one of the 88, because they are facing, you know, a possible 6 months in jail and possible 5,000 dollar fine."
"I don't give much hope for any change. ... You might as well have been talking to a stone."
Such inflexibility, according to Scheidler, makes Jenkins' arrival at the March for Life little more than an empty gesture. "Going to the March was a very small payment for having Obama there," Scheidler said, "and nothing for saving these 88 people ... [from] paying for what was not a crime."
"He has said before that it's out of his hands," he continued. "Well, it's not. He could say 'Drop the charges,' and they'd be dropped."
The problem posed by Father Jenkins' obstinacy makes Scheidler fear for Notre Dame's reputation, especially after Jenkins' recent reelection to another five years in his position. "He's got five more years handed to him," said Scheidler, "and I have great fears that Notre Dame is going to lose its reputation. It's losing it fast. And it would be almost impossible to get it back."
To sign the petition to Free the ND 88, click here.
Contact: James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 25, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Says talking to Jenkins about the issue like talking to a "stone"
Joseph Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League says that prior to last week he had sent letters "begging and pleading" for a chance to meet with Father John Jenkins, President of Notre Dame, but he was never given the chance to do so.
So when he saw Father Jenkins at the March for Life in Washington last Thursday, he thought that it was "too good a chance to miss."
Jenkins had agreed to attend this year's March for Life as part of the pro-life measures he began on campus in response to the outcry caused by his invitation of President Obama to speak at last year's Notre Dame commencement.
However, Jenkins' announcement that he intended to participate in the March for Life did little to assuage the criticisms of pro-life activists, in large part because of his continued refusal to ask that the charges against the 88 peaceful pro-life protestors who were arrested on the campus last year be dropped.
The 88 pro-lifers face up to a year in prison and a $5,000 fine if they are found guilty of the charge of trespassing. Currently an online petition effort, demanding that Fr. Jenkins request that the charges be dropped, has been signed by over 5,000 concerned individuals.
However, according to Scheidler, Fr. Jenkins remains obstinate in his refusal to do so, saying that talking to Jenkins about the issue was like talking to a "stone."
Scheidler told LifeSiteNews (LSN) that he told Fr. Jenkins "that many, many of my friends wanted me to talk to him about removing the charges of the Notre Dame 88. So [Father Jenkins] said, 'Well, now you've told me what they want,' and that was it."
"So I thought, 'Well, that wasn't very good,'" said Scheidler. "So I went back and I said, 'You know, I not only was a student at Notre Dame but I taught at Notre Dame, and I'm very fond of Notre Dame. And I am really concerned that these 88 people were arrested for simply going on the campus doing something that they should do,' or something to that effect. And he said 'Alright, now you've said that.' And he was very off-putting."
Joseph Scheidler is among those listed as "Notable Alumni" on the Notre Dame website. Other Notre Dame alumni are of a similar opinion as Scheidler; according to ReplaceJenkins.com donations totaling over $16 million from over 1,500 alumni have been withheld from Notre Dame because of Father Jenkins' actions.
According to Scheidler, the whole impression Father Jenkins gave was that, "You can talk to me all day about this, and my mind's made up."
"I think he's going to stand his ground on this," he continued. "Although, you know, anything could happen. But I wouldn't want to be one of the 88, because they are facing, you know, a possible 6 months in jail and possible 5,000 dollar fine."
"I don't give much hope for any change. ... You might as well have been talking to a stone."
Such inflexibility, according to Scheidler, makes Jenkins' arrival at the March for Life little more than an empty gesture. "Going to the March was a very small payment for having Obama there," Scheidler said, "and nothing for saving these 88 people ... [from] paying for what was not a crime."
"He has said before that it's out of his hands," he continued. "Well, it's not. He could say 'Drop the charges,' and they'd be dropped."
The problem posed by Father Jenkins' obstinacy makes Scheidler fear for Notre Dame's reputation, especially after Jenkins' recent reelection to another five years in his position. "He's got five more years handed to him," said Scheidler, "and I have great fears that Notre Dame is going to lose its reputation. It's losing it fast. And it would be almost impossible to get it back."
To sign the petition to Free the ND 88, click here.
Contact: James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 25, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
“Everybody Matters, No Matter What”
"Everybody Matters, No Matter What"
I was asked by First Things to write an "On the Square" essay about the awful comments by the novelist Martin Amis, who yearned for "euthanasia boxes" to be placed on every corner to do away with the "stinking" elderly. I did. From my piece, "Everybody Matters, No Matter What:
The noted British novelist, Martin Amis, became the latest to support establishing a radical euthanasia license. In an interview in the January 24 Sunday Times (London) Amis expressed views that were hardly compassionate—the usual pretext for supporting euthanasia/assisted suicide. To the contrary: He denigrated the elderly as a "silver tsunami," whose very existence threatens society. "There'll be a population of demented very old people like an invasion of terrible immigrants, stinking out the restaurants and cafes and shops," Amis told the Times. His answer to this malodorous demographic incursion? "Suicide booths on every corner," Amis offered, a hyperbolic turn of phrase that quickly went viral.
It would be easy to bash Amis's crassness. But I saw something else at work.
Mostly missed in the resulting commentary to Amis' diatribe is that he wasn't as much ageist as self-loathing. "Medical science has again over-vaulted itself so most of us have to live through the death of our talent," Amis said. "Novelists tend to go off at about 70. And I'm in a funk about it. I've got myself into a real paranoid funk about it, how talent dies before the body."
In other words, Amis rejected his own intrinsic dignity and moral worth in the apparent belief that should he become incapable of producing good writing, his life would be rendered useless. This terror of not being "special"—certainly not limited to the cognoscenti—isn't really about a feared loss of talent (or productivity, or independence, and so on), but an abiding worry that if we lose our vigor or health, we will become unworthy of being loved.
The answer to that fear is radical self giving to the suffering and despairing.
This existential terror can only be overcome by embracing human exceptionalism and its corollary that each and every one of us matters—no matter what. But this corrective is quite beyond the most brilliant intellectual argument or reliance upon religious or philosophical principles—which at most, effectively can be deployed as holding actions. If we really want to reverse the tide, we must strive to love our neighbor even more than we love ourselves.
I give some examples of how people ease others' suffering and conclude:
There will always be the Martin Amises of the world raging in despair against life's vicissitudes. But they will be rendered societally impotent if each of us loves actively. As St. Paul put it so eloquently, love "bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails." In the end, if we want to finally defeat euthanasia, it will have to be so with us.
We must engage the holding actions to stop legalization, etc. But to putting the movement itself back into the grave will require actions more than words.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
I was asked by First Things to write an "On the Square" essay about the awful comments by the novelist Martin Amis, who yearned for "euthanasia boxes" to be placed on every corner to do away with the "stinking" elderly. I did. From my piece, "Everybody Matters, No Matter What:
The noted British novelist, Martin Amis, became the latest to support establishing a radical euthanasia license. In an interview in the January 24 Sunday Times (London) Amis expressed views that were hardly compassionate—the usual pretext for supporting euthanasia/assisted suicide. To the contrary: He denigrated the elderly as a "silver tsunami," whose very existence threatens society. "There'll be a population of demented very old people like an invasion of terrible immigrants, stinking out the restaurants and cafes and shops," Amis told the Times. His answer to this malodorous demographic incursion? "Suicide booths on every corner," Amis offered, a hyperbolic turn of phrase that quickly went viral.
It would be easy to bash Amis's crassness. But I saw something else at work.
Mostly missed in the resulting commentary to Amis' diatribe is that he wasn't as much ageist as self-loathing. "Medical science has again over-vaulted itself so most of us have to live through the death of our talent," Amis said. "Novelists tend to go off at about 70. And I'm in a funk about it. I've got myself into a real paranoid funk about it, how talent dies before the body."
In other words, Amis rejected his own intrinsic dignity and moral worth in the apparent belief that should he become incapable of producing good writing, his life would be rendered useless. This terror of not being "special"—certainly not limited to the cognoscenti—isn't really about a feared loss of talent (or productivity, or independence, and so on), but an abiding worry that if we lose our vigor or health, we will become unworthy of being loved.
The answer to that fear is radical self giving to the suffering and despairing.
This existential terror can only be overcome by embracing human exceptionalism and its corollary that each and every one of us matters—no matter what. But this corrective is quite beyond the most brilliant intellectual argument or reliance upon religious or philosophical principles—which at most, effectively can be deployed as holding actions. If we really want to reverse the tide, we must strive to love our neighbor even more than we love ourselves.
I give some examples of how people ease others' suffering and conclude:
There will always be the Martin Amises of the world raging in despair against life's vicissitudes. But they will be rendered societally impotent if each of us loves actively. As St. Paul put it so eloquently, love "bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails." In the end, if we want to finally defeat euthanasia, it will have to be so with us.
We must engage the holding actions to stop legalization, etc. But to putting the movement itself back into the grave will require actions more than words.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
While the Nation Remembers Roe v. Wade, a New Book is Hot Off the Electronic Press
While the Nation Remembers Roe v. Wade, a New Book is Hot Off the Electronic Press
Just days after our nation remembered the historic Roe v. Wade decision, a new book is hot off the (electronic) press. Author Serena Gaefke chose the internet as the best forum to reach her target audience, young, unexpectedly pregnant women. Gaefke's work is titled, "101 Reasons Not to Have an Abortion: A Girl's Guide to Informed Choices" and is available for download from her website. Aiming at benefiting the most people possible, this child of her four year research is being made available for free.
Her statement is as follows:
"No matter what side of the abortion issue you stand, shouldn't your choice or the choice of someone you love be informed? We are so big on 'choice' that we forget that if a choice is made while information is lacking it is likely to be a choice that will be regretted. But what if Planned Parenthood doesn't give you all this information?
"What I've tried to do is to look at the things you normally wouldn't consider when all that comes to mind is that abortion is the quick fix you need. I've come up with a full 101 reasons as to why, possibly, abortion may not be the best of choices. If abortion really is the best choice for you, then nothing in this book should sway you.
"Whichever side you're on, it seems that we can all agree on one thing -- that this a tough choice, one not taken lightly. So what can a woman do when she finds out that she is unexpectedly pregnant and her world is thrown into chaos? Hopefully a good friend will be near to tell her of 101girlsguide.com. Best of all, her informed choice will come at no cost to her. I have chosen to publish this for free in order to benefit the most women possible and hopefully fulfill one of my dreams of making a difference.
"This book includes personal stories and information gleaned from both pro-choice and pro-life sites. It's really very thorough, as you will see by the 53 page bibliography.
"My book is not only for the people of Pittsburgh, but for the people of all states and nations. It is a labor of love that I believe is set to touch many hearts!"
For more information or to download a free copy visit www.101girlsguide.com.
Contact: Serena Gaefke
Source: 101GirlsGuide
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Just days after our nation remembered the historic Roe v. Wade decision, a new book is hot off the (electronic) press. Author Serena Gaefke chose the internet as the best forum to reach her target audience, young, unexpectedly pregnant women. Gaefke's work is titled, "101 Reasons Not to Have an Abortion: A Girl's Guide to Informed Choices" and is available for download from her website. Aiming at benefiting the most people possible, this child of her four year research is being made available for free.
Her statement is as follows:
"No matter what side of the abortion issue you stand, shouldn't your choice or the choice of someone you love be informed? We are so big on 'choice' that we forget that if a choice is made while information is lacking it is likely to be a choice that will be regretted. But what if Planned Parenthood doesn't give you all this information?
"What I've tried to do is to look at the things you normally wouldn't consider when all that comes to mind is that abortion is the quick fix you need. I've come up with a full 101 reasons as to why, possibly, abortion may not be the best of choices. If abortion really is the best choice for you, then nothing in this book should sway you.
"Whichever side you're on, it seems that we can all agree on one thing -- that this a tough choice, one not taken lightly. So what can a woman do when she finds out that she is unexpectedly pregnant and her world is thrown into chaos? Hopefully a good friend will be near to tell her of 101girlsguide.com. Best of all, her informed choice will come at no cost to her. I have chosen to publish this for free in order to benefit the most women possible and hopefully fulfill one of my dreams of making a difference.
"This book includes personal stories and information gleaned from both pro-choice and pro-life sites. It's really very thorough, as you will see by the 53 page bibliography.
"My book is not only for the people of Pittsburgh, but for the people of all states and nations. It is a labor of love that I believe is set to touch many hearts!"
For more information or to download a free copy visit www.101girlsguide.com.
Contact: Serena Gaefke
Source: 101GirlsGuide
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Personhood Kansas Launches Campaign to Amend Constitution
Personhood Kansas Launches Campaign to Amend Constitution
A new Kansas pro-life organization, Personhood Kansas, is seeking to partner with Christian and pro-life leaders, activists, and volunteers to work to amend the Kansas Constitution to protect all human beings, including the unborn.
Similar groups have sprung up in several states after a ballot measure to amend Colorado's constitution made it onto the ballot in 2008. The measure was subsequently defeated.
"The effectiveness of the personhood coalition in Colorado has really been the inspiration," said Keith Ashley, Personhood Kansas Petition Drive Coordinator. "They were the first to demonstrate how close we are to recognizing the personhood of the preborn."
Personhood Kansas has advised the drafting of language that would recognize the right to personhood for all human beings from the biological beginning of human development. "Basic biology explains that human life begins at the moment of fertilization," said Ashley. "This is the moment when we are no longer talking about functional parts of a woman and a man, but rather, we see a complete, genetically unique, living human being.
"Just like injustices in the past that relied on the 'not all human beings are persons' argument because of our differences such as race or gender, so too, denying the preborn full human personhood is discrimination based on an equally arbitrary human property – age."
The organization has started a statewide petition drive with the intent to deliver the responses to the state legislature.
Ashley explained that a two-thirds majority of both legislative houses is needed to pass the amendment, which he called "a rather challenging endeavor."
"So it is of the utmost importance that Kansans voice their desire to see this measure passed," he said.
The amendment process will then call for a referendum, which will give Kansans an opportunity to vote the measure into law.
Personhood Kansas is calling on all Christian and pro-life leaders to get involved by announcing the petition drive and collecting signatures from their churches, parishes, organizations, and events, and by networking with leaders throughout the state. Future plans include a mass emailing and calling campaign, but the group is not advising citizens to wait for instructions.
Instead, they are encouraging citizens to start contacting their legislators immediately to voice their support for human personhood in Kansas.
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
A new Kansas pro-life organization, Personhood Kansas, is seeking to partner with Christian and pro-life leaders, activists, and volunteers to work to amend the Kansas Constitution to protect all human beings, including the unborn.
Similar groups have sprung up in several states after a ballot measure to amend Colorado's constitution made it onto the ballot in 2008. The measure was subsequently defeated.
"The effectiveness of the personhood coalition in Colorado has really been the inspiration," said Keith Ashley, Personhood Kansas Petition Drive Coordinator. "They were the first to demonstrate how close we are to recognizing the personhood of the preborn."
Personhood Kansas has advised the drafting of language that would recognize the right to personhood for all human beings from the biological beginning of human development. "Basic biology explains that human life begins at the moment of fertilization," said Ashley. "This is the moment when we are no longer talking about functional parts of a woman and a man, but rather, we see a complete, genetically unique, living human being.
"Just like injustices in the past that relied on the 'not all human beings are persons' argument because of our differences such as race or gender, so too, denying the preborn full human personhood is discrimination based on an equally arbitrary human property – age."
The organization has started a statewide petition drive with the intent to deliver the responses to the state legislature.
Ashley explained that a two-thirds majority of both legislative houses is needed to pass the amendment, which he called "a rather challenging endeavor."
"So it is of the utmost importance that Kansans voice their desire to see this measure passed," he said.
The amendment process will then call for a referendum, which will give Kansans an opportunity to vote the measure into law.
Personhood Kansas is calling on all Christian and pro-life leaders to get involved by announcing the petition drive and collecting signatures from their churches, parishes, organizations, and events, and by networking with leaders throughout the state. Future plans include a mass emailing and calling campaign, but the group is not advising citizens to wait for instructions.
Instead, they are encouraging citizens to start contacting their legislators immediately to voice their support for human personhood in Kansas.
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 26, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
U.S. passes 50 million abortion mark
U.S. passes 50 million abortion mark
At some point during the past two years the United States experienced its 50 millionth legal abortion, the overwhelming majority of which were conducted for reasons of convenience.
The tragic statistic -- which spans the 37 years since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide in 1973 -- is based on data compiled by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute and tallied by the National Right to Life Committee. Guttmacher's data is respected by both sides of the issue and comes directly from abortion clinics.
The mark of 50 million was passed in 2008 and likely approached or reached 52 million in 2009, although data is not yet available for that year. The 50 million figure actually is an estimate based on Guttmacher data from 2005 -- the last year of data -- when 1.2 million abortions were performed. The abortion rate ranged between 1.2 and 1.3 million from 2000 to 2005. If the same number of abortions performed in 2005 were performed in each succeeding year, then the number stood at 52 million at the end of last year.
To put the total in perspective, the combined number of military deaths in all of America's wars –- from the Revolutionary War to the second Iraq war –- is 1.2 million.
"We've been brutalized, desensitized and paganized by an ever-rising flood of the unborns' blood as our nation continues to abort roughly one out of every four babies conceived," Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said.
"I can still remember the Bible lesson I heard as a youngster in Sunday School about how the people of God turned their back on the One True God and went down into the Valley of Hinnom [2 Chronicles 28] to offer up in pagan sacrifice their little children to the pagan god Molech. I could never have imagined then that I would live to see the day that America would offer up its unborn children as pagan sacrifices because they were viewed as too expensive, too embarrassing, too ill or too inconvenient."
Although pro-choice leaders often claim a solid majority of Americans support the status quo on abortion, polling paints a very different picture. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll from September 2008 showed that 10 percent of registered voters believed abortion should always be illegal and 37 percent believed it should be legal only in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life -- totaling 47 percent who oppose the current laws. Similarly, a Los Angeles Times poll of 1,039 registered voters in October 2007 found 50 percent believed abortion should either be totally illegal or legal only with those three exceptions.
The reason the abortion rate in America is so high is because the Supreme Court's 1973 ruling was so far-reaching. Roe v. Wade -- coupled with the court's companion Doe v. Bolton ruling -- legalized abortion for any reason at any point of the pregnancy. That has led to a society in which 86 percent of abortions are done for convenience, according to a 2004 Guttmacher study of women who had had abortions. Rape and incest each were cited by less than half of a percent of all women who underwent abortion. Twenty-five percent said they weren't ready for a child, 23 percent said they couldn't afford to have one, 19 percent said they didn't want any more children, 8 percent said they didn't want to be a single mother or they had relationship problems, 7 percent said they were too young to have a child and 4 percent said they believed a child would interfere with their education or career.
The reason that some polls show Americans supportive of Roe, pro-lifers say, is because they don't know what it accomplished. Pro-life groups this year once again are sponsoring a website -- RoeIQTest.com -- with 13 multiple choice questions to help educate the public about Roe's reach.
"In spite of its impact, the true understanding of Roe and what it accomplished remains relatively vague in the public consciousness," the website states. "The ongoing debate over federal funding of abortion in the proposed health care legislation has demonstrated that Roe continues to be a contentious issue for many Americans. It is imperative that we, as citizens, understand the facts about what Roe does and does not do."
Contact: Michael Foust
Source: BP
Publish Date: January 25, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
At some point during the past two years the United States experienced its 50 millionth legal abortion, the overwhelming majority of which were conducted for reasons of convenience.
The tragic statistic -- which spans the 37 years since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide in 1973 -- is based on data compiled by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute and tallied by the National Right to Life Committee. Guttmacher's data is respected by both sides of the issue and comes directly from abortion clinics.
The mark of 50 million was passed in 2008 and likely approached or reached 52 million in 2009, although data is not yet available for that year. The 50 million figure actually is an estimate based on Guttmacher data from 2005 -- the last year of data -- when 1.2 million abortions were performed. The abortion rate ranged between 1.2 and 1.3 million from 2000 to 2005. If the same number of abortions performed in 2005 were performed in each succeeding year, then the number stood at 52 million at the end of last year.
To put the total in perspective, the combined number of military deaths in all of America's wars –- from the Revolutionary War to the second Iraq war –- is 1.2 million.
"We've been brutalized, desensitized and paganized by an ever-rising flood of the unborns' blood as our nation continues to abort roughly one out of every four babies conceived," Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said.
"I can still remember the Bible lesson I heard as a youngster in Sunday School about how the people of God turned their back on the One True God and went down into the Valley of Hinnom [2 Chronicles 28] to offer up in pagan sacrifice their little children to the pagan god Molech. I could never have imagined then that I would live to see the day that America would offer up its unborn children as pagan sacrifices because they were viewed as too expensive, too embarrassing, too ill or too inconvenient."
Although pro-choice leaders often claim a solid majority of Americans support the status quo on abortion, polling paints a very different picture. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll from September 2008 showed that 10 percent of registered voters believed abortion should always be illegal and 37 percent believed it should be legal only in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life -- totaling 47 percent who oppose the current laws. Similarly, a Los Angeles Times poll of 1,039 registered voters in October 2007 found 50 percent believed abortion should either be totally illegal or legal only with those three exceptions.
The reason the abortion rate in America is so high is because the Supreme Court's 1973 ruling was so far-reaching. Roe v. Wade -- coupled with the court's companion Doe v. Bolton ruling -- legalized abortion for any reason at any point of the pregnancy. That has led to a society in which 86 percent of abortions are done for convenience, according to a 2004 Guttmacher study of women who had had abortions. Rape and incest each were cited by less than half of a percent of all women who underwent abortion. Twenty-five percent said they weren't ready for a child, 23 percent said they couldn't afford to have one, 19 percent said they didn't want any more children, 8 percent said they didn't want to be a single mother or they had relationship problems, 7 percent said they were too young to have a child and 4 percent said they believed a child would interfere with their education or career.
The reason that some polls show Americans supportive of Roe, pro-lifers say, is because they don't know what it accomplished. Pro-life groups this year once again are sponsoring a website -- RoeIQTest.com -- with 13 multiple choice questions to help educate the public about Roe's reach.
"In spite of its impact, the true understanding of Roe and what it accomplished remains relatively vague in the public consciousness," the website states. "The ongoing debate over federal funding of abortion in the proposed health care legislation has demonstrated that Roe continues to be a contentious issue for many Americans. It is imperative that we, as citizens, understand the facts about what Roe does and does not do."
Contact: Michael Foust
Source: BP
Publish Date: January 25, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Abortion Remains Top Obstacle to Health Bill amid Long Silence from Dems
Abortion Remains Top Obstacle to Health Bill amid Long Silence from Dems
White House to retool health care image with Obama campaign guru Plouffe
Both the White House and Congressional Democrats remained stuck at a crossroads over the weekend following the Massachusetts election that destroyed Senate Democrats' filibuster-proof majority, and in the process put the future of the health care overhaul in question. As the White House scrambles to regain popularity, and Democrats weigh health care success against a tough election season, the abortion issue has emerged yet again as the clearest issue that could block the health bill's path into law.
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) told the FOX Business Network Wednesday that the Senate bill in its current form, which would unleash federal funding of abortion, would meet with certain death in the House.
"I bet it wouldn't get a hundred votes," he said.
Stupak was the House member most responsible for securing Hyde-amendment restrictions on federal abortion funding in the House bill in November.
"[Democrat leadership] tried to hit a homerun with health care instead of hitting - let's get a single, let's get a double. You know, build on this," he continued. "But they went for the whole grand slam and it got thrown back. It got too big, too controversial, and it's just like they overreached."
The House Democrat suggested that Obama and party leaders need to "be more in tune to what the people are saying." "Yes, we want health care, but don't give us a 2,600 page bill that no one can understand, that most of the members have never read," he said.
Stupak made the remarks a day after Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown shocked the nation by snatching the senate seat of Democrat icon Ted Kennedy in the state's special election. Brown rode to victory on a heavily anti-health-care-bill platform. His surprise win left Democrats facing re-election in November wondering whether their cooperation with Obama's health care agenda could spell their own political demise. Describing the impact of Brown's victory on Democrats, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) said Thursday: "People are at various levels of the seven stages of grief."
So far, none of the options floated for rescuing the health care bill are without serious flaws. Both Stupak and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have indicated that the chamber will not pass an unamended version of the Senate bill, which would be the only way to pass the overhaul without subjecting it to a second vote in the Senate, where it would almost certainly fail.
"I don't see the votes for it at this time," Pelosi told reporters concerning the Senate bill.
"Unease would be a gentle word in terms of the attitude of my colleagues toward certain provisions in the Senate bill."
Democrats were hoping to secure such a vote in the House with promises of a later budget bill that could deliver some of the House's interests, and still pass the Senate with a 51-vote majority through the reconciliation process. Yet even the more moderate House bill originally passed with only two votes to spare - and more than two of the previous "yes" votes have confirmed they will not vote for the Senate bill, some citing its lack of adequate abortion restrictions.
"Everyone's talking about Plan B. Plan B is dead. We're not passing the Senate bill, so you best come up with Plan C now," said Stupak.
Analysts have pegged President Obama's State of the Union address scheduled for Wednesday as a crucial moment for his administration's agenda. The speech essentially will be a tightrope-walk to pacify voters concerned over unemployment and the economy as well as liberals expecting an even stronger push for the health care bill.
Obama, who spent the weekend hashing out options for the health bill with Congressional leadership, signaled willingness to pursue a scaled-back version of the bill that could be passed with bipartisan support. Details on the form such a measure might take are unclear.
Meanwhile, administration officials cast the Massachusetts backlash as anger that the government had not done enough – although this interpretation appears to contrast with the message of the nationwide "tea party" movement, which is opposed to the federal government's encroachment into the private sector.
"What we learned from the Massachusetts victory is that people are sick and tired of Washington not delivering for them," said White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett on "Meet the Press."
It was also revealed this week that the White House plans to recruit former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe to revitalize the party's sagging image on health care reform as Democrats head into a midterm election season that could devastate the party's grip on Capitol Hill.
Republicans say that, should Democrats continue to hold the line on the unpopular bill, it will spell disaster at the ballot box in November.
"If they try to jam health care through on partisan lines, I think November 2010 will be a very good month for us," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told "Fox News Sunday."
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 25, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
White House to retool health care image with Obama campaign guru Plouffe
Both the White House and Congressional Democrats remained stuck at a crossroads over the weekend following the Massachusetts election that destroyed Senate Democrats' filibuster-proof majority, and in the process put the future of the health care overhaul in question. As the White House scrambles to regain popularity, and Democrats weigh health care success against a tough election season, the abortion issue has emerged yet again as the clearest issue that could block the health bill's path into law.
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) told the FOX Business Network Wednesday that the Senate bill in its current form, which would unleash federal funding of abortion, would meet with certain death in the House.
"I bet it wouldn't get a hundred votes," he said.
Stupak was the House member most responsible for securing Hyde-amendment restrictions on federal abortion funding in the House bill in November.
"[Democrat leadership] tried to hit a homerun with health care instead of hitting - let's get a single, let's get a double. You know, build on this," he continued. "But they went for the whole grand slam and it got thrown back. It got too big, too controversial, and it's just like they overreached."
The House Democrat suggested that Obama and party leaders need to "be more in tune to what the people are saying." "Yes, we want health care, but don't give us a 2,600 page bill that no one can understand, that most of the members have never read," he said.
Stupak made the remarks a day after Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown shocked the nation by snatching the senate seat of Democrat icon Ted Kennedy in the state's special election. Brown rode to victory on a heavily anti-health-care-bill platform. His surprise win left Democrats facing re-election in November wondering whether their cooperation with Obama's health care agenda could spell their own political demise. Describing the impact of Brown's victory on Democrats, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) said Thursday: "People are at various levels of the seven stages of grief."
So far, none of the options floated for rescuing the health care bill are without serious flaws. Both Stupak and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have indicated that the chamber will not pass an unamended version of the Senate bill, which would be the only way to pass the overhaul without subjecting it to a second vote in the Senate, where it would almost certainly fail.
"I don't see the votes for it at this time," Pelosi told reporters concerning the Senate bill.
"Unease would be a gentle word in terms of the attitude of my colleagues toward certain provisions in the Senate bill."
Democrats were hoping to secure such a vote in the House with promises of a later budget bill that could deliver some of the House's interests, and still pass the Senate with a 51-vote majority through the reconciliation process. Yet even the more moderate House bill originally passed with only two votes to spare - and more than two of the previous "yes" votes have confirmed they will not vote for the Senate bill, some citing its lack of adequate abortion restrictions.
"Everyone's talking about Plan B. Plan B is dead. We're not passing the Senate bill, so you best come up with Plan C now," said Stupak.
Analysts have pegged President Obama's State of the Union address scheduled for Wednesday as a crucial moment for his administration's agenda. The speech essentially will be a tightrope-walk to pacify voters concerned over unemployment and the economy as well as liberals expecting an even stronger push for the health care bill.
Obama, who spent the weekend hashing out options for the health bill with Congressional leadership, signaled willingness to pursue a scaled-back version of the bill that could be passed with bipartisan support. Details on the form such a measure might take are unclear.
Meanwhile, administration officials cast the Massachusetts backlash as anger that the government had not done enough – although this interpretation appears to contrast with the message of the nationwide "tea party" movement, which is opposed to the federal government's encroachment into the private sector.
"What we learned from the Massachusetts victory is that people are sick and tired of Washington not delivering for them," said White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett on "Meet the Press."
It was also revealed this week that the White House plans to recruit former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe to revitalize the party's sagging image on health care reform as Democrats head into a midterm election season that could devastate the party's grip on Capitol Hill.
Republicans say that, should Democrats continue to hold the line on the unpopular bill, it will spell disaster at the ballot box in November.
"If they try to jam health care through on partisan lines, I think November 2010 will be a very good month for us," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told "Fox News Sunday."
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 25, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to Life is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
CBS Urged to Scrap Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad Featuring Tebow and His Mom
NEW YORK -- A coalition of women's groups called on the CBS network on Monday to scrap its plan to broadcast an ad during the Super Bowl featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, which critics say is likely to convey an anti-abortion message. The ad -- paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family -- is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's pregnancy in 1987 with a theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim, who went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy while helping his Florida team to two college football championships.
Click here for the full article.
Indiana Rewards Planned Parenthood Negligence
Last time we took a look at Planned Parenthood of Indiana, we saw a "health" provider train-wreck: two different PP abortion locations, on the same day, with almost the exact same language, agreed to cover up clear cases of child sexual abuse. To a girl purportedly 13 years old and impregnated by her 31-year-old "boyfriend," the nurse in Bloomington said, "I don't want to hear the age, I don't want to know the age" and the one in Indianapolis insisted, "I don't care how old he is." Live Action's undercover videos of Planned Parenthood's blatant violations of Indiana mandatory reporting law sparked state investigations–and yet somehow now, the Indiana State Department of Health has awarded PP IN $150,000 in government grant money for 2010.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Movement Had Successes In 2009, National Review Opinion Piece Argues
With the 2008 election of a Democratic president and Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, many analysts -- including conservatives -- advised Republicans to moderate their views on abortion, Michael New, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alabama and a fellow at the Witherspoon Institute, writes in a National Review opinion piece. "However, the events of 2009 have clearly demonstrated the movement's resiliency and heft" and shown that "the right-to-life movement is an indispensible part of the center-right coalition," New writes. He argues that antiabortion-rights advocates have made gains in public opinion polls and led opposition to President Obama's health reform plans.
Click here for the full article.
Anit-Lifers Advocates Fear Roe Challenges Given Supreme Court's Willingness To Overturn Precedent
Anti-Life advocates say that the Supreme Court's 5-4 campaign finance decision last week shows the willingness of conservative justices to overturn longstanding precedents and signals that they might be open to upending the 37-year-old Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, Politico reports. Thursday's ruling declared unconstitutional a law barring corporations from involvement in federal elections. The ban was challenged by the conservative group Citizens United. Just six years ago, the court said that the ban was "firmly embedded in our law."
Nancy Northup of the Center for Reproductive Rights said that the court "exhibited a stunning disregard for settled law of decades' standing" and that the decision is "terrifying to those of us who care deeply about the constitutional protections the court put in place for women's access to abortion." She added, "We are deeply concerned.
Click here for the full article.
Neb. Bill To Ban Abortion After 20 Weeks Could Start Legal Battle
A Nebraska bill (LB 1103) that would ban abortion after 20 weeks' gestation in nearly all cases could prompt a legal battle regarding its constitutionality, the Omaha World-Herald reports. The bill, introduced by Speaker of the Legislature Mike Flood (R), would allow abortion past 20 weeks only to save the woman's life or to "avert serious risk or substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function." Current Nebraska law bans abortion after viability except to preserve the life or health of the woman.
Flood's bill claims there is "substantial evidence" that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks and proposes to use the fetus' ability to feel pain, rather than viability, as the dividing line between legal and illegal abortion.
Click here for the full article.
President Affirms Support for Abortion
President Obama issued a statement in support of abortion on Friday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion on demand.
The president said he "affirms every woman's fundamental constitutional right to choose whether to have an abortion."
David O'Steen, executive director of National Right to Life, said he's not surprised.
"His whole history," he said, "both as a state legislator, as a senator and as president has been one of unequivocal support for abortion."
Click here for the full article.
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to Life is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
CBS Urged to Scrap Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad Featuring Tebow and His Mom
NEW YORK -- A coalition of women's groups called on the CBS network on Monday to scrap its plan to broadcast an ad during the Super Bowl featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, which critics say is likely to convey an anti-abortion message. The ad -- paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family -- is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's pregnancy in 1987 with a theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim, who went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy while helping his Florida team to two college football championships.
Click here for the full article.
Indiana Rewards Planned Parenthood Negligence
Last time we took a look at Planned Parenthood of Indiana, we saw a "health" provider train-wreck: two different PP abortion locations, on the same day, with almost the exact same language, agreed to cover up clear cases of child sexual abuse. To a girl purportedly 13 years old and impregnated by her 31-year-old "boyfriend," the nurse in Bloomington said, "I don't want to hear the age, I don't want to know the age" and the one in Indianapolis insisted, "I don't care how old he is." Live Action's undercover videos of Planned Parenthood's blatant violations of Indiana mandatory reporting law sparked state investigations–and yet somehow now, the Indiana State Department of Health has awarded PP IN $150,000 in government grant money for 2010.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Movement Had Successes In 2009, National Review Opinion Piece Argues
With the 2008 election of a Democratic president and Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, many analysts -- including conservatives -- advised Republicans to moderate their views on abortion, Michael New, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alabama and a fellow at the Witherspoon Institute, writes in a National Review opinion piece. "However, the events of 2009 have clearly demonstrated the movement's resiliency and heft" and shown that "the right-to-life movement is an indispensible part of the center-right coalition," New writes. He argues that antiabortion-rights advocates have made gains in public opinion polls and led opposition to President Obama's health reform plans.
Click here for the full article.
Anit-Lifers Advocates Fear Roe Challenges Given Supreme Court's Willingness To Overturn Precedent
Anti-Life advocates say that the Supreme Court's 5-4 campaign finance decision last week shows the willingness of conservative justices to overturn longstanding precedents and signals that they might be open to upending the 37-year-old Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, Politico reports. Thursday's ruling declared unconstitutional a law barring corporations from involvement in federal elections. The ban was challenged by the conservative group Citizens United. Just six years ago, the court said that the ban was "firmly embedded in our law."
Nancy Northup of the Center for Reproductive Rights said that the court "exhibited a stunning disregard for settled law of decades' standing" and that the decision is "terrifying to those of us who care deeply about the constitutional protections the court put in place for women's access to abortion." She added, "We are deeply concerned.
Click here for the full article.
Neb. Bill To Ban Abortion After 20 Weeks Could Start Legal Battle
A Nebraska bill (LB 1103) that would ban abortion after 20 weeks' gestation in nearly all cases could prompt a legal battle regarding its constitutionality, the Omaha World-Herald reports. The bill, introduced by Speaker of the Legislature Mike Flood (R), would allow abortion past 20 weeks only to save the woman's life or to "avert serious risk or substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function." Current Nebraska law bans abortion after viability except to preserve the life or health of the woman.
Flood's bill claims there is "substantial evidence" that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks and proposes to use the fetus' ability to feel pain, rather than viability, as the dividing line between legal and illegal abortion.
Click here for the full article.
President Affirms Support for Abortion
President Obama issued a statement in support of abortion on Friday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion on demand.
The president said he "affirms every woman's fundamental constitutional right to choose whether to have an abortion."
David O'Steen, executive director of National Right to Life, said he's not surprised.
"His whole history," he said, "both as a state legislator, as a senator and as president has been one of unequivocal support for abortion."
Click here for the full article.
January 25, 2010
Pro-life marchers flood D.C. in protest of legalized abortion
Pro-life marchers flood D.C. in protest of legalized abortion
Hundreds of thousands of people are gathered in the nation's capital today to mark the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and protest abortion in the annual March for Life. Gathering from all over the country, protesters of all ages first heard from prominent pro-life, political and religious leaders before beginning the march.
Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.) was among the politicians who addressed the crowd on Friday, saying, "Thank you one and all for being an important part of the greatest human rights struggle on earth – the right to life movement. By the grace of God, we stand behind, with and unabashedly for both victims of abortion – women and children."
The sheer number of people has caused a traffic advisory to be issued for the District. The volume of protesters has also allowed for two separate marches to take place. The first route will proceed East on Constitution Avenue to First Street, NE, then South on First Street, NE, to the United States Supreme Court where they will rally and then disband.
The second march route will proceed West on F Street to 10th Street, NW, south on 10th Street to Constitution Avenue, NW, West on Constitution Avenue to 12th Street, NW, then South on 12th Street to the National Mall, where pro-life marchers will also rally and eventually disband.
CNA contacted the D.C Metropolitan Police Department for a crowd estimate but was told that due to disputes in the past between the city and protest organizers over the amount of people gathered, they have stopped giving estimates. However, police said that the march has progressed peacefully and without indecent thus far.
According to EWTN, 300,000 demonstrators are estimated to be taking part in the March for Life.
Just one day before the March for Life in Washington D.C., the results of a new survey put out by the Knights of Columbus and Marist College showed that the number of Americans who say they are pro-life is continuing to grow. Members of the Millennial generation (18-29 year-olds) say abortion is "morally wrong" at a rate of 58 percent.
The survey, which was conducted between December 2009 and January 2010, asked if abortion was "morally wrong." Fifty-six percent of Americans said they thought that abortion was indeed "morally wrong."
In addition to showing that more Americans are becoming pro-life, the results showed that the upcoming generations are more pro-life than those nearing retirement.
Source: CNA
Publish Date: January 22, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Hundreds of thousands of people are gathered in the nation's capital today to mark the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and protest abortion in the annual March for Life. Gathering from all over the country, protesters of all ages first heard from prominent pro-life, political and religious leaders before beginning the march.
Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.) was among the politicians who addressed the crowd on Friday, saying, "Thank you one and all for being an important part of the greatest human rights struggle on earth – the right to life movement. By the grace of God, we stand behind, with and unabashedly for both victims of abortion – women and children."
The sheer number of people has caused a traffic advisory to be issued for the District. The volume of protesters has also allowed for two separate marches to take place. The first route will proceed East on Constitution Avenue to First Street, NE, then South on First Street, NE, to the United States Supreme Court where they will rally and then disband.
The second march route will proceed West on F Street to 10th Street, NW, south on 10th Street to Constitution Avenue, NW, West on Constitution Avenue to 12th Street, NW, then South on 12th Street to the National Mall, where pro-life marchers will also rally and eventually disband.
CNA contacted the D.C Metropolitan Police Department for a crowd estimate but was told that due to disputes in the past between the city and protest organizers over the amount of people gathered, they have stopped giving estimates. However, police said that the march has progressed peacefully and without indecent thus far.
According to EWTN, 300,000 demonstrators are estimated to be taking part in the March for Life.
Just one day before the March for Life in Washington D.C., the results of a new survey put out by the Knights of Columbus and Marist College showed that the number of Americans who say they are pro-life is continuing to grow. Members of the Millennial generation (18-29 year-olds) say abortion is "morally wrong" at a rate of 58 percent.
The survey, which was conducted between December 2009 and January 2010, asked if abortion was "morally wrong." Fifty-six percent of Americans said they thought that abortion was indeed "morally wrong."
In addition to showing that more Americans are becoming pro-life, the results showed that the upcoming generations are more pro-life than those nearing retirement.
Source: CNA
Publish Date: January 22, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
U.S. Congressmen Decry Abortion on Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
U.S. Congressmen Decry Abortion on Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
On Friday, the eve of the 37th anniversary of "one of the ... darkest days in U.S. history," in the words of Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH), a contingent of pro-life politicians rose in the U.S. House of Representatives to condemn Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that imposed a "right" to abortion on the country.
Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) began, expressing his gratitude to the throngs of pro-life supporters flooding the capital for Friday's March for Life. The marchers, he said, gather to "mourn the loss" of the 52 million babies killed by abortion in the last 37 years, but also to rejoice over the countless babies saved due to the march and other efforts, such as pregnancy care centers.
"There are ... hundreds of lives that may never have been, were it not for those who continue to stand on behalf of the unborn," he said.
"Abortion really hurts all of us, but I truly believe that it hurts women the most," explained Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH), emphasizing that "it is the woman's privilege to carry that baby inside of her until it is full-term."
She related the "immediate and devastating" impact of the "horrible, horrible" Roe v. Wade decision, which resulted in a massive and fast rise of abortions in the country.
But she also insisted that "the tide is changing." "The reality is that abortion is no longer a part of mainstream medicine, and the vast majority of hospitals in the United States, religious or secular, now choose not to perform elective abortions," she said. "Yes, the tide is turning."
According to Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA), this year's anniversary of Roe v. Wade has particular significance because the abortion debate has risen to "paramount" importance during the national health care debate. Pro-life leaders, in fact, have warned that, if successful, Obama's health care initiative could be the largest expansion of abortion in the country since the infamous 1973 decision.
"Abortion is an inhumane perversion in our society, a distorted emphasis on rights to the disregard of individual responsibilities," said Cao. "To protect human rights, we have distorted the continuity of human development to portray the human fetus as something less than human, and [who] therefore, can be disposed of."
"Although this is the week when we mark that terrible decision of 1973, I love this week," said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH). "Thousands and thousands of Americans are going to come to the nation's capital, and they're going to celebrate life. They know that life is precious, and that in this great country, the greatest nation in history, we should celebrate life, we should understand that life is precious, life is sacred, that it should be protected."
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, said that even after his 38 years in the pro-life movement, "I still don't get how ... so many seemingly smart, sane, compassionate, and accomplished people – especially in politics – support, promote, and – if President Obama has his way in the pending health care legislation – lavishly fund with public dollars the violent death of unborn children and the wounding of their moms by abortion."
"Is it really so hard to understand that abortion is violence against children – a pernicious form of child abuse, falsely and aggressively marketed as choice, a human right?" he asked. "How long will we permit the pro-choice cover-up and the bogus safety claims to misinform, especially in light of the reams of evidence documenting serious injury to women who abort?"
Smith related the story of Dr. Jean Garton, a former abortion proponent whose conversion to the pro-life cause was strongly influenced by the innocent witness of her own child. Smith explained how Garton was preparing a pro-abortion lecture and her 3-year-old son unexpectedly walked into the room, seeing an image of an aborted baby on the screen.
"Mommy, who broke the baby?" the boy screamed.
"That young child saw the brutality of abortion with unclouded comprehension," observed Smith. "That child was unencumbered and unaffected by the deceptively clever and preposterously misleading propaganda dished by the multi-billion dollar pro-choice industry."
Joining these five Congressmen in their courageous witness to the dignity of life were Rep. Parker Griffith (R-AL), Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), and Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO).
See the Representatives' speeches on Youtube:
Rep. Chris Smith (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)
Rep. Joe Pitts
Rep. Jean Schmidt
Rep. Joseph Cao
Rep. Jim Jordan
Rep. Parker Griffith
Rep. Jeff Fortenberry
Rep. Todd Akin
Contact: Patrick B. Craine
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 22, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
On Friday, the eve of the 37th anniversary of "one of the ... darkest days in U.S. history," in the words of Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH), a contingent of pro-life politicians rose in the U.S. House of Representatives to condemn Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that imposed a "right" to abortion on the country.
Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) began, expressing his gratitude to the throngs of pro-life supporters flooding the capital for Friday's March for Life. The marchers, he said, gather to "mourn the loss" of the 52 million babies killed by abortion in the last 37 years, but also to rejoice over the countless babies saved due to the march and other efforts, such as pregnancy care centers.
"There are ... hundreds of lives that may never have been, were it not for those who continue to stand on behalf of the unborn," he said.
"Abortion really hurts all of us, but I truly believe that it hurts women the most," explained Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH), emphasizing that "it is the woman's privilege to carry that baby inside of her until it is full-term."
She related the "immediate and devastating" impact of the "horrible, horrible" Roe v. Wade decision, which resulted in a massive and fast rise of abortions in the country.
But she also insisted that "the tide is changing." "The reality is that abortion is no longer a part of mainstream medicine, and the vast majority of hospitals in the United States, religious or secular, now choose not to perform elective abortions," she said. "Yes, the tide is turning."
According to Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA), this year's anniversary of Roe v. Wade has particular significance because the abortion debate has risen to "paramount" importance during the national health care debate. Pro-life leaders, in fact, have warned that, if successful, Obama's health care initiative could be the largest expansion of abortion in the country since the infamous 1973 decision.
"Abortion is an inhumane perversion in our society, a distorted emphasis on rights to the disregard of individual responsibilities," said Cao. "To protect human rights, we have distorted the continuity of human development to portray the human fetus as something less than human, and [who] therefore, can be disposed of."
"Although this is the week when we mark that terrible decision of 1973, I love this week," said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH). "Thousands and thousands of Americans are going to come to the nation's capital, and they're going to celebrate life. They know that life is precious, and that in this great country, the greatest nation in history, we should celebrate life, we should understand that life is precious, life is sacred, that it should be protected."
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, said that even after his 38 years in the pro-life movement, "I still don't get how ... so many seemingly smart, sane, compassionate, and accomplished people – especially in politics – support, promote, and – if President Obama has his way in the pending health care legislation – lavishly fund with public dollars the violent death of unborn children and the wounding of their moms by abortion."
"Is it really so hard to understand that abortion is violence against children – a pernicious form of child abuse, falsely and aggressively marketed as choice, a human right?" he asked. "How long will we permit the pro-choice cover-up and the bogus safety claims to misinform, especially in light of the reams of evidence documenting serious injury to women who abort?"
Smith related the story of Dr. Jean Garton, a former abortion proponent whose conversion to the pro-life cause was strongly influenced by the innocent witness of her own child. Smith explained how Garton was preparing a pro-abortion lecture and her 3-year-old son unexpectedly walked into the room, seeing an image of an aborted baby on the screen.
"Mommy, who broke the baby?" the boy screamed.
"That young child saw the brutality of abortion with unclouded comprehension," observed Smith. "That child was unencumbered and unaffected by the deceptively clever and preposterously misleading propaganda dished by the multi-billion dollar pro-choice industry."
Joining these five Congressmen in their courageous witness to the dignity of life were Rep. Parker Griffith (R-AL), Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), and Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO).
See the Representatives' speeches on Youtube:
Rep. Chris Smith (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)
Rep. Joe Pitts
Rep. Jean Schmidt
Rep. Joseph Cao
Rep. Jim Jordan
Rep. Parker Griffith
Rep. Jeff Fortenberry
Rep. Todd Akin
Contact: Patrick B. Craine
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: January 22, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-Life Majority Takes Charge of Nation's Capital
Pro-Life Majority Takes Charge of Nation's Capital
Thousands March for Life, Send Message to Congress
Evidence of Growing Pro-Life Reality in America
Today's March for Life in Washington, D.C. on the 37th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade is another indicator that the majority of Americans are influencing the nation says Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. She offered the following statement:
This growing, bursting at the seams March for Life is an impressive and visible sign of a quiet populist reality. The numbers marching today are spillover of a movement growing exponentially that has just achieved what no other issue base can claim -- helping to bring down the President's top domestic priority.
President Obama was so ideologically fixated upon forcing all of us to finance almost every abortion committed in this nation that he ultimately paid for that extremism with the death of health care.
There are lessons here. The people marching today from every nook and cranny of the nation represent millions more who find 'pro-choice' rhetoric empty of meaning and abortion-friendly policies a violation of their consciences.
According to recent national surveys a majority of Americans now consider themselves pro-life.
They have made their voice heard on the health care bill. We will see evidence of this tidal wave of opinion in important Congressional races this November 2nd.
The Susan B. Anthony List will be continuing its national tour to mobilize pro-life Americans in key Congressional Districts, Women Speak Out: Abortion is NOT Health Care, in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas January 26 -29, 2010. Details can be found at www.sba-list.org/tour.
Contact: Joy Yearout
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Publish Date: January 22, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Thousands March for Life, Send Message to Congress
Evidence of Growing Pro-Life Reality in America
Today's March for Life in Washington, D.C. on the 37th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade is another indicator that the majority of Americans are influencing the nation says Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. She offered the following statement:
This growing, bursting at the seams March for Life is an impressive and visible sign of a quiet populist reality. The numbers marching today are spillover of a movement growing exponentially that has just achieved what no other issue base can claim -- helping to bring down the President's top domestic priority.
President Obama was so ideologically fixated upon forcing all of us to finance almost every abortion committed in this nation that he ultimately paid for that extremism with the death of health care.
There are lessons here. The people marching today from every nook and cranny of the nation represent millions more who find 'pro-choice' rhetoric empty of meaning and abortion-friendly policies a violation of their consciences.
According to recent national surveys a majority of Americans now consider themselves pro-life.
They have made their voice heard on the health care bill. We will see evidence of this tidal wave of opinion in important Congressional races this November 2nd.
The Susan B. Anthony List will be continuing its national tour to mobilize pro-life Americans in key Congressional Districts, Women Speak Out: Abortion is NOT Health Care, in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas January 26 -29, 2010. Details can be found at www.sba-list.org/tour.
Contact: Joy Yearout
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Publish Date: January 22, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)