Indian Court Rules Born and Unborn Are Equal

Indian Court Rules Born and Unborn Are Equal

"The foetus is another life in a woman and loss of the foetus is actually loss of a child"



The Delhi High Court has ruled that an unborn child can be considered equivalent to a minor child and has directed an insurance company to pay compensation of 250,000 rupees (about $5750 Canadian) to a man who lost his pregnant wife in a road accident a year and half ago.

Justice J R Midha allowed an appeal filed by a Mr. Prakash seeking compensation for the death of his unborn child when his plea was ignored by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT), which rules on insurance claim disputes in India.

"This court holds that an unborn child — aged five months onwards in the mother’s womb till its birth — is treated as equal to a child ... the fetus is another life in a woman and loss of the fetus is actually loss of a child in the offing," Justice Midha stated.

The Delhi High Court ruling followed a precedent set by the Kerala High Court’s verdict of October 2008 involving an identical issue, when it had ordered the payment of separate compensation for the death of an unborn child to the husband of a pregnant woman, who died in a road accident.

Prior to the Kerala High Court’s verdict, courts in India generally held that compensation for the death of an unborn child could only be paid in case of a miscarriage by the mother who survived an accident - but no separate claim was allowed for an unborn child if the mother had died.

The Delhi court heard that the MACT had already awarded 611,000 rupees to Mr Prakash for the accident in which his wife died with their seven-month-old child in her womb, but refused to take into account the death of the child.

Counsel for MACT said that the "post-mortem report did not mention anything about the presence of a fetus."

Clarifying that the unborn child was absent at the time of the victim’s death, counsel for Mr. Prakash explained to the court that as a result of the accident that took place on June 8, 2008, the child Mrs Prakash was carrying died and was removed from her womb by Caesarean section on June 17. Following this Mrs. Prakash died from her injuries on August 14.

"The appeal is allowed and the compensation of 250,000 rupees along with interest at 7.5 per annum...is awarded to the appellant (Prakash) towards the death of a seven month-old foetus on June 17,2008," the Court judgment said.

Contact: Thaddeus M. Baklinski
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: February 9, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY

NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY

How to Fight International Planned Parenthood's Latest Sex Ed Agenda



The Planned Parenthood Federation believes that children as young as 10 should be given extensive sex education going so far as to recommend your pre-teen or tween should have an awareness of sexual pleasure. That's according to a new Planned Parenthood report entitled "Stand & Deliver" which also targets Christians and other conservatives accusing them of imposing sexual barriers on young children.

Catholic talk show host, media expert, and co-author of the best selling "All Things Girl" series, Teresa Tomeo, insists the latest push by Planned Parenthood to promote sex to younger children is a wake-up call for Moms and Dads and anyone else concerned about today's youth.
Click here for the entire article from the Teresa Tomeo Press Release.


Planned Parenthood Effort to Expand Injunction Sputters



Planned Parenthood's latest attempt to banish sidewalk counselors from in front of its clinic in San Mateo, California, appeared likely to go down in defeat after a judge made a preliminary ruling that the abortion business had failed to prove its case against long-time pro-life advocate Ross Foti.
 
Over five years ago, Mr. Foti entered into a mutually binding injunction with Planned Parenthood Golden Gate (PPGG), in order to put an end to years of legal wrangling over his rights at the clinic. Mr. Foti agreed to stay 15 feet from clinic property and to limit the number of his signs on the sidewalk in exchange for PPGG's agreement that its "escorts" would not block him or drown out his words.
Click here for the entire article from the Life Legal Defense Foundation.


Older Women In UK Murder More Babies Than Teens: Report



Women aged over 35 who believe they can have unprotected sex because their fertility is on the wane are fuelling the demand for abortions, according to a sexual health charity. The Conceivable? campaign, launched by the Family Planning Association (FPA), says reports citing age as a leading cause of infertility is encouraging older women to abandon contraception. However, figures show the abortion rate in Scotland is higher for over-35s than for the under-16s: the abortion rate for women in the 35-39 age range was 6.2 per 1,000 of the population in 2008 against 4.7 in the under-16s. In England and Wales, the under-16s had an abortion rate of four per 1,000 women in 2008. Women aged 40-44 also have an abortion rate of four per 1,000.
Click here for the entire article from The Scotsman.


Why All The Fuss About Russian Journalist’s Call for Infanticide?



A Russian journalist set off a firestorm in calling for infanticide of developmentally disabled babies, using extremely crass and dehumanizing language. From the story:

    The author, Aleksandr Nikonov, used the word “debil” — a deeply offensive term in Russian — to characterize such children. He argued that parents should have the right to euthanize newborns diagnosed with mental retardation and other developmental disabilities. The article, which ran under the headline “Finish Them Off, So They Don’t Suffer,” went on to describe what Nikonov termed “postnatal abortion” as an act of mercy.

That’s awful, I agree. But why the fuss?  Dutch doctors now actually kill disabled and terminally ill babes–and they end up having their death protocol published respectfully by the New England Journal of Medicine.
Click here for the entire article from Secondhand Smoke.

Tebow Choose Life Ad: What’s All the Fuss About?

Tebow Choose Life Ad: What's All the Fuss About? For weeks, NOW and other pro choice activists have had the vapors about a pro life ad, in which the mother of football hero Tim Tebow was allegedly to say she is glad she refused a doctor's advise to have an abortion.  (Other supporters of abortion rights, such as the New York Times editorial page, did not oppose the ad.) But she doesn't even do that much. She just says she is so glad she had her son, who enters and givers her a big and loving hug. The ad is below.  This is cause for screaming and gnashing of teeth? Click here to view the ad.

Pro-Aborts Clash over Short, Sweet Tebow Ad

Pro-Aborts Clash over Short, Sweet Tebow Ad Considering the abortion lobby's deluge of pre-emptive protest against the Tim Tebow Super Bowl advertisement, sponsored by Focus on the Family, few might have guessed its actual form, first unveiled last night: a clean, simple, family-oriented message that never mentioned abortion. The brief spot, garnished with light humor, left pro-abortion forces so scattered in their effort to respond that one group even called another's harsh criticism of the ad "absurd." The ad took two forms - one that showed during the pre-game show, and an extended version that played during the Super Bowl.  The first spot shows Pam Tebow against a simple white backdrop, holding up a photo of her son as a baby. "I call him my miracle baby," she says. "He almost didn't make it into this world." "I remember so many times when I almost lost him," she continues. "It was so hard. Well he's all grown up now, and I still worry about his health. Everybody treats him like he's different, but to me, he's just my baby. He's my Timmy, and I love him." Tim then walks on screen and gives his mom a hug. "Thanks mom. Love you too," he says. The second spot is similar to the first, except that at one point Tim runs across the screen and humorously tackles his mom as she is speaking. "Timmy!" says Pam, "I'm trying to tell our story here." Tim: Sorry about that, Mom... You still worry about me, Mom? Pam: Well, yeah, you're not nearly as tough as I am. Both ads direct viewers to learn more about Tebow's story at FocusontheFamily.com. There Pam and Bob Tebow discuss the miraculous circumstances of their son Timothy's conception and birth, and their decision not to abort him against the advice of doctors.  The parents also urge viewers struggling with a difficult pregnancy to trust in God's love and choose life for their baby. The president of NOW, one of the leading forces urging CBS to remove the ad, responded by condemning the ad's "celebration" of violence against women, in a reference to Tim's tackling of his mom.  "I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it," said NOW's Terry O'Neill, according to the LA Times. "That's what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don't find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself." Before the ad aired, O'Neill responded to former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, who had criticized NOW's objections to the ad, by saying that "Focus on the Family has cynically set it up so they can say anyone who disagrees with airing this ad is disrespecting one woman and her choice. NOW respects every woman's right to plan her own family and insists our laws do the same." Also prior to its airing, NOW vice president Erin Matson called the Tebow spot "hate masquerading as love." Pro-abortion blogger Amanda Marcotte also took issue with the tackle, writing in a Twitter post: "Tebow: Hey Mom! Tried to kill you from the womb and failed. How about a blind side tackle? Violence against Moms FTW [for the win]!" In another tweet, Marcotte called the spot "misogynist porn for the anti-sex crowd." "I think they're attempting to use humor as another tactic of hiding their message and fooling the American people," the president of the Women's Media Center, another top lobbyist against the ad, told the LA Times. Other pro-abortion leaders demurred from attacking the ad's humor point. "It's absurd to claim that this is an endorsement of violence against women," said Frances Kissling, former president of Catholics for Choice.  Saying Pam and Tim Tebow "came across as affectionate, loving, funny and happy," Kissling admitted that Focus on the Family's lighthearted pro-life message can credit much of its impact to the publicity generated by the all-out pro-abortion campaign against it. "If there had not been all of that publicity over the last 2 weeks, this ad could have passed almost unnoticed. Who would have known what they're talking about? It's so subtle," said Kissling. Last week, Washington Post sports columnist Sally Jenkins wrote a scathing editorial against the abortion lobby's reaction, presaging the negative effect of their media coverage.  "Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked 'The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us' to reveal something important about themselves: They aren't actually 'pro-choice' so much as they are pro-abortion," she wrote. Pro-life blogger Dr. Gerard Nadal agreed, saying the ad's great success lay in focusing attention on the pro-abortion lobby's reaction to a simple celebration of life. "Focus on the Family are expert fisherman, and you Big Mouth Bass took the bait," said Nadal in an open letter to Planned Parenthood and NOW.  "You allowed yourselves to be exposed for just who and what you are: Haters of motherhood, fatherhood, family and babies." Contact: Kathleen Gilbert Source: LifeSiteNews.com Publish Date: February 8, 2010 Link to this article.   Send this article to a friend.

Abortion revelation amps pro-life protest

Abortion revelation amps pro-life protest Pro-life groups continue to protest a proposal for abortions at the Madison Surgery Center of the University of Wisconsin (UW), especially since encountering a new revelation. Pro-Life Wisconsin and the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) obtained records through the Freedom of Information Act. Peggy Hamill, director of Pro-Life Wisconsin, reports on the findings.   "The documents confirm that UW is already involved in research using aborted baby body parts," she explains. "This is something that Pro-Life Wisconsin has known for many, many years, but these documents in print confirm that."   The records also indicate the School of Medicine is involved, so Hamill concludes that the documents reveal plans for the new abortion facility. "They reveal that it is very likely that babies that will be aborted, should this late-term abortion facility open, will become an in-house source of fresh, economic fetal body parts for UW-Madison medical research," she says.   The Pro-Life Wisconsin director underscores that people with a respect for life of the unborn will not stand for the government sanctioning of their killing. She goes on to say that "until the blood stops flowing, these institutions can be assured pro-lifers will stand up for innocent pre-born babies." Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: February 6, 2010 Link to this article.   Send this article to a friend.

Fundraiser should drop pro-abortion group

Fundraiser should drop pro-abortion group AMA Haiti fundraising drive has a link to a pro-abortion group.   MTV recently conducted a telethon and recorded a digital release called Hope for Haiti Now to raise money for aid to earthquake victims in Haiti. But according to Erik Whittington, director of Rock for Life, one organization is suspect. "The Hope for Haiti Now funnels all their proceeds to at least seven different organizations, and they're split up evenly," he explains. "Unfortunately one of those recipients is UNICEF" -- the United Nations Children's Fund. Whittington feels that should raise a warning flag because of the organization's history. "They support and promote and advocate abortion, distributing of condoms and other contraceptives, forced or involuntary, sterilization [and] other anti-life programs," he reports.   The Rock for Life director goes on to say that people contribute to the fundraiser thinking UNICEF will help people, but he adds that that is the organization's form of aid. What Haitians need are medical supplies, water and food, he argues – life-sustaining contributions. Whittington is asking Help for Haiti Now to drop UNICEF from its list of recipients. Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: February 8, 2010 Link to this article.   Send this article to a friend.

Chinese Human-Rights Crusaders Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Chinese Human-Rights Crusaders Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

   

A bipartisan group of Congressmen have nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize three stalwart Chinese human rights activists who have suffered enormously for championing the religious, political, and natural rights of Chinese citizens. Two nominees have been persecuted specifically for fighting China's brutal policy of forced abortion and sterilizations under the "one-child" policy.

On behalf of the seven U.S. lawmakers, New Jersey Republican Rep. Chris Smith sent a letter to Thorbjorn Jagland, Chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in Norway, nominating human rights advocates Chen Guangcheng, Gao Zhisheng, and Liu Xiaobo for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize. Under the committee's rules, representatives of national legislatures may nominate individuals for the prestigious award. 

"These human rights advocates are making a signal contribution to peace," the Congressmen wrote. "One of the most crucial factors determining whether the twenty-first century will be peaceful will be China's internal development – whether China recognizes its citizens' human rights and their desire to live in a democratic state ruled by law, or persists in non-representative government and repression." 

"By jointly awarding Chen, Gao, and Liu the Nobel Peace Prize, you would not only recognize their contributions to peace, but you would further inspire millions of Chinese whose hearts resonate with the ideals these three figures have heroically articulated," the letter stated.

Chen Guangcheng is a blind self-taught lawyer, who took the burden upon himself to defend local Chinese peasant women from forced sterilization and their children from forced abortion by local government authorities.

Although Beijing now has an official policy against forced abortions and sterilizations under the "one-child" policy, investigations reveal that local authorities routinely ignore the directive in order to fulfill Beijing's population quotas – and that Beijing, in turn, routinely ignores these violations and silences those who expose them.

Chen's run-in with the Chinese government began after he filed an unprecedented class-action lawsuit against Linyi City health officials. The suit attacked officials for their inhuman treatment of women and their unborn children in the Shangdong province – for what Chen viewed as brutal violations in enforcing the "one-child-policy." 

After enduring a year of house arrest, Chen was sentenced in August 2006 to four years and three months in prison on ludicrous charges of damaging property and disrupting traffic.

In addition, the date for Chen's trial was altered regularly and suddenly, making it very difficult for his lawyers to coordinate a defense. The most obvious foul play occurred the day before his trial, as the three lawyers on his legal team – one of them a graduate of Yale University – were arrested on the creative charge of stealing a wallet. They were released only after the delay made their involvement in Chen's trial moot. 

Gao Zhisheng, a Beijing attorney committed to defending human rights in China, was one of Chen's lawyers. On February 4, 2009, Gao went missing under suspicious circumstances and his whereabouts are currently unknown. 

In the past, Gao had been tortured horribly by prison officials. In a column for the Washington Post, Gao's wife, Geng He, revealed that guards subjected him to electric shock, stuck burning cigarettes in his eyes and toothpicks in his genitals during a previous 50-day prison incarceration. Authorities had tossed the human rights lawyer in jail for writing a letter to Congress exposing China's continued human rights abuses.

Gao's wife and two children had escaped China and sought asylum in the United States, shortly before Gao disappeared. 

(To join an online effort to free Gao Zhisheng, visit: FreeGao.com)

Geng expressed concern that the government's brutal treatment of Gao and other lawyers is deterring "the next generation of Chinese lawyers" from championing human rights cases. She said that "China's lawyers are the country's only hope for becoming a one-party state where the rule of law prevails, let alone a true democracy," but was hopeful that China would listen to the United States if forcefully pressed on the issue. 

Some are less hopeful: Carl Moeller, head of Open Doors USA, said he believes the chance for the U.S. to influence China has disappeared now because of excessive borrowing and the enormous debt it owes China.

"The American economy has become enslaved to the Chinese banks. It would be economic suicide to make threats now," Moeller stated earlier in the year. 

Liu Xiaobo, the third name offered for the Nobel prize, is the architect of a pro-democracy and human rights manifesto called Charter 08. The charter called for basic freedoms such as freedom of religion, assembly, protection of private property, and the guarantee of rights outlined under the U.N.'s Declaration of Universal Human Rights.

Authorities arrested Liu two days before the Charter's December 8, 2008 release and charged him with "inciting the subversion of state power." After declaring him guilty as charged, a Chinese court sentenced Liu on Christmas Day 2009 to 11 years in prison. 

Liu is appealing the sentence, and the United States has petitioned for his release. 

"These three heroes have stood up for the cause of freedom and human dignity, and they have sacrificed and suffered for their stands," stated Rep. Smith. "They deserve consideration for the Nobel Peace Prize."

Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeiSiteNews.com
Publish Date: February 8, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY

NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY

Herb Titus: Abortion Is NOT Legal!



The mainstream media tell us that the Supreme Court legalized abortion with its Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. The media also tell us that there is nothing we can do about it because Roe v. Wade is the "law of the land." Nothing could be further from the truth. Abortion is not legal in America! Recognition of this fact is the first step for the pro-life movement in its campaign to turn back the murderous scourge on innocent babies. Indeed, heart disease (738,781 deaths per year) is not the number one cause of death in the United States - abortion is, at well over a million deaths per year.
Click here for the entire article from The American View.


Oklahoma Lawmakers To Reconsider Abortion-Rights Laws Deemed Unconstitutional



Hundreds of pro-life protesters gathered at the Oklahoma Capitol on Wednesday as lawmakers began work on more than 2,500 bills in the state Legislature, including bills related to abortion rights that have been struck down by state courts, the AP/Stamford Advocate reports. The protesters were marking the annual Rose Day rally, during which they distribute roses to lawmakers' offices and ask them to support pro-life legislation.

The measures state lawmakers are expected to revive include bills that would affect regulation of a drug used in medical abortion and that would require women seeking abortion procedures to receive an ultrasound, listen to a physician's description of the fetus and fill out a lengthy questionnaire, among other measures. Oklahoma courts ruled that the laws violated a state constitutional requirement that bills deal with only one subject.
Click here for the entire article from Medical News Today.


Baby Killers at 'Amnesty International' Want U.N. to Condemn Nicaragua's Anti-abortion Policy



The United Nations should urge Nicaragua to repeal its ban on abortion following a human rights' review of the country on 8 February, Amnesty International said on Thursday. During the United Nations' Universal Periodic Review, UN members will have the opportunity to raise questions about the country's absolute ban on abortion. Nicaragua's revised Penal Code, which came into effect in July 2008, stipulates prison sentences for girls and women who seek an abortion and for health professionals who provide health services associated with abortion. The prohibition includes cases where the life of the woman is at risk or when pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.
Click here for the entire article from Amnesy.org.


Idaho Senate Bill Would Allow Providers To Refuse Health Services Based On Beliefs



Two Idaho state senators -- Russell Fulcher (R) and Chuck Winder (R) -- have introduced a bill (SB 1270) that would legally exempt physicians, nurses and other health professionals from providing medical care or services that conflict with their religious or moral beliefs, the Idaho Statesman reports. Although the bill was prepared for a public hearing in the Senate State Affairs Committee, its sponsors are revising it to address concerns from groups representing trial lawyers, physicians and hospitals.

The bill cites a list of specific practices and procedures -- including abortion, embryonic stem cell research, embryo cloning and dispensing of abortion-inducing drugs -- that could potentially clash with a provider's values.
Click here for the entire article from Medical News Today.

The Duggars Under Fire

The Duggars Under Fire

The latest issue of People magazine has the Duggar family featured in its cover story. The Duggars, as you probably already know, are a large family also featured in a reality television show with Mom (Michelle), Dad (Jim Bob), and their now 19 children. The aforementioned magazine cover has a picture of Michelle and Jim Bob along with the Duggar family's latest addition, Josie Brooklyn, born this past December via emergency C-section. Also on the cover is the copy "How Many Kids Are Too Many?", and "The Duggars Under Fire". At the bottom of the cover this explanation is given: "As their 19th child, Josie, fights for life, Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar say they might have more children- igniting a controversy over their supersize family".

Actually, controversy about the Duggars long pre-dated the birth of baby Josie and any recent acknowledgment that there may be more little Duggars yet to come. Criticism of the Duggars goes back a few years, even before the time they came into the national spotlight  in 2004 when their first special was aired on the Discovery channel.

The criticism directed at them runs the gamut: Their religious views, their environmental impact (the Duggars do, no doubt, produce a lot of CO2),  the health risks they've taken, and their view that they have all the emotional and economic resources required to have 19 children (and maybe more).



They are said to be a part of the "Quiverfull" movement,  a stream of doctrine and practice within evangelical Christianity that, among other things, emphasizes the great gift and blessing that children are. The movement takes its name from Psalm 127:3-5:

Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

There is much to be said positively for Quiverfull. They obviously possess a high regard for children, have a great emphasis on the family, and reject the modern day feminist dogma that says women can't be fulfilled simply by being mothers and homemakers. They aren't mere throwbacks to a 19th century social model, rather they stand as a living antithesis of what the world around them believes and does.

Yet, while Quiverfull is not a monolithic movement, it nonetheless has a number of tenants within it that are generally held, and may be seen as troubling even within the most conservative of evangelical circles. For example, the notion that "birth control" by any means in any circumstance is always wrong is something that many (most?) evangelicals cannot accept as a Scriptural teaching. John Piper's Desiring God Ministries has argued that there is no inconsistency in believing that children are a gift from God, and yet regulating the "timing and number" of those children: "Just because something is a gift from the Lord does not mean that it is wrong to be a steward of when or whether you will come into possession of it."

But for the Duggars, stewardship of these gifts from God doesn't include such matters as Piper contemplates. Their idea of stewardship is post-conception.

And we should be okay with that.

Despite all the critical noise in the media and on the internet (which, arguably, they brought upon themselves with their television show), the Duggars seem to have been successful by every measure in their endeavors to raise all their little gifts from God. It is a commitment and lifestyle that they have chosen. While one might not agree with a number of Quiverfull movement views, the Duggars and others like them need to be defended from all the spurious attacks that are made against them.  They get hammered on because they take the Bible literally. They get scorned because they believe in creationism. They are the subjected to these stupid environmental/resource criticisms that are utter Leftist drivel.

Sound familiar?

Moreover, the current trajectory of our society would suggest that somewhere down the line we will have government legislation that limits the number of children families can have. Recently Diane Francis wrote in the Financial Post : "The "inconvenient truth" overhanging the UN's Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world. A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days."

Perhaps you had a small family by choice. Perhaps you think that the Duggars have some far-fetched ideas. Whatever the case, you might want to consider supporting the Duggars' right to live and procreate as they please.

Contact: Brian Myers
Source: Caffeinated Thoughts
Publish Date: February 8, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Democrats May Be Banking on Different Health Care Strategy

Democrats May Be Banking on Different Health Care Strategy
 
Pro-life Americans may be forced to pay for health-care abortions.


Democrats still don't have a firm plan to move forward with health care reform, but are said to be considering a path that would bypass the 60-vote hurdle typically required in the Senate.

Under the "budget reconciliation," only 51 votes would be required to pass in the Senate. Before Sen. Scott Brown beat out Martha Coakley for the seat vacated by the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, the Democrats appeared to have a filibuster-proof 60 votes in Congress to pass the bill.

A national survey by Rasmussen Reports showed that 58 percent of voters oppose the health care plan, and 54 percent don't like the way President Obama is handling the issue.

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., said Americans are not getting the whole picture.

"What worries me the most is what we don't see," he said. "This process has been distinguished all the way along by backroom deals – things out of public sight, no transparency."

Ashley Horne, federal issues analyst with Focus on the Family Action, said family advocates need to keep the pressure on lawmakers.

"Now is the time to remain vigilant on opposing health care reform," she said. "The one thing Democrats would like Americans to do is forget about the health care debate and allow them to pass a bill under the cover of darkness."

The legislation includes language that would mean federally-funded abortions. That's why it's so important for pro-lifers to follow the process, Horne added.

"The Senate version of the bill expressly included funding for abortion," she said. "So you can be sure they'll try to sneak that provision into the final version of the bill, unless Americans continue to speak up and in the end, hold their elected officials accountable at the polls."

Contact: Nima Reza
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: February 4, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

“Please don’t kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child.”

"Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child."



Read Mother Teresa's speech, reprinted below in full. It is beautiful, and in it three times she calls abortion the greatest destroyer of peace:

On the last day, Jesus will say to those on His right hand, "Come, enter the Kingdom. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was sick and you visited me." Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, "Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me to drink, I was sick and you did not visit me." These will ask Him, "When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?" And Jesus will answer them, "Whatever you neglected to do unto one of these least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!"

As we have gathered here to pray together, I think it will be beautiful if we begin with a prayer that expresses very well what Jesus wants us to do for the least. St. Francis of Assisi understood very well these words of Jesus and his life is very well expressed by a prayer. And this prayer, which we say every day after Holy Communion, always surprises me very much, because it is very fitting for each one of us. And I always wonder whether 800 years ago when St. Francis lived, they had the same difficulties that we have today. I think that some of you already have this prayer of peace — so we will pray it together.

Let us thank God for the opportunity He has given us today to have come here to pray together. We have come here especially to pray for peace, joy and love. We are reminded that Jesus came to bring the good news to the poor. He had told us what is that good news when He said: "My peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you." He came not to give the peace of the world which is only that we don't bother each other. He came to give the peace of heart which comes from loving — from doing good to others.

And God loved the world so much that He gave His son — it was a giving. God gave His son to the Virgin Mary, and what did she do with Him? As soon as Jesus came into Mary's life, immediately she went in haste to give that good news. And as she came into the house of her cousin, Elizabeth, Scripture tells us that the unborn child — the child in the womb of Elizabeth — leapt with joy. While still in the womb of Mary — Jesus brought peace to John the Baptist who leapt for joy in the womb of Elizabeth.

And as if that were not enough, as if it were not enough that God the Son should become one of us and bring peace and joy while still in the womb of Mary, Jesus also died on the Cross to show that greater love. He died for you and for me, and for the leper and for that man dying of hunger and that naked person lying in the street, not only of Calcutta, but of Africa, and everywhere. Our Sisters serve these poor people in 105 countries throughout the world. Jesus insisted that we love one another as He loves each one of us. Jesus gave His life to love us and He tells us that we also have to give whatever it takes to do good to one another. And in the Gospel Jesus says very clearly: "Love as I have loved you."

Jesus died on the Cross because that is what it took for Him to do good to us — to save us from our selfishness in sin. He gave up everything to do the Father's will — to show us that we too must be willing to give up everything to do God's will — to love one another as He loves each of us. If we are not willing to give whatever it takes to do good to one another, sin is still in us. That is why we too must give to each other until it hurts.

It is not enough for us to say: "I love God," but I also have to love my neighbor. St. John says that you are a liar if you say you love God and you don't love your neighbor. How can you love God whom you do not see, if you do not love your neighbor whom you see, whom you touch, with whom you live? And so it is very important for us to realize that love, to be true, has to hurt. I must be willing to give whatever it takes not to harm other people and, in fact, to do good to them. This requires that I be willing to give until it hurts. Otherwise, there is not true love in me and I bring injustice, not peace, to those around me.

It hurt Jesus to love us. We have been created in His image for greater things, to love and to be loved. We must "put on Christ" as Scripture tells us. And so, we have been created to love as He loves us. Jesus makes Himself the hungry one, the naked one, the homeless one, the unwanted one, and He says, "You did it to Me." On the last day He will say to those on His right, "whatever you did to the least of these, you did to Me, and He will also say to those on His left, whatever you neglected to do for the least of these, you neglected to do it for Me."

When He was dying on the Cross, Jesus said, "I thirst." Jesus is thirsting for our love, and this is the thirst of everyone, poor and rich alike. We all thirst for the love of others, that they go out of their way to avoid harming us and to do good to us. This is the meaning of true love, to give until it hurts.

I can never forget the experience I had in visiting a home where they kept all these old parents of sons and daughters who had just put them into an institution and forgotten them — maybe. I saw that in that home these old people had everything — good food, comfortable place, television, everything, but everyone was looking toward the door. And I did not see a single one with a smile on the face. I turned to Sister and I asked: "Why do these people who have every comfort here, why are they all looking toward the door? Why are they not smiling?"

I am so used to seeing the smiles on our people, even the dying ones smile. And Sister said: "This is the way it is nearly everyday. They are expecting, they are hoping that a son or daughter will come to visit them. They are hurt because they are forgotten." And see, this neglect to love brings spiritual poverty. Maybe in our own family we have somebody who is feeling lonely, who is feeling sick, who is feeling worried. Are we there? Are we willing to give until it hurts in order to be with our families, or do we put our own interests first? These are the questions we must ask ourselves, especially as we begin this year of the family. We must remember that love begins at home and we must also remember that 'the future of humanity passes through the family.'

I was surprised in the West to see so many young boys and girls given to drugs. And I tried to find out why. Why is it like that, when those in the West have so many more things than those in the East? And the answer was: 'Because there is no one in the family to receive them.' Our children depend on us for everything — their health, their nutrition, their security, their coming to know and love God. For all of this, they look to us with trust, hope and expectation. But often father and mother are so busy they have no time for their children, or perhaps they are not even married or have given up on their marriage. So their children go to the streets and get involved in drugs or other things. We are talking of love of the child, which is were love and peace must begin. These are the things that break peace.

But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? How do we persuade a woman not to have an abortion? As always, we must persuade her with love and we remind ourselves that love means to be willing to give until it hurts. Jesus gave even His life to love us. So, the mother who is thinking of abortion, should be helped to love, that is, to give until it hurts her plans, or her free time, to respect the life of her child. The father of that child, whoever he is, must also give until it hurts.

By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems. And, by abortion, that father is told that he does not have to take any responsibility at all for the child he has brought into the world. The father is likely to put other women into the same trouble. So abortion just leads to more abortion. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.

Many people are very, very concerned with the children of India, with the children of Africa where quite a few die of hunger, and so on. Many people are also concerned about all the violence in this great country of the United States. These concerns are very good. But often these same people are not concerned with the millions who are being killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today — abortion which brings people to such blindness.

And for this I appeal in India and I appeal everywhere — "Let us bring the child back." The child is God's gift to the family. Each child is created in the special image and likeness of God for greater things — to love and to be loved. In this year of the family we must bring the child back to the center of our care and concern. This is the only way that our world can survive because our children are the only hope for the future. As older people are called to God, only their children can take their places.

But what does God say to us? He says: "Even if a mother could forget her child, I will not forget you. I have carved you in the palm of my hand." We are carved in the palm of His hand; that unborn child has been carved in the hand of God from conception and is called by God to love and to be loved, not only now in this life, but forever. God can never forget us.

I will tell you something beautiful. We are fighting abortion by adoption — by care of the mother and adoption for her baby. We have saved thousands of lives. We have sent word to the clinics, to the hospitals and police stations: "Please don't destroy the child; we will take the child." So we always have someone tell the mothers in trouble: "Come, we will take care of you, we will get a home for your child." And we have a tremendous demand from couples who cannot have a child — but I never give a child to a couple who have done something not to have a child. Jesus said, "Anyone who receives a child in my name, receives me." By adopting a child, these couples receive Jesus but, by aborting a child, a couple refuses to receive Jesus.

Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child. I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child and be loved by the child. From our children's home in Calcutta alone, we have saved over 3000 children from abortion. These children have brought such love and joy to their adopting parents and have grown up so full of love and joy.

I know that couples have to plan their family and for that there is natural family planning. The way to plan the family is natural family planning, not contraception. In destroying the power of giving life, through contraception, a husband or wife is doing something to self. This turns the attention to self and so it destroys the gifts of love in him or her. In loving, the husband and wife must turn the attention to each other as happens in natural family planning, and not to self, as happens in contraception. Once that living love is destroyed by contraception, abortion follows very easily.

I also know that there are great problems in the world — that many spouses do not love each other enough to practice natural family planning. We cannot solve all the problems in the world, but let us never bring in the worst problem of all, and that is to destroy love. And this is what happens when we tell people to practice contraception and abortion.

The poor are very great people. They can teach us so many beautiful things. Once one of them came to thank us for teaching her natural family planning and said: "You people who have practiced chastity, you are the best people to teach us natural family planning because it is nothing more than self-control out of love for each other." And what this poor person said is very true. These poor people maybe have nothing to eat, maybe they have not a home to live in, but they can still be great people when they are spiritually rich.

When I pick up a person from the street, hungry, I give him a plate of rice, a piece of bread. But a person who is shut out, who feels unwanted, unloved, terrified, the person who has been thrown out of society — that spiritual poverty is much harder to overcome. And abortion, which often follows from contraception, brings a people to be spiritually poor, and that is the worst poverty and the most difficult to overcome.

Those who are materially poor can be very wonderful people. One evening we went out and we picked up four people from the street. And one of them was in a most terrible condition. I told the Sisters: "You take care of the other three; I will take care of the one who looks worse." So I did for her all that my love can do. I put her in bed, and there was such a beautiful smile on her face. She took hold of my hand, as she said one word only: "thank you" — and she died.

I could not help but examine my conscience before her. And I asked: "What would I say if I were in her place?" And my answer was very simple. I would have tried to draw a little attention to myself. I would have said: "I am hungry, I am dying, I am cold, I am in pain," or something. But she gave me much more — she gave me her grateful love. And she died with a smile on her face. Then there was the man we picked up from the drain, half eaten by worms and, after we had brought him to the home, he only said, "I have lived like an animal in the street, but I am going to die as an angel, loved and cared for." Then, after we had removed all the worms from his body, all he said, with a big smile, was: "Sister, I am going home to God" — and he died. It was so wonderful to see the greatness of that man who could speak like that without blaming anybody, without comparing anything. Like an angel — this is the greatness of people who are spiritually rich even when they are materially poor.

We are not social workers. We may be doing social work in the eyes of some people, but we must be contemplatives in the heart of the world. For we must bring that presence of God into your family, for the family that prays together, stays together. There is so much hatred, so much misery, and we with our prayer, with our sacrifice, are beginning at home. Love begins at home, and it is not how much we do, but how much love we put into what we do.

If we are contemplatives in the heart of the world with all its problems, these problems can never discourage us. We must always remember what God tells us in Scripture: "Even if a mother could forget the child in her womb" — something impossible, but even if she could forget — "I will never forget you."

And so here I am talking with you. I want you to find the poor here, right in your own home first. And begin love there. Be that good news to your own people first. And find out about your next-door neighbors. Do you know who they are?

I had the most extraordinary experience of love of neighbor with a Hindu family. A gentleman came to our house and said: "Mother Teresa, there is a family who have not eaten for so long. Do something." So I took some rice and went there immediately. And I saw the children — their eyes shining with hunger. I don't know if you have ever seen hunger. But I have seen it very often. And the mother of the family took the rice I gave her and went out. When she came back, I asked her: "Where did you go? What did you do?" And she gave me a very simple answer: "They are hungry also." What struck me was that she knew — and who are they? A Muslim family — and she knew. I didn't bring any more rice that evening because I wanted them, Hindus and Muslims, to enjoy the joy of sharing.

But there were those children, radiating joy, sharing the joy and peace with their mother because she had the love to give until it hurts. And you see this is where love begins — at home in the family.

So, as the example of this family shows, God will never forget us and there is something you and I can always do. We can keep the joy of loving Jesus in our hearts, and share that joy with all we come in contact with. Let us make that one point — that no child will be unwanted, unloved, uncared for, or killed and thrown away. And give until it hurts — with a smile.

Because I talk so much of giving with a smile, once a professor from the United States asked me: "Are you married?" And I said: "Yes, and I find it sometimes very difficult to smile at my spouse, Jesus, because He can be very demanding — sometimes." This is really something true. And this is where love comes in — when it is demanding, and yet we can give it with joy.

One of the most demanding things for me is travelling everywhere — and with publicity. I have said to Jesus that if I don't go to heaven for anything else, I will be going to heaven for all the travelling with all the publicity, because it has purified me and sacrificed me and made me really ready to go to heaven.

If we remember that God loves us, and that we can love others as He loves us, then America can become a sign of peace for the world. From here, a sign of care for the weakest of the weak — the unborn child — must go out to the world. If you become a burning light of justice and peace in the world, then really you will be true to what the founders of this country stood for. God bless you!

Mother Teresa, "Mother Teresa Goes to Washington." National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., (February 5, 1994).

Contact: Cathy Ruse
Source: FRCBlog
Publish Date: February 4, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Black Children Are an Endangered Species

Black Children Are an Endangered Species



Georgia Right to Life and the Radiance Foundation today announced at a press conference the launch of the Endangered Species Project, an initiative to increase awareness of the impact of abortion on Georgia's minority communities and women.

The campaign began with the placement of billboards in Dekalb and Fulton counties where the majority of abortions occur. According to Catherine Davis, Director of Minority Outreach, over 67% of the abortions in Georgia occur in those two counties. Ms Davis maintains that this is by design.

"Planned Parenthood's Negro Project is succeeding", Davis said. "They targeted blacks in order to control their birthrate, limiting the growth of populations they 'don't want too many of' as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg revealed was the goal behind Roe v. Wade (Women on the Court, New York Times Magazine, July 2009)."

Georgia leads the country in the number of reported abortions performed on black women, 18,901 in 2008 alone. Davis maintains the impact of abortion is so great that black children are an endangered species.

In addition to the billboards a website was also launched this week -- www.TooManyAborted.com --where the motives for abortion in America are discussed. Ryan Bomberger, co-founder of The Radiance Foundation stated, "TooManyAborted.com is the response to the rhetoric of 'reducing abortions'. Regardless of race, religious and civic community leaders and the general public need to understand the destructive nature of the abortion industry and get outraged by the truth."

Dr. Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King Jr. commented, "My Uncle Martin once stated, 'The Negro cannot win if he is willing to sell the future of his children for his personal and immediate comfort and safety.' Those words are still true today. After all, how can the dream survive if we let them take our children?"

In closing, Dr. Alveda King noted, "Abortion is the civil rights issue of the 21st century."


Click here for the video.

Contact: Catherine Davis
Source: Georgia Right to Life
Publish Date: February 4, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

‘Stop dehydration deaths,’ says Terri Schiavo’s brother in response to new brain scan

'Stop dehydration deaths,' says Terri Schiavo's brother in response to new brain scan
   


Reacting to news of a breakthrough in brain scanning technology, Terri Schiavo's brother Bobby Schindler is calling for a halt to removing hydration from brain-damaged patients who are thought to be in a persistent vegetative state.

An "unscientific, inaccurate" diagnosis of unresponsive patients is being used as "a criterion to kill," Schindler charged.

Schindler was responding to news that researchers from the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the University of Liège have used a technique called functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to map a patient's brain activity while he was asked to answer 'yes' or 'no' questions.

One patient, a 29-year-old man who suffered a severe traumatic brain injury in a traffic accident, was able to communicate by willfully changing his brain activity, a press release from the MRC reports. He correctly answered questions such as "Is your father's name Alexander?"

Dr. Adrian Owen and his team at the MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit in Cambridge, England were the developers of the technique.

"We were astonished when we saw the results of the patient's scan and that he was able to correctly answer the questions that were asked by simply changing his thoughts," Dr. Owen commented. "Not only did these scans tell us that the patient was not in a vegetative state but, more importantly, for the first time in five years, it provided the patient with a way of communicating his thoughts to the outside world."

Dr. Steven Laureys of the University of Liège, a co-author of the study, said the scans were the only viable method for the patient to communicate since his accident.

"It's early days, but in the future we hope to develop this technique to allow some patients to express their feelings and thoughts, control their environment and increase their quality of life."

The three-year study conducted fMRI scans on 23 patients diagnosed as being in a vegetative state. The technology detected signs of awareness in four of the cases, 17 percent of the participants.

The fMRI technique can decipher the brain's answers to questions in healthy participants with 100 percent accuracy but has previously not been used for a patient who cannot move or speak.

Dr. Martin Monti, another MRC co-author of the study, said the advance could help with clinical questions and would allow patients to say if they are feeling any pain.

The new study is published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Dr. Allan Ropper, a neurologist at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, wrote an editorial accompanying the study. According to HealthDay News, he said that people are going to have to "grapple" with the meaning of brain scans that show consciousness or residual consciousness.

"It has to do with what you think life is and what is a meaningful life. Those are social, cultural and theological questions," he said.

He also cautioned against giving false hope to families, noting the small percentage of the responsive patients. All the study's patients had suffered traumatic brain injuries, not damage from oxygen deprivation.

Speaking of the 29-year-old patient, Monti said "it is still the case that we managed to give him, to a little extent, a voice. In a sense there was a very positive outcome. We managed to interact. This is an extremely exciting thing."

CNA sought comment on the issue from Bobby Schindler of the Terri Schiavo Foundation.

His sister Terri, who was severely brain damaged from oxygen deprivation, was at the center of a 2005 legal dispute in Florida. She was denied nutrition and hydration by court order in a case between her blood relatives and her husband.

Schindler said the study backs other findings about the "unscientific, inaccurate" diagnosis of a persistent vegetative state (PVS) and shows how it is "often" wrong when diagnosing people with severe injuries.

"As in the case of my sister, they're using this diagnosis as a criterion to kill."

Schindler said his family had asked a judge for similar testing for Terri but it was denied.

If the technique was easy to conduct and available, he said, it would have given a better understanding of her condition. "Why not ask, especially when it is going to end someone's life?"

Asked whether the case offers insight into how unresponsive patients should be treated, he replied:

"Nobody should have to earn the right to hydration. We should do everything we can to care for these people, regardless of how responsive or unresponsive they are."

Schindler lamented that people are being "indoctrinated" to see killing as "an act of compassion."

"We are morally obligated to care for these people," Schindler told CNA.

"They should stop any further dehydration deaths, because we're learning how inaccurate the PVS diagnosis is."

Discussing the other patients who could not communicate, he said families of unresponsive patients should continue to treat them with "love and compassion."

But the patient's condition should never justify removing food, hydration or "basic care," he stressed.

Schindler also noted that improvements on science are possible and could improve unresponsive patients' functioning.

"We should never come to the conclusion that someone is better off starving to death," he told CNA.

He was critical of news reports that claimed the new technology would not have helped Terri Schiavo, saying some stories were written "as if these doctors want to go out of their way to justify Terri's death."

"If you read these articles, it seems they always have this caveat: 'let's not jump to conclusions with Terri Schiavo and say these tests would have proven she wasn't in the conditions the doctors said she was in.'"

Schindler told CNA that more doctors were on record saying that Terri could have been helped with some of the technology available. They believed that she wasn't in a vegetative state.

He also advocated the elimination of the term "vegetative state" from common use, saying it is "dehumanizing" and devalues the person and his or her "inherent moral worth." In his view, PVS diagnosis should also not be used as a criterion for ending someone's life because of how often it is wrong.

Schindler said he describes unresponsive patients as "persons with brain injuries."

"I don't know why I have to label them as being a vegetable. I think it leads to an existing prejudice against these types of people," he told CNA.

Source: CNA
Publish Date: February 4, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Pro-lifer Wins European Christian Party Chairmanship

Pro-lifer Wins European Christian Party Chairmanship



Italian pro-life politician Luca Volonte captured the chairmanship of the European People's Party (EPP) in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) last week, besting second-place finisher Jean-Claude Mignon of France, whom socially-liberal members had rallied around after their favored candidates faded.

Immediately upon assuming the chairmanship of the EPP, the chamber's Christian Democratic grouping, Volonte was confronted with a number of challenges on controversial social issues. Due to coordinated EPP opposition, a report on "discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity" sponsored by Swiss socialist Andreas Gross was withdrawn and referred to the PACE Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. Volonte had engineered a flood of some 70 substantive amendments to the bill, joined by Italian colleagues Renato Farina and Lorenzo Cesa, as well as Marco Gatti, representing San Marino, an independent microstate on the Italian peninsula.

EPP unity was lacking, however, when PACE adopted a report by British Labour parliamentarian Christine McCafferty commemorating the fifteenth anniversary of the Cairo conference on Population and Development as an "official Recommendation." The report calls for universal access to "sexual and reproductive health rights," "safe abortion services" and "age-appropriate, gender-sensitive sexuality and relationship information and education in schools."

The Recommendation serves as an action plan not only for the 47 Council of Europe countries represented in PACE, but also affects nations throughout the developing world. It calls upon donor governments to "allocate 10% of ODA (Official Development Assistance) to population/sexual and reproductive health and rights" programs and mandates that recipients of such aid also devote two-thirds of their total "population/sexual and reproductive budget" from domestic sources.

While non-binding, the McCafferty document also calls upon the decision-making Committee of Ministers - comprised of member state foreign ministers - to consider "a European convention on sexual and reproductive health."

The parliamentary tactics that worked with the Gross bill failed to stop the McCafferty proposal, as 60 amendments put forth by Volonte's EPP allies and Irish independent Ronan Mullen failed to pass by varying margins, the closest falling short by three votes. Among the amendments that failed was language reaffirming the Cairo declaration's rejection of abortion as a method of family planning.

Many EPP members did not support Volonte's amendments and joined the socialists bloc, voting to accept the recommendation in its entirety. Internal opposition was led by France's Mignon and Holland's Corien Jonker, a favored candidate of social liberals within the EPP and an abortion-rights sympathizer.

Despite the evident split between EPP party members who adhere to the bloc's founding principles and those that want to blur distinctions from progressive parties, the week closed with a victory for those who favor less activism from European institutions. Guido Raimondi was elevated to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), filling Italy's seat and replacing a social liberal. Raimondi, a practicing Catholic, is respected across ideological lines for his past representation of Italy in front of ECHR and service as a legal adviser to the International Labour Organization. He also has been a noted jurist on the Court of Cassation, Italy's court of last resort on issues other than those calling for constitutional interpretations.

This article reprinted by LifeSiteNews.com with permission from www.c-fam.org.

Contact: Piero A. Tozzi, J.D. and Emanuele Rizzardi
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: February 4, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

South Dakota Senate Rejects Effort to Undermine Embryonic Stem Cell Ban

South Dakota Senate Rejects Effort to Undermine Embryonic Stem Cell Ban

The South Dakota Senate voted down a bill Tuesday that would have sabotaged the state's ban on embryonic stem-cell research. 



The Senate rejected S.B. 74 by a 21 - 12 margin, after the bill was substantially revised to permit South Dakotans to access embryonic stem cell treatments approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The original bill intended to throw out South Dakota's ban on embryonic stem cell research and treatments entirely and replace it with a set of "ethical guidelines" by which research and treatments could be carried out.

The proposed legal restrictions included a ban on human cloning, but defined "human cloning" mainly in reproductive terms, leaving some ambiguity over whether scientists could perform human cloning for therapeutic purposes.

The bill also forbade the purchase or sale of "human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures," prohibited the creation of human embryos "by fertilization" for the sole purpose of ESCR, and required documented written informed consent.

However, the penalties for violating the law were criticized for being exceptionally light, especially considering the millions of dollars researchers have at their disposal. The bill stated that violators of the law would be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. In South Dakota, a Class 1 misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of "one year imprisonment in a county jail or two thousand dollars fine, or both."

The original bill also erroneously defined "stem-cell research" to apply only to stem-cell research derived from human embryos, to the exclusion of adult stem-cells or stem-cells derived from umbilical cord blood. The latter two forms of stem-cell research are considered free of the ethical problems that dog ESCR, and unlike ESCR have delivered a host of scientifically proven therapies and cures.

But after enduring blistering testimony on the failure of ESCR to provide any practical results, especially in comparison to proven therapies that do not have ESCR's ethical baggage, the Senate Health and Human services gutted the bill.

Bob Ellis, a writer for the conservative Dakota Voice explained that "the original bill had been a direct assault on the ban on ESCR. However, it became apparent from the damning scientific testimony before the Health and Human Services Committee against embryonic stem cell research and for adult stem cell research that the bill was about to go down in total flames."

"The prime sponsor Senator Ben Nesslhuff then offered to gut the bill and replace the outright attack on the ban with a much weaker measure which might serve as a 'foot in the door' to get the results of ESCR into the state," he explained.

The amended bill instead read only that "nothing in this chapter prohibits the use of any Food and Drug Administration approved treatments derived from or involving human embryonic stem cells."

The committee then approved the bill 4-2 before handing it off to the South Dakota legislature where it was handily rejected.

The Associated Press reports that former state Treasurer David Volk of Sioux Falls had suspended a petition drive to put the state ban on the November ballot for public vote, while the legislature debated the issue. However, he may now revive those efforts.

But South Dakota appears likely to benefit from steering clear of ESCR, if the experience of the near-bankrupt State of California offers any lesson. Back in 2004, California's government pumped $3 billion into research at California's Institute for Regenerative Medicine, seeking some medical use for stem cells harvested from human embryos, which are killed in the process.
 
However after years of fruitless work and facing the prospect of total failure, the Institute has now quietly diverted funds away from ESCR to adult stem cell research – which has already produced at least 73 documented therapies and cures for maladies ranging from spinal cord injury, to Alzheimer's, to Type I diabetes.

Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: February 4, 2010
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY

Americans United for Life Defends Arizona's Informed Consent Law

 

Attorneys with Americans United for Life filed a brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that Arizona's 2009 informed consent law is a constitutionally-appropriate expression of the state's legitimate interest in safeguarding the health of women considering abortions.

"Abortion providers in Arizona are making it clear that they aren't protecting women's health," noted AUL's lead attorney Mailee Smith, "rather their priority is getting paid."
Click here for the entire article from Americans United for Life.


Personhood Amendment Filed in Iowa



A House Joint Resolution (HJR 2003) was filed in the Iowa House today by 16 Representatives.  It proposes an amendment to the Iowa Constitution to specify that the right of life is paramount and most fundamental right of every person (I seem to remember reading that in one of our founding documents, hmmmm…).  This calls for personhood to be applied to all human beings regardless of where they are at in their biological development.

This resolution addresses the fundamental question in the abortion debate, all others are peripheral, when does life begin?  If personhood, if life begins at conception, there is no reasonable argument that justifies abortion.  Personhood matters.
Click here for the entire article from Caffeinated Thoughts.


Abortion supporters Want 'Choose Death' Specialty License Plate



Richmond, VA -- Last year's anti-abortion "Choose Life" specialty license plate could soon have its political counterpoint in aluminum: A "Trust Women/Respect Choice" license plate. The Senate Transportation Committee yesterday heard testimony from abortion-rights groups seeking approval of Senate Bill 704. It would provide the same revenue-sharing opportunity to Planned Parenthood that is enjoyed by the anti-abortion group that benefits from the proceeds of the "Choose Life" plates. "It's unfair to have just one viewpoint expressed," said Sen. Janet D. Howell, D-Fairfax, who sponsored the legislation -- one of six specialty license plate bills that the panel considered. It has not voted on any.
Click here for the entire article from the Richmond Times-Dispatch.


Military Bases to Offer 'Abortion Pills' Abroad

The Pentagon for the first time will require military bases worldwide to offer emergency contraception or the so-called morning-after pill (Bush's Plan B Abortion Pill at taxpayer expense), a military spokeswoman said Thursday. The decision follows a recommendation by an independent panel of doctors and pharmacists in November, said Defense Department spokeswoman Cynthia Smith. The panel determined that emergency contraception should be added to the military's list of medications that must be stocked at each military facility. Over much resistance from abortion opponents, the Food and Drug Administration approved the over-the-counter sale of the morning-after pill to adults in 2006. The drug, which contains a high dose of birth control pills, can be used to prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex by blocking ovulation or fertilization. Critics of the contraceptive say it is the equivalent of an abortion pill because it can prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.
Click here for the entire article from Associated press via MSNBC.


Adult Stem Cells May Reverse Heart Attack Damage
 


Adult stem-cell therapy continues to prove useful for treating heart disease patients, according to researchers at the Interdisciplinary Stem Cell Institute at the University of Miami's Miller School of Medicine.

The study found that injecting stem cells into patients within 10 days of a heart attack could repair heart damage.

Researchers said it could be several years before there are federally approved cardiac stem-cell therapies.
Click here for the entire article from CitizenLink.


Tebow ad another reason pro-choice is losing



Why are groups such as the National Organization for Women (NOW), the Feminist Majority Foundation, the Women's Media Center, and numerous "pro-choice" groups apoplectic over a Super Bowl commercial sponsored by Focus on the Family?

The "pro-choice" movement knows they are losing and that ultrasound machines and commercials like the Tebows' are confronting the country with the undeniable humanity of each unborn child, just as Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin put a human face on the three-million slaves in America, thus hastening their liberation.
Click here for the entire article from OneNewsNow.