The Right to Life
450 Maple Avenue East * Vienna, Va. 22180 * 703-938-9626
|Roll Call Votes on abortion and other issues | Watch Pro-Life Videos at our Channel |GOP Betrayals | GOP Leadership|
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of December 31, 2009
CATHOLIC BISHOPS FACILITATED OBAMACARE
"A lot is being said and written about why national health care legislation is becoming a reality. The simple fact, available for all to see, is that the U.S. Catholic Bishops ensured passage of the bill in the House, enabling the Senate to move forward with its version."
IS HEALTH CARE A "RIGHT"?
"Like ‘progressive’ strategist Robert B. Creamer, the Bishops believe that health care is a right to be guaranteed by government. This position has driven the debate and has rarely been challenged by Republicans. The debate over abortion has been mostly a diversion. Perhaps it has been planned that way."
"MORALITY", NOT ABORTION, WAS THE OVERRIDING CONCERN
"As we were the first to disclose, Creamer, an ex-con and husband of Rep. Jan Schakowsky, emphasized using ‘the faith community’ to mobilize support for universal health care by highlighting the morality of providing medical care to people in need. His book, Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win, emphasized that ‘We must create a national consensus that health care is a right, not a commodity; and that government must guarantee that right.’ "
BISHOPS ECHOED THE RADICAL LEFT
"Now compare this to what the Bishops have said. ‘Our approach to health care is shaped by a simple but fundamental principle: "Every person has a right to adequate health care," ’ they say. They go on, ‘For three quarters of a century, the Catholic bishops of the United States have called for national action to assure decent health care for all Americans. We seek to bring a moral perspective in an intensely political debate; we offer an ethical framework in an arena dominated by powerful economic interests.’ "
A DISTORTION OF BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY
"Reform, the Bishops said, would ‘require concerted action by federal and other levels of government and by the diverse providers and consumers of health care. We believe government, an instrument of our common purpose called to pursue the common good, has an essential role to play in assuring that the rights of all people to adequate health care are respected.’ …"
REPUBLICANS FAILED TO CHALLENGE THE FALSE CLAIM
"Andrew P. Napolitano, the senior judicial analyst at the Fox News Channel, has written a very revealing article about what has been missing in the debate over health care. He writes, ‘In the continually harsh public discourse over the President’s proposals for federally-managed healthcare, the Big Government progressives in both the Democratic and the Republican parties have been trying to trick us. These folks, who really want the government to care for us from cradle to grave, have been promoting the idea that health care is a right. In promoting that false premise, they have succeeded in moving the debate from WHETHER the feds should micro-manage health care to HOW the feds should micro-manage health care. This is a false premise, and we should reject it. Health care is not a right; it is a good, like food, like shelter, and like clothing.’ Rights come from God, not government, Napolitano points out. …"
BISHOPS MOBILIZED $131 MILLION-PLUS AND THEIR 350 LOBBYISTS FOR OBAMACARE
"In short, the Catholic Bishops have emerged as a major ‘progressive’ force in the United States, determined to saddle the country with a socialized medicine scheme. The disagreements over abortion among the ‘Big Government progressives’ should not distract our attention from this basic fact. The Bishops also favor ‘climate change’ legislation and amnesty for illegal aliens.
"In addition to the lobbyists who were working on Capitol Hill, the bishops have a staff of 350 in Washington, D.C. and operate on a budget that was estimated back in 2002 at $131 million a year. By contrast, the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress operates on about $48 million a year." Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media, 12/23/09
OBAMACARE COULD MAKE UNCLE SAM DADDY TO YOUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS
"It’s funny, the things that never make the news. Take the recent amendment to the Senate health care plan by Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus (D-MT). This language allocates hundreds of millions of dollars of your money toward ‘Personal Responsibility Education for Adulthood Training.’ "
U.S. GOVERNMENT WILL USURP RESPONSIBILITY FOR TEACHING AMERICA’S CHILDREN
"What can this possibly mean? According to the amendment’s mostly vague language, $400 million from the years 2010 to 2015 will be spent on ‘evidence-based effective programs’ that will supposedly teach kids ‘healthy life skills,’ including things like ‘goal-setting, decision making, negotiation, communication and interpersonal skills, and stress management.’ This looks like standard Washington-speak: a great pile of words that mean whatever they need to mean."
THE "FACTS OF LIFE" – BIRDS, BEES, AND BUGGERY"That is, it looks that way until we get to the part of the amendment that deals with sex. Here we find reference to very specific ‘activities to educate youth who are sexually active regarding responsible sexual behavior.’ The amendment claims to implement ‘evidence-based effective programs ... that have been proven on the basis of rigorous scientific research to change behavior, which means delaying sexual activity, increasing condom or contraceptive use for sexually active youth, or reducing pregnancy among youth.’
"Here we come to the nub of the matter. The ‘personal responsibility education’ referred to in the Baucus amendment is actually sex education. The Senate health care plan is going to teach kids about sex. Graphically, and early. With heaps of tax dollars. …"
CONTRACEPTION AND ABORTION WILL BE CELEBRATED
"And what good is ‘abstinence education’ if contraception and abortion are being pushed right alongside it? Kids receive a mixed message. They are told, with a wink and a nod, that maybe they should abstain from sex, but the chances are that they simply can’t – and that no one really can. The past teaches us that ‘evidence-based’ or ‘comprehensive’ sex education is simply code for sexual education that treats sex as unavoidable, rather than a human choice. …
"William Smith, Vice President for public policy at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), congratulated the Senate for including in the health care bill a ‘new comprehensive sex education program for the states.’ ‘This is a huge step in putting evidence and common sense over hypermorality,’ he gloats." Source: LifeNews.com, 12/10/09, Colin Mason
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of May 15, 2007
SCOTUS RULING ON PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION UPHOLDS ROE v. WADE
“The April 18 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld Congress’ ban on ‘partial-birth abortion’ in Gonzales v. Carhart will not in and of itself prevent one late-term, partial-birth abortion.
“While the ruling, contrary to the media hullabaloo, upholds the court’s notorious 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, as did the bill itself passed by Congress, it only says that the federal government and the states may pass legislation declaring restrictions on this particular technique; that is, such restrictions are not unconstitutional.”
JUSTICE KENNEDY’S OPINION VALIDATES ALL OTHER ABORTIONS
“Simply put, Justice Anthony Kennedy, a former employee of the California Catholic Conference of Bishops, held that abortions of late-term babies can continue up to the moment of birth, and even the partial-birth abortion technique can be used, as long as the child is killed in utero. …
“[T]he fact remains that late-term abortions will be as available as before. The only difference now is that nurses assisting doctors performing the partial-birth abortion technique invented by former Catholic altar boy Dr. James T. McMahon (now buried in Holy Martyrs section of Holy Cross Cemetery in Los Angeles) will not have to watch the child squirm as it is pulled out of its mother.
“Kennedy wrote: ‘The [Partial-Birth Abortion ban] Act does not restrict an abortion procedure involving the delivery of an expired fetus. The Act, furthermore, is inapplicable to abortions that do not involve vaginal delivery (for instance, hysterotomy or hysterectomy). The Act does apply both previability and postviability because, by common understanding and scientific terminology, a fetus is a living organism while within the womb, whether or not it is viable outside the womb. See, e.g., Planned Parenthood, 320 F. Supp. 2d, at 971.972. We do not understand this point to be contested by the parties.
“ ‘Second, the Act’s definition of partial-birth abortion requires the fetus to be delivered, until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother §1531(b)(1)(A) (2000 ed., Supp. IV).”
PROHIBITIONS DO NOT APPLY
“ ‘The Attorney General concedes, and we agree, that if an abortion procedure does not involve the delivery of a living fetus to one of these anatomical “landmarks” where, depending on the presentation, either the fetal head or the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, the prohibitions of the Act do not apply.”
ABORTIONISTS WILL KNOW HOW TO AVOID VIOLATING THE ACT
“ ‘Third, to fall within the Act, a doctor must perform an overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. §1531(b)(1)(B) (2000 ed., Supp. IV). For purposes of criminal liability, the overt act causing the fetus’ death must be separate from delivery.
“ ‘And the overt act must occur after the delivery to an anatomical landmark. This is because the Act proscribes killing the partially delivered fetus, which, when read in context, refers to a fetus that has been delivered to an anatomical landmark. Ibid. …
“” ‘Fourth, … If a living fetus is delivered past the critical point by accident or inadvertence, the Act is inapplicable. In addition, the fetus must have been delivered for the purpose of performing an overt act that the [doctor] knows will kill [it].. Ibid. If either intent is absent, no crime has occurred….
“ ‘The Act provides doctors of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited…. The Act excludes most D&Es in which the fetus is removed in pieces, not intact. If the doctor intends to remove the fetus in parts from the outset, the doctor will not have the requisite intent to incur criminal liability. A doctor performing a standard D&E procedure can often tak[e] about 10-15 passes through the uterus to remove the entire fetus…. Removing the fetus in this manner does not violate the Act because the doctor will not have delivered the living fetus to one of the anatomical landmarks or committed an additional overt act that kills the fetus after partial delivery.’ …”
CHARLES RICE CONDEMNS THE RULING’S HYPOCRISY
“ ‘This ruling,’ said Notre Dame’s professor emeritus of constitutional law, Dr. Charles E. Rice, ‘is 1984 and it is grotesque. The decision does nothing to disturb the current rule that the unborn child is a nonperson with no right to life under the U.S. Constitution.
“ ‘All that was at stake here was a statutory restriction as to how that nonperson may be legally executed. The campaign to restrict partial-birth abortion did enhance public awareness of abortion but that campaign was and is a reflection of the bankruptcy of the pro-life movement.
“ ‘In any civilized society, the only coherent question is whether an innocent human being can be legally executed. The answer, obviously, is “no.” The establishment pro-life movement, by advocating a states’ rights approach and by advocating exceptions, has itself framed the issue not in terms of whether but in terms of which innocent human beings may be executed.
“ ‘The effort to restrict partial-birth abortions,’ he said, ‘frames the issue in terms of how these innocents may be legally executed.’ ” Source: Paul Likoudis, The Wanderer, 4/26/07, pp. 1, 7
CLAP WITH ONE HAND ONLY
“For the first time since Roe v. Wade the court has upheld a law banning a specific (and particularly heinous) abortion method. That result alone, however, does not amount to much.
“Abortion remains legal throughout pregnancy. A doctor performing late-term abortions still has two commonly-used methods to choose from — killing the child by tearing off her limbs piecemeal or injecting digoxin to cause a fetal heart attack while the child is still in the womb.
“Doctors now are simply foreclosed from intentionally delivering a living child partly outside the mother’s body before committing an act that kills the child.” Source: Susan E. Wills, National Catholic Register, 4/24/07
KENNEDY RULING PROTECTS ALL METHODS OF ABORTION, SAVE ONE
“Justice Kennedy has given new meaning to the aphorism that ‘anything worth doing … is worth doing badly.’ The decision Wednesday in Gonzales v. Carhart seems to have set off chains of euphoria – and alarm – in the land. The pro-lifers have shown a joy that is surely out of scale with the narrow, constricted opinion that sprang from the mean nature of Justice Kennedy.
“And the pro-choicers, wringing their hands, seem not to have noticed that Kennedy has so cabined the approval of this federal law on partial-birth abortion that the ‘abortion liberty’ seems to have been placed safely beyond challenge. As Kennedy was careful to assure his audience, the abortionist who goes merrily on his way dismembering a child – or, as he put it, the one who ‘disarticulates [a fetus] at the neck, in effect decapitating it’ – is safely insulated from any danger of prosecution: The abortionist simply needs to avoid that indelicate matter of having a substantial part of the child dangling outside the body of the pregnant woman as he inserts a scissor into the skull of the child or finds another way of killing it.”
MAJORITY OPINION AFFIRMS CASEY AND ROE
“Kennedy went out of his way to sound again the themes in the Casey case of 1992, in affirming Roe v. Wade. ‘We assume,’ he said, ‘the following principles for the purpose of this opinion’ – and then went on to list propositions that no one else among his colleagues in the majority is likely to accept. For example: that before the point of ‘viability’ a state may not prohibit a woman from making a decision to ‘terminate her pregnancy.’ Or that the state may not place an ‘undue burden’ on a woman seeking abortion. …
“Now Justice Kennedy insists, in the same way, that the bill does not diminish Roe v. Wade, and we wonder whether we should discount that flat assertion in the same way we did [solicitor general Paul] Clement’s [during his oral argument of the case in November]. But Kennedy, in control of the opinion, has acted precisely to foreclose virtually all piecemeal challenges to Roe. He has made it clear that the killing of the unborn can proceed almost wholly unchecked, as long as the grisly acts of dismembering or poisoning are taking place solely in the womb.” Source: Hadley Arkes (National Review Online), Ethics and Public Policy Center, 4/24/07
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of November 15, 2005
WALL STREET JOURNALSHOULD PRACTICE WHAT IT PREACHES
"The Wall Street Journal, which says it stands for ‘free markets and free people,’ takes $5 million from the federally-funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting to produce a weekly public-TV show called Journal Editorial Report. Still, it had the audacity to run a September 29 editorial denouncing former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay for not doing enough to cut back the size of the ‘federal Leviathan.’ The editorial griped about Republicans passing ‘a giant new Medicare entitlement,’ the prescription drug program. But there was no complaint about federal spending on public TV and radio. Isn’t that interesting?
"Whatever happened to ‘free markets and free people’ in the marketplace of ideas? Does it make any sense for the Journal, whose parent company is the multibillion dollar conglomerate Dow Jones, to take federal money?" Source: Cliff Kincaid,Media Monitor, www.aim.org, 10/27/05
SIR HARRY SKEWERS ESTABLISHMENT HYPOCRISY ON TEN COMMANDMENTS
"What is an Oxymoron? Definition: A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined. Example: ‘Oxymoron’ – Removing the Ten Commandments from the courthouse while making people inside the court swear to tell the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth, so help you God – while your hand is on the Bible!" Source: Sir Harry Schultz, Harry Schultz Life Strategies (HSL 650),email@example.com, 10/30/05, p. 12
BETRAYED BY THE BENCH
John Stormer’s newest book, BETRAYED BY THE BENCH, has just been released. The subtitle is: How Judge-made Law Has Transformed America’s Constitution, Courts and Culture." Other good books on the court problem published recently deal largely with symptoms. Some solutions proposed are good – but most require Constitutional Amendments which, humanly speaking, are almost impossible. BETRAYED BY THE BENCH takes a very different approach. Stormer challenges readers to examine what they can look to God to do through them.
Humanly speaking, according to Stormer, any realist evaluation of the influence exerted by the culture-shaping institutions shows there is no hope. Those who want to see America restored must relearn the Bible-based history of our political foundations and how they’re been betrayed. BETRAYED BY THE BENCH looks at that history. The book also examines how God has intervened twice in America’s history and turned the nation upside down morally and politically. The first time was the Great Awakening between 1740 and 1785 which preceded the War for Independence. A hundred years later God moved again.
BETRAYED BY THE BENCH also examines two 19th Century Academic theories (Hegel and Darwin) which people in key places have used to revolutionize the courts and culture. The book shows how the Biblically-based common law which protected the individual, his freedom and his property has been replaced by sociological jurisprudence and code law which bases law on the supposed needs of society as determined by social scientists. The book analyzes how the Court has used its misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment to negate the Ninth and Tenth Amendments and transfer control of education, voting, criminal justice, etc. from the States to Washington.
BETRAYED BY THE BENCH has unusual bipartisan endorsements. Phyllis Schlafly says BETRAYED BY THE BENCH is "must reading". Robert Baine was the Democrat candidate for attorney general of Missouri in 1980. John Ashcroft defeated him. Baine, who has argued and won before the U.S. Supreme Court, says:
In 50 years as an attorney, I’ve observed what court decisions have done to our constitutional heritage and culture. I’ve read the books about what courts have done and are doing now. My experiences and the books I read combine to produce the depressing thought that there is no real remedy. However, John Stormer’s book, BETRAYED BY THE BENCH, has given me a glimmer of hope. Every citizen should read it --- particularly those in law, in education, and the clergy.
Dr. D. James Kennedy says, "BETRAYED BY THE BENCH is a book which every American should read … I heartily recommend it …"
BETRAYED BY THE BENCH is priced at $26.95 plus $3.00 for shipping and handling. However, those who mention the Howard Phillips newsletter can buy single copies for $25 or five copies for $100, all postpaid. The book is available from Liberty Bell Press, P.O. Box 32, Florissant MO 63032.
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of May 30, 2005
PRESIDENT BUSH DEMONSTRATES SUPPORT FOR "OVER-THE-COUNTER" SALES OF "MORNING AFTER" ABORTION PILLS
"The President’s choice to head the Food & Drug Administration (F.D.A.) ‘offered assurances to liberals’ during his recent Senate confirmation hearing, reports Focus on the Family’s Family News in Focus ‘that the process for approving over-the-counter sales of the "morning-after pill" is close to being complete.’ "
GWB’S FDA APPOINTEES ALSO PROMOTE RU-486
"Never mind that such a marketing scheme would fuel America’s epidemic of sexual promiscuity and all the social ills that flow from it. Never mind that one mechanism by which Barr Labs’ drug is believed by its developers to work is by making the womb inhospitable for an already conceived living human being. Never mind that the long-term effects of massive doses of hormonal contraceptives on the women – and girls – who use them is still unknowable. Never mind either that over-the-counter sales of the drug will abet the sexual abuse and rape of young girls by older men, who will, under the scheme proposed to the FDA, be perfectly free to pick up the powerful drug on the way to conquest.
"The FDA has yet to award Barr Labs its long-sought over-the-counter marketing clearance. Those concerned about the implications can still write and call the FDA at 5600 Fishers Ln., Rockville, MD 20857 or via the agency’s Internet website at www.fda.gov or via telephone at 1-301/827-2410." Source: Life Advocacy Briefing #12-12, 3/28/05
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of May 15, 2005
BUSH NAMES PRO-ABORT TO BE U.S. AMBASSADOR TO OSCE
"President Bush has announced his intention to nominate Julie Finley, a strong pro-abortion advocate, as U.S. Ambassador to The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
"The OSCE is engaged in setting standards in fields including human rights and humanitarian concerns as well as military security, and economic and environmental cooperation. In addition, the OSCE undertakes a variety of preventive diplomacy initiatives designed to prevent, manage and resolve conflicts within and among the participating states.
"Because of on-going attempts to promote taxpayer funding of abortion and the distribution of abortion causing drugs overseas, we are concerned that, given her history of support for liberal abortion policies, she will be able to promote her pro-abortion views through the OSCE.
"Julie Finley has served on the advisory board of the Republican Coalition for Choice, which works to remove the pro-life plank from the Republican National Platform. She is a founding member of The WISH List, a Political Action Committee that has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for pro-abortion-choice Republican women candidates since its inception in 1992. She is a member of the Republican National Committee.
"Julie Finley is a major fundraiser for the Republican Party and has been recognized for her sizeable contributions with various appointments over the years. However, the position of Representative of the United States to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, with the rank of Ambassador, is the wrong message for the President to send, while talking at the same time about promoting a ‘culture of life’ in America." Source: Colleen Parro, Republican National Coalition For Life Fax Notes, 5/3/05
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of March 15, 2005
ALBERTO GONZALES PROMISES TO DEFEND ROE v. WADE AS BUSH’S ATTORNEY-GENERAL
"Bush’s Attorney-General-designate, Alberto Gonzales, one of his most trusted aides over the years, said the following in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee: ‘Thank you, Senator. Of course, the Supreme Court has recognized a right of privacy in our Constitution, and in Roe the court held that that right of privacy includes a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion. A little over a decade ago, the court, in Casey, had an opportunity to revisit that issue. They made a – they declined to overturn Roe, and of course made a new standard that any restriction that constituted an "undue burden" on a woman’s right to choose could not be sustained. My judgment is that the court has had an opportunity – ample opportunities – to look at this issue. It has declined to do so. And as far as I’m concerned, it (Roe versus Wade) is the law of the land and I will enforce it.’ " Source: Thomas Droleskey, Ph.D., The Remnant, 2/15/05, pp. 10, 11
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of February 28, 2005
U.N. USES TSUNAMI AID TO PROMOTE ABORTION
"The United Nations Population Fund, the UNFPA, is calling for US $28 million in donations to re-establish ‘reproductive health services,’ in the Tsunami-stricken regions of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and the Maldives, according to a UNFPA press release published Thursday."
FREE CONDOM DISTRIBUTION ALSO SUBSIDIZED
"The Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute Friday Fax further clarified that ‘According to UNFPA’s Reproductive Health in Emergency Situations manual, the "reproductive health needs" of refugees include "guaranteeing the availability of free condoms." Indeed,’ the C-FAM Friday Fax continues, ‘UNFPA’s website says that "Free condoms are among the first reproductive health supplies to reach people caught in a crisis situation … UNFPA provides both male and female condoms in emergencies." ’
"The UNFPA has developed ‘reproductive health kits,’ developed for ‘the initial acute phase of the emergency,’ according to C-FAM. The kits include: ‘ "condoms," "oral and injectable contraceptives" including the abortifacient morning-after pill, and "IUD[s]." ’
"UNFPA, which claims to not be providing or promoting abortion services, also provides ‘manual vacuum aspirators, portable abortion devices that are easily used in primitive conditions such as refugee areas,’ in its kits." Source: LifeSiteNews.com, 1/6/05
WHY DOES BUSH AUTHORIZE TAX-SUBSIDIZED GRANTS FOR "FAMILY PLANNING PUBLIC EDUCATION"?
"Summary: The Office of Family Planning (OFP), Office of Population Affairs (OPA), announces the availability of fiscal year (FY) 2004 funds for a grant program for family planning public education and information conference support. Three to five grants will be awarded to provide partial support for non-Federal conference activities in topic areas relevant to the delivery of family planning services. Successful applicants will conduct public education and information activities (as part of a larger conference) that will enhance and support the mission of the Title X family planning program. …
"Through the support of conferences and meetings, including symposia, seminars and workshops (not as part of series) in the area of family planning research, education, program development and prevention application, OFP is meeting its overall training goals. OFP believes that conferences and similar meetings permit individuals who are engaged in family planning service delivery, related research, and policy to interact. This is critical for the development and implementation of effective family planning programs. …"
CONTRACEPTION AND ABORTION ON THE AGENDA
"Applications for conference support activities must address topic areas that are consistent with the goals and mission of the Title X family planning program and should reflect HHS’ Departmental Priorities. … Population specific issues in the delivery of family planning services – women’s reproductive health, men’s reproductive health, contraceptive updates, hard-to-serve populations, sexually active adolescents, or populations with Limited English Proficiency." Source: Department of Health and Human Services, "Funding Opportunity Title: Conference Support Grant Program for Family Planning Public Education and Information Activities", Federal Register, 5/7/04, p. 25585
DEMOCRATS SNOOKERED BUSH IN JUDGESHIP DEAL
"As I reported two days ago, the White House and Republican Senate leadership struck an agreement with Senate Democrats to move 25 ‘non-controversial’ judicial nominations to the Senate floor for confirmation."
A GIFT FOR ARLEN SPECTER
"I expressed concern over the agreement then as it did not include the more conservative nominees and largely removed judicial obstructionism as an issue for the 2004 elections. … One of the nominees, who incidentally was confirmed last night by the Senate 96-1, was supported by the National Employment Lawyers Association, a group joined by the ACLU, NOW Legal Defense Fund, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, and a long list of other anti-life, anti-family groups in opposition to a federal marriage amendment. This judge even publicly suggested renaming a district court building after Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), saying, ‘the judiciary and the cause of justice never had a better friend than Arlen Specter.’ This is the same Arlen Specter who votes consistently against pro-life legislation, including sponsoring a human cloning bill, defeated Judge Robert Bork as a Reagan nominee to the Supreme Court …."
PRO-ABORTION JUDGES NAMED BY A PRO-LIFE PRESIDENT
"Another nominee from the list of 25 has said publicly that she is a pro-choice feminist. The Association of the Bar of the City of New York rejected her nomination 45-1 out of concern for her judicial temperament which includes throwing a pen at a lawyer. Even some Senate Democrats oppose her out of concern for her judicial temperament, and yet it seems Senator Schumer (D-NY) has convinced the White House that the country would be well served by her confirmation. When the battle for our culture is played out in the courts, it is hard for me to understand how this administration can agree to the confirmation of such judges when other more qualified nominees languish without a vote because they are conservative." Source: Tony Perkins (President of Family Research Council), Washington Update, 5/21/04
SANTORUM AND BUSH BACKED GREATER EVIL IN PENNSYLVANIA
"The defeat of Representative Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) by militant pro-abortion Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) in a Republican Party primary in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, has sent many well-meaning people into something of a tizzy. …
"One of the standard canards of those who believe that we are going to improve our situation politically is that we have to accept the ‘lesser of two evils’…. This canard, invoked so mechanically and mindlessly by its adherents, has permitted the dose of the so-called ‘lesser evil’ to increase more and more with each election cycle. Professional politicians know this, which is why they know they can get away with giving pro-life voters only a few crumbs and some empty, if not contradictory, rhetoric to secure their votes. Even the canard of the ‘lesser of two evils,’ though, is stood on its head on occasion when someone alleged to be a friend of the babies, such as President George W. Bush and Senator Rick Santorum, call upon their supporters to listen to their seemingly infallible pronouncements and advice."
RICK AND GEORGE SUPPORTED THE MORE PRO-ABORTION CANDIDATE
"To wit, some of the very people who incant the slogan of the ‘lesser of two evils’ voted for the greater of the two evils in the Specter-Toomey race, Arlen Specter, because men in whom they have falsely placed their trust urged them to do so. George W. Bush is not pro-life. He supports abortion in the cases of rape, incest, and alleged threats to a mother’s life. If he is not pro-life in all cases then one cannot assert that he is pro-life. He is simply less pro-abortion than someone who supports abortion in all circumstances. The same is true of Rick Santorum. If he understood the inviolability of all innocent human life, which he does not, then he would not have included a needless ‘life of the mother’ exception in the bill to conditionally ban partial-birth abortions. These two less pro-abortion politicians endorsed Specter, who is completely pro-abortion, choosing to work against a fellow partly pro-life/partly pro-abortion politician, Pat Toomey. If one wants to accept the ‘lesser of two evils’ slogan, then Toomey was the lesser of two evils. Does it not tell you something that two supposedly ‘pro-life’ politicians endorsed a man who is completely pro-abortion?"
BUSH CONSISTENTLY PREFERS THE PRO-ABORTION REPUBLICAN
"The Bush-Santorum endorsement of Specter should come as no surprise to anyone. Robert Novak noted in a column in February of 2003 that these two ‘pro-life’ icons were supporting Specter against Toomey, who was attempting to raise funds at the time for his primary race against Specter. This is not news. George W. Bush has raised funds and campaigned for militant pro-abortion Republican politicians such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, New York Governor George Pataki, the now embattled Connecticut Governor John Rowland, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger – and a whole host of others. Pro-abortion Catholic Republican Rudolph Giuliani is said to be his party’s keynote speaker at its national nominating convention at Madison Square Garden in the City of New York this September."
BUSH’S CLAIMS DEFY LOGIC, BUT ARE ACCEPTED BY CLERGY APOLOGISTS FOR GOP
"How can a man, namely, George W. Bush, claim that he is working in behalf of the culture of life and for the day when ‘every child will be welcomed in life and protected by law’ when he works to elect pro-aborts to serve in public office and appoints pro-aborts to the highest offices in his own administration? There is a disconnect here, people. Wake up. … Why do people like Father Frank Pavone and Austin Ruse and Deal Hudson and the sycophants at the National Right to Life Committee continue to be silent as this president campaigns for pro-aborts and funds contraceptive abortifacients here and around the world? Why have we not heard one word from these influential sources about the introduction of contraception as one of the first things that followed our troops into Afghanistan and Iraq? Are they afraid of losing their White House passes and photo opportunities?"
AS GOVERNOR, BUSH HAD A PRO-ABORT RECORD IN TEXAS
"Bush’s actions in the Specter-Toomey race are not atypical. He did the same in Texas, even going so far as to sign into law a bill that named a Houston highway after an actual baby-killer. He appointed pro-aborts to every level of the Texas judiciary. … [P]lease do not tell me that Bush just has to do these things. He chooses to do these things. … Working on behalf of Arlen Specter was a choice made to cooperate with evil. And there is no other way around it. The silence of those who like their ‘unprecedented access’ to the White House, replete with their White House passes and their egotistic photo opportunities, is reprehensible and misleads ordinary pro-lifers about the actual state of our situation. …"
BUSH IS THE ENEMY OF CONSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATISM
"George W. Bush, for instance, has governed in most instances as a liberal Republican, which should not surprise anyone since that is his family’s heritage. He has been a big-spending liberal on unjust entitlement programs (most of which would be totally unnecessary if contraception and abortion and divorce and sodomy had not helped to undermine the integrity of the family). He has failed to protect American borders from an influx of illegal immigrants, doing so for two reasons: to curry favor with Spanish-speaking voters and to pay off political debts to the corporate barons who profit from the sweat of illegal immigrants. He has, as noted above, campaigned actively for pro-aborts in his own political party, and he takes a Wilsonian view of the world, believing that American ‘democracy’ is the salvation of all nations…. His obsession with Iraq has needlessly cost the lives of American service personnel and civilians and piled up debts that will enslave future generations of our citizens while the real threat to American security, Red China, is treated with complete magnanimity. … He is not our friend. Indeed, it is my belief he has been one of the worst presidents in the history of this country. …"
DEMS AND GOPS BOTH LEAD IN THE WRONG DIRECTION
"[T]he [Supreme] Court will remain in the hands of the pro-aborts no matter who is elected. Democrats will block Bush nominees who are pro-life; Republicans will do with a ‘President’ Kerry’s Supreme Court nominees what they did with Bill Clinton’s: confirm them in overwhelming numbers in order to curry favor with ‘moderate’ voters and to show how ‘bi-partisan’ they are. …
"The quintessential American questions that I always get asked is this: ‘Well, what are we going to do? Who should we vote for?’ My non-infallible prudential judgment remains the same now as it has been since 1996: we should cast a vote of conscience and rest comfortably after casting it.… There will be completely no-exceptions candidates on at least one minor party line (the Constitution Party)." Source: Thomas A. Droleskey, PhD, The Remnant, 5/15/04, pp. 1, 11, 12
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of May 31, 2004
WHY DOES PRESIDENT BUSH USE YOUR TAX DOLLARS TO FUND PRO-ABORTION ACTIVISTS?
"FRC [the Family Research Council] has learned that three government agencies are promoting the abortion industry at a conference this summer in Washington D.C. with you and I picking up the tab. As another slap in the face to pro-life Americans, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) are ‘platinum sponsors’ for the ‘Youth and Health: Generation on the Edge’ conference, featuring the International Planned Parenthood Federation, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and MTV. …
"[T]he government is rolling out the red carpet for these groups and MTV to hold sessions on: ‘working with a faith-based organization to improve adolescents’ access to sexual and reproductive health services,’ sexual and reproductive health for pre-adolescent girls, and ‘young people creating animated films on sex and sexuality for use in schools and the community.’ I wonder if MTV will have Janet Jackson speak to the young people about modesty." Source: Tony Perkins, Washington Update, 4/15/04
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of July 15, 2002
GWB AUTHORIZES USE OF ABORTED BABIES FOR NAZI-STYLE RESEARCH
"During the campaign, candidate George W. Bush told the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I oppose using federal funds to perform fetal tissue research from induced abortions. Yet the Chicago Tribune reported on Sunday that in May the administration quietly approved such research. The National Institutes of Health now can conduct research on aborted fetuses up to eight weeks after conception. The administration pleads that its hands are tied by a 1993 law. But if this is so, then why the secrecy? FRC today sent a letter to President Bush expressing our dismay and urging him to repeal this unwise decision. As the president said in his stem cell speech last August, even noble ends do not justify any means. Using aborted fetuses for research provides a perverse incentive for abortions and legitimates the killing of the innocent unborn after the fact. We urge President Bush to reconsider and repeal this unconscionable decision. FRCs letter to the president can be viewed on our web sitewww.frc.org." Source: Ken Connor, President, Family Research Council, Washington Update, 7/9/02
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of May 15, 2002
AT LEAST ANDREA YATES LET HER CHILDREN LIVE FOR AWHILE OUTSIDE THE WOMB BEFORE SHE KILLED THEM
"Andrea Yates is in prison today because she drowned her five children in a bathtub. Commentators say Yates was crazy, and medical records indicate as much. Perhaps she was nuts perhaps. But while the major media bemoaned Yatess crime, they didnt touch the topic so related to this case: abortion. For if Yates was psychotic, then what of the parents who kill their children every day by abortion? Are they sane and Yates sick?"
IF MENTAL ILLNESS SUCCEEDS IN YATES DEFENSE, MAY IT BE CLAIMED BY MOTHERS WHO COMMIT ABORTION?
"To raise that point, of course, would help the scales fall from peoples eyes. It would help reveal that Americas courts, her Congress, and her president are morally complicit in the killing of children. Thats why the critics didnt raise the issue. After all, America the land of choice celebrates a womans right to kill her children. Americans have the freedom to kill their babies. And no one in the major media or among the cultural elite wants that freedom to go away.
"On June 20, 2001, Andrea Yates, 37, married, evangelical, took her children, one by one, and drowned them in the bathtub. She held each childs head under the water as the child struggled to breathe and then stopped. After each child died she took him to the bedroom and placed a sheet over him. There was John, 5, Paul, 3, Luke, 2, Mary, 6 months, and Noah, 7. (Yates left Noah face down in the tub.) She then called the police and told them what she did. (Yates was convicted of murder on March 16, 2002, and sentenced to life in prison.)"
YOU HAVE TO BE "CRAZY" TO KILL YOUR OWN CHILDREN
"The news of the crime made headlines worldwide. It also spurred pundits, reporters, womens activists, and countless other elite analysts to comment on the killing. The message broadcast by commentators was, in general, that Yates was psychotic. Only a crazy mother would kill her own children, right? Heres what some of the media said:
Killing kids: the horror is unimaginable. [W]hat rational reason can there ever be for killing a child? Calgary Herald
Yates bewildered and saddened the world by murdering her children. Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Now "a nation ponders its method of coping with madness. Yatess case has put the insanity defense itself on trial. No one disputes that the young mother was suffering from mental illness when she drowned her five children in the familys Houston home. [T]hose whose lives have been forever changed by this tragedy pray that from their anguish may come heightened awareness and change. -- Newsweek
Andrea Yates and the Idea of Moral Blindness; An Act So Heinous Murdering Your Five Children Defies Comprehension. If Shes Not Insane, Could Another Defect Explain Her Crime? Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
A mother killing her child is nature upended, a reversal of instinct, a violent challenge to the natural order of things. Her trial offered a glimpse into a complicated, gruesome landscape, a dark corner of human behavior that always defies explanation and never ceases to horrify. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
The case "generated much awareness and discussion of the nature of post-partum illnesses, schizophrenia and even filicide the troubling phenomenon in which parents kill their own children. It became a symbol for both victims and womens right groups. [I]f just one person is moved to action by the inconceivability of what this loving Houston mother did to her five children in June those children will not have drowned utterly in vain. The Baltimore Sun
"From office water coolers to colleges and churches, the case has raised daunting questions that remain unsolved. They range from the definition of a victim; to the responsibilities of spouses, clergy, and doctors; to the laws ability to address mental illness justly." Boston Globe
"There need to be some changes in the law. Anyone that has been exposed to mental illness knows what this is all about." National Organization for Women
"How free is the will of someone who is seriously psychotic? Guilt presupposes free will. Did Andrea Yates really have it?" Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post Writers Group"
KILLING OF UNBORN CHILDREN SEEN AS "RATIONAL", KILLING OF POST-PARTUM CHILDREN SEEN AS "IRRATIONAL"
"Indeed. If Yates did not freely and willfully murder her children, she must have been crazy right? Only psychos kill their own kids. A mother killing her child is nature upended, a reversal of instinct, a violent challenge to the natural order of things, the media tell us. A sane person has free will. Sane people dont murder their own children unless, of course, theyre freely and willfully choosing to do evil. And thats wrong. That is murder, by legal definition. That is an act so heinous that it defies comprehension, say the cultural elite.
"But they dont say the same thing about abortion. They dont see the free-will decision to murder children by abortion as heinous, as nature upended. In fact, the major media and intelligentsia tell us that abortion is a rational and reasonable choice for many mothers. Some parents may not be able to afford a child. Or the child may interfere with their career, or their lifestyle. And some parents just dont want kids. (They want sex but not kids.)"
ARE OUR PRO-ABORTION POLITICAL LEADERS INSANE?
"So, if a woman is pregnant and doesnt want the child, she should kill it. That is rational and sane right? Well, thats what the law says. Thats what President Bush and his wife say. Thats what most members of Congress and most judges say. And they, certainly, cant be insane."
MURDER BY CHOICE
"A recent poll by the Los Angeles Times shows that 43% of Americans support Roe v. Wade. They support abortion on demand at any time during a pregnancy, including at the moment of delivery. In addition, a little more than 50% of Americans support abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or when the mothers life is in danger. That same majority, however, also said that the decision to end a pregnancy should be left to a woman and her physician. In other words, while a little more than 50% of Americans oppose abortion except in certain cases, they say its okay if a mother really wants to kill her child; its her personal choice. A majority of Americans believe that a woman should have the freedom to kill her own child, or children, for that matter she may have as many abortions as she wants."
IS IT THE METHOD THAT MATTERS?
"Killing kids by drowning is wrong; killing kids by abortion is right. Saline injections, dilation and extraction, vacuuming out body parts, puncturing the skull and sucking out the brain all that is more humane than drowning, or so the government and the dominant culture would have us believe."
NO ATTENTION PAID TO THE THOUSANDS OF OTHER KIDS KILLED THAT DAY
"Andrea Yates may God have mercy on her killed her five children. Each child was a gift from God: a soul walking, playing, and laughing. The story is terrible. The story is a nightmare. And yet the same day that Yates killed her kids approximately 4,000 other children were slaughtered. Four thousand mothers kill their children every day in the United States almost 30,000 every week. More than 1.2 million kids are slaughtered by abortion every year in America. Since the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, more than 40 million children have been killed by abortion."
"BIRTH CONTROL" BY ABORTION
"And why are the children murdered? According to available data, 95% of abortions are done as a means of birth control the kid got in the way of the mothers lifestyle. Only 3% of abortions are done because of the mothers health problems, 1% because of fetal abnormalities, and 1% because of rape or incest."
ABORTION IS RACIAL GENOCIDE OF BLACK AMERICANS
"Worldwide, there are about 126,000 abortions every day or 46 million every year. A holocaust of children. Its interesting to note that, statistically, the leading cause of death among blacks in America is abortion. Blacks make up 12% of the U.S. population yet they account for 35% of the abortions. Since 1973, more than 13 million black children have been murdered by abortion."
10 MILLION BLACKS WERE SLAVES. 12 MILLION AFRICAN-AMERICANS HAVE BEEN ABORTED.
"For comparison, about 10 million blacks total were enslaved in the United States. Abortion backed by the U.S. government, tax dollars, and the legal freedom to choose has slaughtered more blacks than any racist might imagine." Source: Michael Chapman, The Remnant, 4/30/02, pp. 1, 4
RIGHT TO LIFE SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED
Colleen Parro, director of the Republican National Coalition for Life, comments: "Imagine what Congress would be like today, had pro-life leaders conditioned their support for candidates of either party on a 100% respect for innocent human life from conception, no exception no compromise" Source: The Wanderer, 4/25/02, p. 7
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of April 30, 2002
IS THERE LIFE AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL?
"President Bush has named the executive vice-dean of the radiology department at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine to head the National Institutes of Health which funds more than 43,000 biomedical projects in the United States that employ more than 10,000 people.
"President Bush also nominated Dr. Richard Carmona of Tucson, AZ to fill the position of U.S. Surgeon General. When asked if both nominees share Bushs ethical opposition to human cloning and embryonic stem cell research, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer told reporters, Suffice it to say that these are administration appointees. They serve the president; they serve his policies and I dont think you would expect the president to appoint people who hold wildly different views than he does.
"What is troubling is Bushs own morally unacceptable position. He does not support experiments on human embryos, unless they were killed prior to October 10, 2001. Whats the difference when a developing baby is killed for his stem cells? Hes still very dead. The line has been crossed."
BUSH USES YOUR TAXES TO FUND EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH
"Now we have learned that the NIH has invited applications for grants to develop, conduct, evaluate, and disseminate short-term courses on laboratory research techniques for human embryonic stem cell lines. The courses should include hands-on experience to improve the knowledge and skills of biomedical researchers to maintain, characterize, and utilize human embryonic stem cells in basic research studies and be made available to investigators in research areas of interest to all of the institutes and centers of the NIH.
"WHY? Why is the Bush administration using our tax dollars to build a cadre of researchers who will become experts at human embryonic stem cell research and share their knowledge with their colleagues? This doesnt look like a project that has an end in sight. This looks just like what we said it was when the President announced his support of limited research on stem cell lines taken from tiny humans who had already been killed a beginning an opening of the door to a world we hoped we would never see.
"We invite you to take a look at the grant proposal yourself and see how the federal government is becoming complicit in developing better methods of dissecting these tiny humans.
"Read it at:http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-02-054.html" Source: Republican National Coalition For Life FaxNotes, April 2, 2002
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of December 31, 2001
BUSH GIVES CUSHY PATRONAGE JOB TO PRO-ABORT CLINTON HOLDOVER
"Another Clinton Holdover Re-appointed by Bush - Franz Leichter, who served 30 years in the New York Legislature, has been re-appointed to a position on the Federal Housing Finance Board on which he already serves, having been appointed to the Board by Bill Clinton in 1999. According to theSwarthmore Bulletin, Leichter exhibits pride when speaking of two legislative accomplishments that stand as bookends around his career. In 1970, a bill he introduced made New York the first state to legalize abortion. This was three years before the U.S. Supreme Courts Roe v. Wade decision and an extremely controversial move at the time - especially for a newcomer. "It was just the right thing to do," says Leichter of his pioneering effort. " Source: Republican National Coalition for Life FaxNotes, P.O. Box 618, Alton, IL 62002, 11/2/01
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of April 15, 2001
BUSHS "MEXICO CITY" ABORTION
POLICY DEPENDS ON WHAT THE MEANING OF "IS" IS
ABORTION AND ABORTION ADVOCACY WILL STILL BE FUNDED
Previously, your editor has pointed out that President G.W.B.s decision to restore the Reagan "Mexico City" policy, limiting the provision of your tax dollars flowing to overseas population control organizations was less significant than assumed by many well-intentioned pro-life leaders, in that, while the Bush policy does limit the direct use of U.S. subsidies to perform and promote abortion, nonetheless, the pro-abortion recipient organizations still get the money to which they are not Constitutionally or morally entitled, with these funds available to offset their other expenses, so long as the U.S. Treasury dollars are assigned to a separate bank account.
Now, in reviewing the policy as enunciated in the Federal Register (Vol. 66, No. 61, Thursday, March 29, 2001) Presidential Documents, "Memorandum of March 28, 2001: Restoration of the Mexico City Policy" over the signature of President Bush, it is clear that this is even less a pro-life victory than first believed.
"FAMILY PLANNING": YES, "ABORTION": NO --- WITH EXCEPTIONS
GWB: "The Mexico City Policy announced by President Reagan in 1984 required foreign nongovernmental organizations to agree as a condition of their receipt of Federal funds for family planning activities that such organizations would neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations .
"It is my conviction that taxpayer funds appropriated pursuant to the Foreign Assistance Act should not be given to foreign nongovernmental organizations that perform abortions or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations except as otherwise provided below...."
ABORTION FUNDING OK IF NOT "A METHOD OF FAMILY PLANNING"
"The recipient agrees that it will not furnish assistance for family planning under this award to any foreign nongovernmental organization that performs or actively promotes abortion as a method of family planning in USAID-recipient countries or that provides financial support to any other foreign nongovernmental organization that conducts such activities. For purposes of this paragraph (e), a foreign nongovernmental organization is a nongovernmental organization that is not organized under the laws of any State of the United States, the District of Columbia or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. ..."
FUNDING OF "POST-ABORTION" CARE IS AUTHORIZED
"Abortion is a method of family planning when it is for the purpose of spacing births. This includes, but is not limited to, abortions performed for the physical or mental health of the mother, but does not include abortions performed if the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or abortions performed following rape or incest (since abortion under these circumstances is not a family planning act)."
FUNDING OF POST-ABORTION SERVICES PERMITTED
"To perform abortions means to operate a facility where abortions are performed as a method of family planning. Excluded from this definition are clinics or hospitals that do not include abortion in their family planning programs. Also excluded from this definition is the treatment of injuries or illnesses caused by legal or illegal abortions, for example, post-abortion care. ..."
GWB: "SAFE, LEGAL ABORTION" REFERRAL IS PERMITTED
"([P]assively responding to a question regarding where a safe, legal abortion may be obtained is not considered active promotion if the question is specifically asked by a woman who is already pregnant, the woman clearly states that she has already decided to have a legal abortion, and the family planning counselor reasonably believes that the ethics of the medical profession in the country requires a response regarding where it may be obtained safely). "
GWB OKS ABORTION ADVOCACY IF "FAMILY PLANNING" PERSONNEL DO IT ON THEIR LUNCH HOUR
"Action by an individual acting in the individuals capacity shall not be attributed to an organization with which the individual is associated, provided that the organization neither endorses nor provides financial support for the action and takes reasonable steps to ensure that the individual does not improperly represent that the individual is acting on behalf of the organization. ..."
SEPARATE BANK ACCOUNTS FOR ABORTION AND CONTRACEPTION
"The recipient may request USAIDs approval to treat as separate the family planning activities of two or more organizations, that would not be considered separate under the preceding sentence, if the recipient believes, and provides a written justification to USAID therefor, that the family planning activities of the organizations are sufficiently distinct so as to warrant not imputing the activity of one to the other."
ALL U.S. FUNDS MUST BE CLEANLY LAUNDERED
"Assistance for family planning may be furnished under this award by a recipient, subrecipient or sub-subrecipient to a foreign government even though the government includes abortion in its family planning program, provided that no assistance may be furnished in support of the abortion activity of the government and any funds transferred to the government shall be placed in a segregated account to ensure that such funds may not be used to support the abortion activity of the government."
DUBYA SAYS USAID SUBSIDIES WILL FUND CHILD-SPACING ABORTIONS
"The requirements of this paragraph are not applicable to child spacing assistance furnished to a foreign nongovernmental organization that is engaged primarily in providing health services if the objective of the assistance is to finance integrated health care services to mothers and children and child spacing is one of several health care services being provided by the organization as part of a larger child survival effort with the objective of reducing infant and child mortality."
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of February 28, 2001
WOULD CONDI RICE AND COLIN POWELL BE "PRO-CHOICE" ON SLAVERY?
"Condoleeza Rice, Bush's much-expected pick as national security adviser, has described herself as reluctantly pro-choice.
" What if I described myself as reluctantly pro-slavery? [Douglas] Scott [President of Life Decisions International] retorted. I mean, we are all reluctant to make hard choices. ...
"Judie Brown of American Life League was blunt: Bush's pro-life honeymoon will end in divorce. He passed up an enormous opportunity to say something profound in his acceptance speech. Instead, says Brown, Gonzales as White House counsel is not pro-life. Rice is not held to a pro-life standard. Powell is pro-abortion. What is borne out in these appointments is that Bush is not truly pro-life. Presidents listen to their inner circle; Bush's actions contradict his rhetoric. Brown was particularly frustrated with Powell: The Secretary of State is in agreement with population control. He will oversee population-control dollars. American foreign aid comes under the auspices of the secretary of state." Source: Mary Jo Anderson, WorldNetDaily.com, 12/22/00
DNA DO NOT ABORT
"A contributor to the Free Republic web site recently had this to say: The DNA of a human fetus is not the same as the mothers DNA, so when the mother decides to get rid of a fetus she is not making a decision about HER body, but about another persons body, the fetus. It is a waste of time continuing the "when does life begin" argument because DNA is legally recognized as being the "fingerprint" of a specific human being. DNA is accepted as proof of who this person is, whether dead or alive. Life doesnt prove you are human, but DNA does. We should just establish through DNA testing that the body she wants to get rid of is not hers. Maybe DNA will come to mean Do Not Abort. Thank you to the FaxNotes subscriber who sent this to us. Source: Republican National Coalition for Life FaxNotes, 2/9/01
ARE GOP PLATFORMS LIKE PIECRUSTS, MADE TO BE BROKEN?
Virginia Governor and new Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Gilmore discussed abortion with host Tim Russert on NBCs Meet the Press (2/4/01):
TIM RUSSERT: "Let me show you the Republican Party platform on the very sensitive issue of abortion:
The unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendments protections apply to unborn children. Harry Truman said a partys platform is its contract with the people. Will the Republican Party you now have the Senate, the House and the White House work to enact a constitutional amendment to ban all abortion as promised in your platform?"
GOV. GILMORE: "I think the Republican Party is going to be able to find common ground on some of these areas for example, the issues of partial-birth abortion, the issue of full information to a woman so that she has the best ability to make those kinds of decisions. And I think that we will find some common ground on that in the Republican Party, but the Republican Partys a very diverse party. We have a lot of people in it with a lot of different points of view."
GILMORE NOT SURE IF PRO-LIFE PROMISES WILL BE KEPT
TIM RUSSERT: "But you wont keep your word on your platform?"
GOV. GILMORE: "Im not sure. Its up to the Republican chairman of the Republican National Committee to either keep or not keep that kind of word. What I do believe is that...
TIM RUSSERT: "Well, should you keep your word on the platform?"
GOV. GILMORE: "Well, what I believe is that the Republican Party is going to find common ground on the key issues, and thats where I think were going to head."
A PRO-LIFE COMPROMISE: RU-486 SHOULD KILL ONLY ONE PERSON AT A TIME
Life Advocacy Briefing #8-6 (2/12/01) points out that "Two U.S. lawmakers filed legislation Tuesday to add protections to federal rules governing administration of the abortion drug, RU-486, also known as mifepristone.
"HR-482 and S-251 were introduced, respectively, by Rep. David Vitter (R-LA) and Sen. Tim Hutchinson (R-AR), who introduced the same bill in the Senate last year as a twin to a House measure filed by then-Rep. Tom Coburn (R-OK), the Congressional pro-life leader on RU-486. The family physician returned to his Oklahoma practice full-time in January to fulfill a term-limit pledge."
DRUGS PURPOSE IS TO KILL
"The former chief of staff to Rep. Coburn, Michael Schwartz, told Life Advocacy Briefing last week the idea behind the proposal is to make sure, as long as RU-486 is legally available on the US market, that it kills only one person at a time. In his many efforts to block approval of RU-486, Dr. Coburn had emphasized it would be the only drug ever approved by the federal Food & Drug Administration (FDA) whose sole purpose is to kill a human being. "
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of October 15, 2000
CHENEY TILTS LEFT
CNN's Bernard Shaw moderated the Thursday, October 5 vice-presidential debate in Danville, Kentucky between Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and former Defense Secretary Richard Cheney. Excerpts follow (nytimes.com, 10/6/00).
CHENEY SAYS GOVERNMENT EDUCATION IS THE SOLUTION, NOT THE PROBLEM
BERNARD SHAW: "You alluded to problems. There's no magic bullet, Secretary Cheney, in this question to you, no magic bullets to solve the problems of public education but what's the next best solution?"
RICHARD CHENEY: "Well, I think public education is the solution. ..."
CHENEY BACKS RU-486
BERNARD SHAW: "Mr. Secretary, this question is for you. Would you support the effort of House Republicans who want legislation to restrict distribution of the abortion drug RU486?"
RICHARD CHENEY: "Bernie, the abortion issue is a very tough one, without question, and a very important one. ... With respect to the question of RU486, we believe that of course that it's recently been approved by the F.D.A. That really was a question of whether or not it was safe to be used by women. They didn't address the, sort of the question of whether or not there should or should not be abortion in the society so much as evaluate that particular drug. ... With respect to the RU486 proposal, at this stage, I haven't looked in particular at that particular piece of legislation. Governor Bush made it clear the other night that he did not anticipate that he would be able to go in and direct the F.D.A. to reverse course on that particular issue, primarily because as I say the decision they made was on the efficacy of the drug, not the question of whether or not we supported abortion."
GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS PUSH "MORNING AFTER" PILLS TO ELIMINATE EVIDENCE FROM THE "NIGHT BEFORE"
"'Maybe you've already gone back-to-school shopping with your kids. Well, Congress has taken one school supply off your list. It's called parental involvement. This time school clinics are giving it to students in caplet form. Known as the "morning-after" pill, it's a controversial drug that can be taken within 72 hours of sexual intercourse to either prevent or end a pregnancy. The bill would effectively take the "permission slip" out of your hands and give the pen to Congress. But although the Senate may sign the bill, parents, as taxpayers, are the ones signing the check. And like many other taxpayer decisions before, the check may as well be blank. Senator Helms said the government "[has] been given free reign to distribute to American school children whatever they so please."'"
PUBLIC EDUCATION THREATENS MODESTY, VIRTUE, CHASTITY, AND PARENTAL AUTHORITY
"'Most parents aren't aware that instead of sending their children to school, they're really sending them to a distribution center for free contraceptives. And now, thanks to this bill, they may not even be aware that their daughters are aborting a human life when they should be in geometry class. The pill, aside from destroying preborn children and encouraging promiscuity, is available without a parent's knowledge or consent! Americans need to "do their homework" before letting Congress and our schools do the parenting.'" Source: September 8, 2000 Radio Commentary of Freedom Research Council's Janet Parshall's Washington Watch.
Senator Jesse Helms has pointed out that "Planned Parenthood and its cronies have been given free reign to distribute to American schoolchildren whatever they so please -- to the point where schoolchildren are now being provided extremely controversial forms of contraception. And, in my judgment, this has gone on far too long."
29 GOP SENATORS SIDE WITH RED CHINA ON MANDATORY ABORTION
The Republican National Coalition for Life's FaxNotes (9/22/00) reports that "Pro-life Republicans Help Defeat Helms Pro-life Amendment to China Trade Bill - From now on, Communist China's trading status will not be scrutinized by Congress on an annual basis. Instead, China has permanent trading status as well as U.S. approval for its petition to join the World Trade Organization. No longer will China's persistent human rights abuses and military expansion be a potential obstacle to our consideration of China as a trading partner. Money talks, in this case very loudly."
CONGRESS SUPPORTS SLAVE LABOR OVER FREE LABOR
"American businesses are making a fortune on the backs of Chinese laborers who manufacture thousands of products dirt cheap which are then imported by the U.S. to be sold at highly inflated prices to American consumers. It is truly becoming difficult to find a product that is not labeled 'Made in China.'
"Pressure for passage of the China trade bill has been so great that an amendment (4128) to HR-4444 expressing the sense of Congress that the President should urge Red China 'to cease its forced abortion and forced sterilization policies and practices' and 'to cease detention of those who resist abortion or sterilization,' offered by pro-life stalwart Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) was defeated 53-43."
29 "PRO-LIFE" REPUBLICAN SENATORS VOTE FOR ABORTION
"Republican Senators...who voted against the Helms amendment were:
Allard, Bennett, Bond, Brownback, Chafee, Cochran, Craig, Crapo, Domenici, Enzi, Fitzgerald, Frist, Gramm (TX), Grams (MN), Grassley, Hagel, Hatch, Hutchison (TX), Lott, Lugar, Mack, McCain, Murkowski, Nickles, Roberts, Roth, Smith (OR), Stevens, Thomas."
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of September 15, 2000
MORE "FAMILY PLANNING" HAS NOT REDUCED ABORTION
Steven W. Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, points out (The Wanderer, 8/3/00, p. 6) that "Fully 94.8% of sexually active women in America are now either sterile or use some form of contraception -- yet the abortion rate has not changed significantly since 1975. ...
"Contraceptive use in developing countries has increased from about 8% of all couples in 1960 to about 60% of all couples in 1998. Yet the number of legal and illegal abortions worldwide continues to increase, reaching an estimated 55 million per year by the early 1990s according to the statistics provided by the International Planned Parenthood Federation. ... If contraceptives were truly the answer to reducing 'unwanted pregnancies,' we should have seen a drop or a leveling out in the number of abortions worldwide. Instead, the numbers continue to rise."
INTOLERANCE FOR THE PRO-FAMILY ETHIC
"The final reason that population control programs should be ended -- yesterday -- is straightforward: We as a people simply have no business telling families in the Third World how many children they should or should not have."
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of August 31, 2000
ORGAN DONORS ARE OFTEN ALIVE WHEN DECLARED DEAD
"Dead or Alive? Anesthesia Recommended for Organ Donors Thought to Be Dead. Some news that gives a shudder about organ donation has come from Britain. For a long time, anesthetists have debated whether people certified as 'brain dead' might experience pain during surgery to remove donated organs, done while their hearts are still beating."
ANESTHESIA NEEDED TO SMOTHER THE LIVING DEAD
"Now an editorial in Anaesthesia, the journal of the Royal College of Anaesthetists, has recommended that an anesthetic be routinely given during operations to remove a person's heart, lung, liver, and pancreas. Without sedation, such operations can bring troubling sights. Phillip Keep, a consultant anesthetist at the Norfolk and Norwich hospital says, 'Almost everyone will say they have felt uneasy about it.' 'Nurses get really, really upset. You stick the knife in and the pulse and blood pressure shoot up. If you don't give anything at all, the patient will start moving and wriggling around and it's impossible to do the operation.'"
PARTIAL DEATH ORGAN SNATCHING
"According to bioethics expert Gilbert Meilaender, cessation of heart and lung activity was the traditional criterion for determining when death occurs, but in 1968 a committee at Harvard recommended cessation of all brain activity as a criterion. The change allowed doctors to take organs from people whose heart and lungs were kept going mechanically, a process which protects the condition of the organs. However, a description like the one above stirs second thoughts about how best to treat 'patients.'" Family Research Council (Washington Update, 8/25/00)
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of March 31, 2000
TRENT LOTT IS A CULTURAL FOIL FOR PRO-ABORTION PROPAGANDISTS
TIM RUSSERT: "Who's going to win the Oscars?"
SEN. TRENT LOTT: "Well, I saw 'The Cider House Rules.' I enjoyed that tremendously."
TIM RUSSERT: "Best picture?"
SEN. TRENT LOTT: "It was great. Best movie."
(Transcript, Meet the Press, 3/26/00)
"THE CIDER HOUSE RULES" WAS CRAFTED TO LIMIT POPULAR OPPOSITION TO THE FOR-PROFIT SLAUGHTER OF UNBORN CHILDREN
Ed Vitagliano, News Editor of the American Family Association's Journal (April, 2000) puts Hollywood's culture of promiscuity in perspective: "Based on the John Irving novel of the same name, The Cider House Rules....focuses on Dr. Wilbur Larch, who cares for the children, and Homer Wells, the young man he has raised to help him.
"At the orphanage, Larch often delivers babies who are then put into the care of the orphanage staff. The doctor also frequently performs abortions and dumps the dead babies into an outside incinerator."
JOHN IRVING HAD A MESSAGE TO DELIVER
"The movie presents a clear, one-sided argument in favor of abortion. This is no surprise, since Irving intended such a message for his book, and was pleased to see the same message faithfully replicated in the film. In the novel, Larch says that abortion is as much 'the Lord's work' as delivering babies."
HE HAD "USEFUL IDIOTS" LIKE TRENT LOTT IN HIS SIGHTS
"Enamored with the potential power of the movie to change people's minds to a pro-abortion position, Irving has gone so far as to suggest that the two groups of people that most need to see The Cider House Rules are pro-life politicians 'and 12-year-old girls.' ..."
EVIL IS DISGUISED AS COMPASSION ---
"[I]n The Cider House Rules, Larch demonstrates no regret for the abortions he performs, and, in fact, the doctor is an unabashed evangelist for his trade. ..."
--- IN A WORLD WITHOUT GOD
"[I]n this world, man needs not consult with God about how he should live -- presumably because God 'don't live here.' It is the occupants of the cider house -- the humans living on planet earth -- who have the right to decide which rules will be obeyed. Consequently, man will decide who lives and who dies. ..."
ABORTION IS SATAN'S SACRAMENT
"The truly wicked core of this film's message is that the butchery performed by the abortionist is an act of beneficence. Abortion becomes a noble endeavor. The wickedness of murder has been transformed into a sacred act, and the sacred act of defending the innocent becomes iniquity. In Larch's mind, it is much more of a sin not to kill the unwanted, unborn child, than to kill.
"Only a devil could conceive of an ethic which insists that society spare children misery by killing them. Such logic, of course, is happily dreamt of in the minds of those who wield the butcher's knife, rather than in the minds of those who find themselves under it. ... The final stop for the dismembered remains of unwanted babies, the incinerator stands outside the orphanage like a ghastly sentinel of the grave. ..."
HOLLYWOOD IS BLIND TO THIS HOLOCAUST
"Once the intrinsic, God-ordained value of innocent human life has been stripped away, man is free to begin the process of re-categorizing people into valuable and nonvaluable. Who will be tossed into the latter bin? It's been done before -- with Native Americans, slaves, and Jews -- and it is done now with unborn children."
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of July 31, 1999
PRO-ABORTS DEFEATED DESPITE SUPPORT OF GOP CAMPAIGN CHIEF TOM DAVIS
Fortunately, an amendment by Connecticut Democrat Congressman Rosa DeLauro to H.R. 2490, Treasury-Postal Appropriations, was defeated 230 to 188 (Roll Call no. 301, 7/15/99). If it had succeeded, American taxpayers would have been required to indirectly pay for the cost of abortions performed on Federal employees, via their government-subsidized health insurance.
The bad news is that 28 House Republicans supported DeLauro in seeking to require you to underwrite the slaughter of unborn children.
These included Bass (N.H.), Biggert (Ill.), Boehlert (N.Y.), Bonilla (Tex.), Campbell (Calif.), Castle (Del.), Tom Davis (Va., Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee), Ehrlich (Md.), Foley (Fla.), Franks (N.J.), Frelinghuysen (N.J.), Gilman (N.Y., Chairman of the House International Relations Committee), Greenwood (Pa.), Horn (Calif.), Houghton (N.Y.), Johnson (Conn.), Kelly (N.Y.), Kuykendall (Calif.), Lazio (N.Y., potential GOP Senate nominee vs. Hillary Clinton), Miller (Fla.), Morella (Md.), Ose (Calif.), Porter (Ill.), Pryce (Ohio), Ramstad (Minn.), Roukema (N.J.), Shays (Conn.), and Sweeney (N.Y.).
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of June 15, 1999
BOB SMITH WINS FIGHT TO BLOCK MILITARY ABORTIONS
An amendment introduced by Senator Bob Smith (R-N.H.) to uphold current law and prevent taxpayer-funded abortions at military hospitals passed the Senate on May 26, 1999, by a vote of 51-49 (Roll Call no. 148).
Democrats who joined Smith in opposing abortions at military hospitals were John Breaux (La.) and Harry Reid (Nev.).
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of May 31, 1999
SOUTER'S PRO-ABORTION STANCE WAS KNOWN TO RUDMAN AND BUSH WHEN THEY PICKED HIM
Warren Rudman, in his book, Combat: Twelve Years in the U.S. Senate, acknowledges what no other member of his party in the U.S. Senate has been willing to publicly admit: that David Souter, Rudman's and, subsequently, Bush's candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court, was pro-abortion from start to finish.
TCC RESEARCHED THE FACTS AND DELIVERED TO GOP SENATORS INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE OF SOUTER'S SUPPORT FOR ABORTION
Here is what Rudman had to say: "Howard Phillips, chairman of the Conservative Caucus, opposed the nomination, citing the fact that David, as a board member of the Concord Hospital, had participated in unanimous decisions to permit abortions there. ..."
GOP SUPREME COURT JUSTICES KENNEDY, O'CONNOR, AND SOUTER SAVED ROE V. WADE
"But perhaps the best ending to this story is a scene in a railroad station in Wilmington, Delaware, on Monday, June 29, 1992.
"That was the day the Supreme Court announced its long-awaited decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the case in which the pro-life forces had hoped to muster five votes to overturn Roe v. Wade. Four votes were there, those of Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices White, Scalia and the most recent addition to the court, Clarence Thomas. To form a majority, they needed only one vote from the centrist trio of Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter, and past votes by Kennedy and O'Connor had suggested that either might help overturn Roe."
SOUTER BECAME THE PRO-ABORTION LEADER
"Instead, Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter signed an unprecedented three-person opinion, joined by Justices Blackmun and Stevens, that dramatically reaffirmed Roe. In court that morning, each of the three read aloud a segment of the joint opinion.
"There was little doubt that David had been the catalyst who had drawn O'Connor and Kennedy to the defense of Roe, or that he was the principal author of the eloquent statement on stare decisis that was the heart of the opinion."
GOP PRESIDENTS NAMED PRO-ROE MAJORITY
Justice Blackmun was appointed by President Nixon, Justice Stevens by President Ford, Justices O'Connor and Kennedy by Ronald Reagan, and David Souter by George Bush -- five pro-Roe Republican appointees whose selections betrayed the GOP's pro-life supporters. In baseball, after three strikes, you're called out. When you strike out five times, it's time to surrender your place to others -- who will deliver.
THE REAL "FAMILY PLANNING" AGENDA: STERILIZATION OF WOMEN
Life Advocacy Briefing #6-19 for May 17 reports that "An astonishing call was issued last week by Werner Fornos, notorious president of the pro-abortion Population Institute, during a preparatory conference for the UN's review of the Cairo action plan on population and development.
"'Complain[ing] that the Cairo+5 debate has not centered more on finding cheap ways to sterilize women in the developing world,= reports Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute director Austin Ruse in CAFHRI's Friday Fax, '...[Mr.] Fornos called for the use of the controversial drug Quinacrine.'"
WILL ACID BE USED TO DESTROY THE WOMB?
"The vaginally inserted pellet, which acts, notes Mr. Ruse, 'by burning [a woman's] fallopian tubes and upper uterus with acid,' is such an offensive product that it has been banned in the US and was declared unsafe by the World Health Organization in 1993.
"Overseas peddling of the poison by two North Carolina men was the subject of an extensive Wall Street Journal expose last year, leading to a supposed crackdown on its manufacture."
QUINACRINE IS DEADLY MEDICINE
"'The spread of Quinacrine internationally has come mainly from two US researchers who are funded by American anti-immigration and population control groups,' reports Mr. Ruse. 'Stephen Mumford and Elton Kessel, each long ago fired from the contraceptive research group Family Health International, are said literally to carry briefcases full of the pellets to small villages in poor countries all over the world. ... The attraction of [using Quinacrine] is that it can be performed without advanced training and the pellets cost only a penny apiece.
"'Short term medical consequences,' says Mr. Ruse, 'include abnormal bleeding, backaches, fever, lower abdominal pain and headaches. Independent laboratory studies,' warns Mr. Ruse, 'show long-term side effects could include cancer.' Friday Fax quotes Dr. Mohan Rao, 'chairman of the Center of Social Medicine and Community Health in India, [who] says the method "has a barbaric history going back to the Nazi concentration camps."'
"Yet Mr. Fornos insists on Quinacrine as '"a medical priority,"' reports Mr. Ruse, and insists, says Friday Fax: '"Quinacrine has already been proven a safe drug, one used by soldiers in World War II. ..."'
"Lest anyone think Mr. Fornos will be dismissed for his quackery, Mr. Ruse notes 'that the chairman of the Cairo+5 process, Amb. Anwarul Chowhury of Bangladesh, serves on [Mr.] Fornos's board of directors.'"
Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues & Strategy Bulletin of April 30, 1999
"LEGALIZED" ABORTION IN USA AND RED CHINA
HAS KILLED MORE HUMANS THAN SLOBODAN MILOSOVEC
MILLIONS OF SOULS FORCIBLY REMOVED FROM THEIR MOTHERS' WOMBS
Isn't it time to stop the "ethnic cleansing" of millions of unborn children in China, or indeed, for that matter, the United States?
When it comes to Serbia's oppression of Kosovo, the number of souls involved is fewer than 3 million, but scores of millions of souls in America and other NATO countries have not only been victimized in the wombs of their mothers, they have had their very lives taken from them. And if enormity of evil counts for anything, isn't Beijing a more appropriate target than Belgrade?
Copyright © 2011 - 1999 Policy Analysis, Inc. All rights reserved.