from Gateway Pundit by Gateway Pundit
President Barack Obama, first lady Michelle Obama and Pope Benedict XVI stand for a photo with members of the United States delegation, Friday, July 10, 2009, at the Vatican. (AP) A year ago Obama told Pastor Rick Warren that he wasn't sure at what point a baby gets human rights.It was above above his paygrade.But that was last year.A funny thing happened after the election.Obama suddenly figured it out.
Already this year, Barack Obama has signed several pieces of abortion legislation including funding foreign abortions. He also signed legislation to use taxpayer money to kill embryos in research. And, democrats are pushing legislation that will force healthcare providers to perform abortions even if it violates their moral or religious convictions.Barack Obama is the most radical pro-abortion and infanticide president in the last 35 years. Barack Obama even voted 4 times to support infanticide during his political career.But, that didn't stop Barack Obama from promising Pope Benedict last week that he would reduce abortions.Obama lied to the Pope.Life News reported, via Free Republic: read the rest HERE at Gateway Pundit
Friday, July 17, 2009
Taxpayer Funding for Abortion: Another Sleeper Issue in Health Care Reform?
from The Foundry by Randy Pate
Much of the controversy in President Obama and congressional Democrats’ health care overhaul thus far has focused on the public option and concerns with the budget-busting price tag. But as negotiations in Congress on hundreds of pages of complex legislative text continue to move at break-neck pace, all leading up to floor consideration scheduled in the next few weeks, the issue of taxpayer funding for abortion is threatening to take center stage.
Just before Congress broke for the 4th of July recess, nineteen Democrat members of the House sent a sternly worded letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, warning that “we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan.” read the rest HERE
Much of the controversy in President Obama and congressional Democrats’ health care overhaul thus far has focused on the public option and concerns with the budget-busting price tag. But as negotiations in Congress on hundreds of pages of complex legislative text continue to move at break-neck pace, all leading up to floor consideration scheduled in the next few weeks, the issue of taxpayer funding for abortion is threatening to take center stage.
Just before Congress broke for the 4th of July recess, nineteen Democrat members of the House sent a sternly worded letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, warning that “we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan.” read the rest HERE
Monday, July 6, 2009
New Stanek WND column, "Abortion vs. cat 'murders'"
By jill stanek
... In April someone began mutilating and killing cats in 2 Miami-Dade neighborhoods. The outcry with demands to make it stop were instant.
Animal cruelty is despicable. Only sick people hurt and kill defenseless animals. That's how Jeffrey Dahmer got his start.
But knowing the same sorts of torturous acts are committed every day against human beings in at least 25 Miami area abortion clinics with no public protest makes me a little crazy. These would include... an abortion survivor who was suffocated in a plastic bag and thrown on the clinic roof for a week until he was so infested by maggots he couldn't be properly autopsied....
Mainstream media accounts attempting to humanize, dramatize and describe the cat killings in contrast to how they attempt to dehumanize, sanitize and obfuscate abortion make me a little crazy. Some excerpts:
"At a news conference... city and county leaders... reassured the community that the 'reign of terror' was over." (CBS)
"... the killing spree..." (KPLG)
"... [M]y heart goes out to those families who have lost their dear kitties 'cause I understand that pet owners feel very strongly about their little family members.... To see them so violated and so mutilated just defies all common sense and is painful for everyone involved. Thankfully... the terror has come to an end. And what of the perpetrator, depraved, demented, twisted." - Miami-Dade Commissioner Katy Sorenson (CBS) "
... a slew of brutal cat murders and mutilations..." (CBS)...
Continue reading my column today, "Abortion vs. cat 'murders,'" at WorldNetDaily.com.
... In April someone began mutilating and killing cats in 2 Miami-Dade neighborhoods. The outcry with demands to make it stop were instant.
Animal cruelty is despicable. Only sick people hurt and kill defenseless animals. That's how Jeffrey Dahmer got his start.
But knowing the same sorts of torturous acts are committed every day against human beings in at least 25 Miami area abortion clinics with no public protest makes me a little crazy. These would include... an abortion survivor who was suffocated in a plastic bag and thrown on the clinic roof for a week until he was so infested by maggots he couldn't be properly autopsied....
Mainstream media accounts attempting to humanize, dramatize and describe the cat killings in contrast to how they attempt to dehumanize, sanitize and obfuscate abortion make me a little crazy. Some excerpts:
"At a news conference... city and county leaders... reassured the community that the 'reign of terror' was over." (CBS)
"... the killing spree..." (KPLG)
"... [M]y heart goes out to those families who have lost their dear kitties 'cause I understand that pet owners feel very strongly about their little family members.... To see them so violated and so mutilated just defies all common sense and is painful for everyone involved. Thankfully... the terror has come to an end. And what of the perpetrator, depraved, demented, twisted." - Miami-Dade Commissioner Katy Sorenson (CBS) "
... a slew of brutal cat murders and mutilations..." (CBS)...
Continue reading my column today, "Abortion vs. cat 'murders,'" at WorldNetDaily.com.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Assisted Suicide Endangers Allfrom ProLifeBlogs
By Ken Connor from ProlifeBlogs
Last week in Washington state a 66-year-old woman with terminal cancer made history as the first person to undergo physician-assisted suicide since that state legalized the practice in November of 2008.
Proponents of legalized suicide celebrated Washington's approval of this policy as a victory for the "death with dignity" movement. These suicide advocates, in keeping with the rhetorical tactic of their ideological cousins in the pro-abortion movement, equate "dignity" with "choice." Unfortunately, as with the abortion debate, the "choice" rhetoric of the right-to-die movement eclipses critical moral and ethical questions which ought to be at the forefront of the debate.
Is suicide really a way to honor life and preserve dignity? What are the social and cultural implications of normalizing the "right to die?" Will voluntary physician-assisted suicide give way to involuntary physician-assisted suicide where doctors decide whether their patients would be better off dead? Will the "right" to suicide be transmogrified into a "duty" to commit suicide? Will the elderly who consume more than they produce be deemed "resource hogs" that have a duty to die and get out of the way? In an age of scarce economic resources, will the critically ill or the handicapped or the demented be viewed as expendable by their younger, healthier counterparts? How will the medical profession be transformed if those who are trained to cure are given a license to kill? These and many other questions should be asked and answered before we decide it's okay to encourage terminally-ill persons to choose self-destruction in the name of dignity.
But we won't get answers if we allow this debate to be defined solely in terms of the euphemistic "right to choose." Indeed, these questions won't even be asked.
Dying with dignity does not require suicide. The question, "Do you want to suffer and die or die with dignity?" presents a false choice and assumes that there are only two alternatives at the end of life--pain or death. Properly employed, modern medicine has the tools to mitigate pain. Hospice care, for example, employs a multi-disciplinary approach to ensure that terminally-ill patients endure their final time on earth with dignity--free from pain and nourished physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. Hospice care does not seek to stop the dying process. The goal of hospice care is to make a difficult time as comfortable and peaceful as possible for both the patient and their loved ones. The important distinction between palliative care and physician-assisted suicide is that the first respects the inviolability of human life in spite of the difficulties presented by illness while the second rejects the sanctity of life in favor of an expedient escape from pain and fear.
Read the rest HERE
Ken Connor is an attorney and co-author of "Sinful Silence: When Christians Neglect Their Civic Duty" He is also Chairman of the Center for a Just Society. For more articles and resources from Mr. Connor and the Center for a Just Society, go to http://www.centerforajustsociety.org/
Last week in Washington state a 66-year-old woman with terminal cancer made history as the first person to undergo physician-assisted suicide since that state legalized the practice in November of 2008.
Proponents of legalized suicide celebrated Washington's approval of this policy as a victory for the "death with dignity" movement. These suicide advocates, in keeping with the rhetorical tactic of their ideological cousins in the pro-abortion movement, equate "dignity" with "choice." Unfortunately, as with the abortion debate, the "choice" rhetoric of the right-to-die movement eclipses critical moral and ethical questions which ought to be at the forefront of the debate.
Is suicide really a way to honor life and preserve dignity? What are the social and cultural implications of normalizing the "right to die?" Will voluntary physician-assisted suicide give way to involuntary physician-assisted suicide where doctors decide whether their patients would be better off dead? Will the "right" to suicide be transmogrified into a "duty" to commit suicide? Will the elderly who consume more than they produce be deemed "resource hogs" that have a duty to die and get out of the way? In an age of scarce economic resources, will the critically ill or the handicapped or the demented be viewed as expendable by their younger, healthier counterparts? How will the medical profession be transformed if those who are trained to cure are given a license to kill? These and many other questions should be asked and answered before we decide it's okay to encourage terminally-ill persons to choose self-destruction in the name of dignity.
But we won't get answers if we allow this debate to be defined solely in terms of the euphemistic "right to choose." Indeed, these questions won't even be asked.
Dying with dignity does not require suicide. The question, "Do you want to suffer and die or die with dignity?" presents a false choice and assumes that there are only two alternatives at the end of life--pain or death. Properly employed, modern medicine has the tools to mitigate pain. Hospice care, for example, employs a multi-disciplinary approach to ensure that terminally-ill patients endure their final time on earth with dignity--free from pain and nourished physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. Hospice care does not seek to stop the dying process. The goal of hospice care is to make a difficult time as comfortable and peaceful as possible for both the patient and their loved ones. The important distinction between palliative care and physician-assisted suicide is that the first respects the inviolability of human life in spite of the difficulties presented by illness while the second rejects the sanctity of life in favor of an expedient escape from pain and fear.
Read the rest HERE
Ken Connor is an attorney and co-author of "Sinful Silence: When Christians Neglect Their Civic Duty" He is also Chairman of the Center for a Just Society. For more articles and resources from Mr. Connor and the Center for a Just Society, go to http://www.centerforajustsociety.org/
New Stanek WND column:
"Missing from Tiller's eulogy: The A-word"
From World Net Daily
Of everything I read about the June 6 funeral of late-term abortionist George Tiller, I thought this was the most telling, from the New York Times:
Conversely, without ever saying the A-word, family and friends implied that if anything would earn Tiller a place in both heaven and history as a martyr it would be the tens of thousands of abortions he committed. From the Associated Press:
Of everything I read about the June 6 funeral of late-term abortionist George Tiller, I thought this was the most telling, from the New York Times:
But for the most part, Dr. Tiller's funeral focused less on his work than on his life with his family and friends. The word abortion was never uttered....Clearly they all knew: Tiller was murdered for his "life's" work, but the reason was unmentionable? Sad. Even in death George Tiller's "vocation" was anathema....
Conversely, without ever saying the A-word, family and friends implied that if anything would earn Tiller a place in both heaven and history as a martyr it would be the tens of thousands of abortions he committed. From the Associated Press:
"Dear God, get heaven ready, because Mr. Enthusiasm is coming," said Larry Borcherding, of Overland Park, who first met Tiller a half-century ago when both were students at the University of KS. "Heaven will never be the same. It will be a better, better place with George in it."...But if what Tiller did was so heroic, why not describe it?
"Dear God, get heaven ready, because one of the few who not only stomached but relished aborting late-term babies (We called him 'Mr. Enthusiasm'!) is coming!...Continue reading my column, "Missing from Tiller's eulogy: The A-word," in today's WorldNetDaily.com.
OFL Leads Campaign Against Sotomayor with Online Petition
from ProLifeBlogs
Sign the petition opposing Sonia Sotomayor at www.stopsotomayor.com
WASHINGTON, June 11 /Christian Newswire/ -- On May 26, the day that Judge Sotomayor was nominated to the Supreme Court, Organized for Life stepped up as a leading force against President Obama's nominee. Organized for Life's PAC, OFL Action, has opened a petition site at www.stopsotomayor.com to oppose the addition of another pro-abortion justice to the Supreme Court.
Sonia Sotomayor, in these few short weeks since her nomination, has made it clear that she is not with the majority when it comes to the dignity and protection of life. This has become more evident with the news of her involvement as a member of the board of a group that filed six legal briefs in support of abortion rights.
Peter Shinn, national director of Organized for Life, commented that, "Sonia Sotomayor is out of step with the American people. Senators Feinstein, Snowe, and Wyden are confident that Sotomayor will uphold Roe and so are we. The pro-life movement must unite to protect the unborn from another pro-abortion justice."
Ruben Obregon, president of Organized for Life, added, "Sotomayor's involvement as a board member of a group that filed six legal briefs in support of abortion rights and taxpayer funding of abortion is a key indicator of how she will cast her votes on the nation's highest court. The pro-life majority of this country does not want to see another pro-abortion activist justice impose abortion on our society. Pro-life activists, the Davids in this epic battle for life, can only stop the Goliath of the White House by banding together and signing the petition at www.stopsotomayor.com ."
The petition against Sonia Sotomayor be found at www.stopsotomayor.com and will be sent to President Obama and the members of the United States Senate. Let's go out, let's get organized for life, and let's legally protect our children, one Supreme Court justice at a time.
Sign the petition opposing Sonia Sotomayor at www.stopsotomayor.com
WASHINGTON, June 11 /Christian Newswire/ -- On May 26, the day that Judge Sotomayor was nominated to the Supreme Court, Organized for Life stepped up as a leading force against President Obama's nominee. Organized for Life's PAC, OFL Action, has opened a petition site at www.stopsotomayor.com to oppose the addition of another pro-abortion justice to the Supreme Court.
Sonia Sotomayor, in these few short weeks since her nomination, has made it clear that she is not with the majority when it comes to the dignity and protection of life. This has become more evident with the news of her involvement as a member of the board of a group that filed six legal briefs in support of abortion rights.
Peter Shinn, national director of Organized for Life, commented that, "Sonia Sotomayor is out of step with the American people. Senators Feinstein, Snowe, and Wyden are confident that Sotomayor will uphold Roe and so are we. The pro-life movement must unite to protect the unborn from another pro-abortion justice."
Ruben Obregon, president of Organized for Life, added, "Sotomayor's involvement as a board member of a group that filed six legal briefs in support of abortion rights and taxpayer funding of abortion is a key indicator of how she will cast her votes on the nation's highest court. The pro-life majority of this country does not want to see another pro-abortion activist justice impose abortion on our society. Pro-life activists, the Davids in this epic battle for life, can only stop the Goliath of the White House by banding together and signing the petition at www.stopsotomayor.com ."
The petition against Sonia Sotomayor be found at www.stopsotomayor.com and will be sent to President Obama and the members of the United States Senate. Let's go out, let's get organized for life, and let's legally protect our children, one Supreme Court justice at a time.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Cutting Through Prochoice Rhetoric
By Bekah Ferguson @ Prolife Blogs I've learned from experience that it can be difficult to get straight answers from prochoice adherents. There is so much rhetoric, douplespeak and catch phrases, it can be like trudging through a swamp to get to the heart of the matter.
So, to help people understand the prochoice perspective better and to recognize common strawmen, I've compiled some of the arguments I hear the most and what they really mean: click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
