Monday, February 28, 2005

A Record of Evil Reviewed

Based upon the surrealistic discussion in the Senate Health & Welfare Committee last week, it is clear that we must remind many people about what Planned Parenthood is – and how they impact the lives of Idaho families.

One Republican member of the Senate panel, in justifying his vote to support a $15 million windfall to Planned Parenthood of Idaho – argued that he may not agree with some of what Planned Parenthood does, but Senate Bill 1140 would allow the organization to do some good things.

Well, I suppose any group of ill-advised persons might accidentally perform a valuable public service – but the good senator too quickly dismisses the overwhelming record of evil amassed by this organization since its founding back in the days of Margaret Sanger.

Planned Parenthood is simply not a morally-neutral source of medical care. I would hazard to say that the various clinic services are mere enticements to indoctrinate young women with their poisonous brand of feminism.

This legislation, for instance will pay Planned Parenthood for providing “counseling services”. Will that “counseling” be value neutral? Or will it reflect the kind of values which drove Planned Parenthood to sue the State of Idaho three times since 1998?

They oppose parental consent for abortions – arguing that girls as young as 14 are mature enough to make their own decisions. They oppose a ban on partial birth abortions. They have demanded public funding of all low-income abortions.

Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion provider. In 2003, Planned Parenthood killed 224,628 preborn children at its “clinics” around the nation, making a handsome profit of $104 million in the process. That is more than one-third of its total clinic income.

We urgently need your help to stop this bill. You must call your state senator today. In the Boise area, you can call 332-1000. The Legislature’s toll-free number is 1-800-626-0471. Say NO to SB1140.

Friday, February 25, 2005

Spirit of Margaret Sanger Dominates Senate Panel

Well, the Senate Health & Welfare Committee spent time this week considering SB1140 – the “Planned Parenthood Funding Act”. We were fairly outgunned at the hearing, with Idaho Chooses Life being the only organization to testify against the legislation.

On the other side, we had Idaho Women’s Network, a staff person for Central District Health, Planned Parenthood, the March of Dimes, the Idaho Nurses Association, St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center and the Academy of Family Physicians. Even the League of Women Voters endorsed the plan to create a funding pool of at least $14 million in tax dollars for Planned Parenthood.

In testifying against the bill, I stated that we opposed the legislation because it represented a massive infusion of public money into Idaho’s Abortion Industry. And if the committee was determined to drag the state deeper into the sex facilitation business, then they should at least restrict the use of tax dollars to public agencies. Simply put, we have no business subsidizing Planned Parenthood and their radical agenda for Idaho families.

Frankly, it was one of the most hostile committee environments I’ve been in. It was as if I had mistakenly wandered into a meeting of the “Margaret Sanger Book Club”. Committee members and proponents were in complete harmony with Sanger’s elitist notions about managing the sexual habits of the lower classes, of solving most social ills through sexual liberation and wide availability of birth control.

People testifying for the legislation claimed that we would reduce unwanted pregnancies, abortion rates, child abuse, domestic violence and the growing problem of low birthweight babies – all through the magic of free condoms and birth control pills. I sat waiting for someone to add that we could end war and world hunger – but the Chairman, Sen. Dick Compton of Coeur d’Alene, discouraged more testimony since it was clear the Committee was already sold on raiding your wallets to finance the ambitions of Planned Parenthood.

The legislation passed without a single no vote – and now goes to the full Senate.

Given the momentum of this bill, it is likely to pass the full Senate – unless you start educating your state senator. A vote could be held early next week.

Thursday, February 24, 2005

Signs of Life in Oregon’s Pro-Life Movement

There are signs of vigorous life in the pro-Life movement of our neighboring state, Oregon.

A new organization called “Life Support” is working the legislature in Salem to end the practice of paying for abortions. Under rules of the state’s Medicaid program, taxpayers have paid for some 8,000 so-called “health” abortions in the last two years. That program is expected to cost Oregon taxpayers approximately $3.2 million in the coming two years.

At least one legislator, Republican Senator Gary George, intends to help force votes on the crucial issue.

Meanwhile, a tragic murder of a pregnant woman last year has focused attention on the lack of a fetal homicide statute in Oregon. Kerry Michele Repp was three months pregnant when she was shot and killed.

Pro-abort Democrats have introduced legislation which would create stiffer criminal penalties for killing a pregnant woman. Pro-Life Republicans have introduced legislation similar to Idaho’s “Noah’s Law” – in that it would recognize that in these grotesque crimes, there are two victims.

The Oregon fight reminds me of the battle we endured in the 2002 Idaho Legislative session. Pro-abort forces were opposed to any bill which recognized the humanity of a preborn child. They understood that such legislation creates an enhanced legal tension around the arbitrary treatment of preborn children.

Laci Peterson’s stepfather traveled to Salem this week to testify in support of SB440. While Ron Grantski says he supports legalized abortion, he also defended the drive to recognize preborn children as innocent second victims. “When somebody takes that grandchild, son or daughter away from you, that’s murder,” Grantski said. “You’ve gotta have justice for both.”

Mr. Grantski is to be commended for his public support of the two-victim legislation. But it is clear he needs to spend a lot more time thinking through his position on abortion. By what magic is one preborn child a victim of murder… and another just a blob of flesh appended to the woman’s body?

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

European Jews Blast Catholic Church Over Abortion

The ailing head of the Catholic Church has ignited a new controversial dialogue with Europe’s Jewish community over statements in his new book, Memory and Identity: Conversations Between Millenniums.

In the book, Pope John Paul argues that both the Holocaust and widespread legalized abortion spring from a decision by cultures to abrogate the law of God. When man assumes the powers of God – to decide which groups of human beings are entitled to basic protection of the law, and which are to be arbitrarily deemed, “sub-human’ – then evil is certain to ensue.

Paul Spiegel, head of Germany’s Central Council of Jews has taken great offense at the Pope’s writings. He blasted John Paul for failing to understand the “tremendous difference between factory-like genocide and what women do to their bodies”.

But it is Spiegel himself who demonstrates a willful moral blindness. The practice of abortion in America and across what once was Christian Europe has become a mechanized destruction unknown before in human history. It is not merely a private matter of what a troubled woman chooses to do to her body, to her own future; nor is it even now just a question of what happens to a single, defenseless preborn child who depends on many others to claim his God-given right to live.

Today, and in most nations, the magnitude of wholesale destruction is simply beyond imagination. A complete industry has developed, involving billions, whose only mission is to kill and dispose of tiny humans. If anything, John Paul understates the gravity of our modern condition.

And yet another dynamic must be noted. It is particularly sad to me that the Jewish community would be among the last to recognize their stake in the fate of preborn children. If any people should have insight into the horror of being cast aside as “unworthy” – it should be our Jewish brothers and sisters. The crime of the Holocaust is not simply that Jewish people were destroyed en masse – but that most of the rest of humanity stood by, believing they had no stake in their fate.

To the extent that the Jewish community supports and defends mechanized abortion, the victim becomes the victimizer.

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Roe Challenge May Be Decided Today

The motion to rehear the Roe v. Wade case is now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. Norma McCorvey and Sandra Cano, the women used by feminists as Jane Roe and Jane Doe in the 1973 cases, have petitioned the court to reverse their “victory”. The women are arguing that much experience has demonstrated that abortion is harmful to women, that the humanity of preborn children is beyond debate – and that the assumptions made by the court in its landmark ruling are now clearly invalid.

The petition is supported by affidavits from over one thousand post-abortive women.

Our information is that the Supreme Court held a closed door conference on the petition last Friday. Their decision as to whether the petition will be a granted a hearing by the Court could be issued as early as today.

Obviously, fervent and immediate prayer is needed.

A three-judge panel for the Fifth Circuit has already denied the motion. But one of the judges wrote that she fervently hoped the Supreme Court would one day evaluate the massive evidence presented by Norma McCorvey and rethink their 1973 ruling.

We live in an era of characterized by unprecedented judicial pride and arrogance. From a human point of view, it seems unlikely that the five committed pro-aborts on the Supreme Court will find the humility to re-evaluate their political dogma enshrined in Roe v.Wade. Yet prayer is effective – and perhaps just one heart lingers in the Valley of Decision.

And, if you haven’t had a chance yet, please call your state senator about SB1140 – the legislation which provide millions in tax dollars to Planned Parenthood. You can use the toll-free number, 1-800-626-0471. Remember, we are the only voice available for babies in the womb.

Monday, February 21, 2005

Chris Rock Boldly Explains Support for Abortion

Comedian Chris Rock is in the thick of controversy for outrageous so-called “jokes” which celebrate abortion as a tremendous boon to predatory men.

One quote has him saying, “Abortion, it’s beautiful, it’s beautiful abortion is legal. I love going to an abortion rally to pick up women ….”

Note Rock’s explanation for why many men back abortion. Polls have unwaveringly shown support for abortion “rights” highest among men between the ages of 17 and 35. Abortion is an ideal institution for men who see women as nothing more than sexual objects.

The outrage at Rock’s monologue is not coming from feminists. I am old enough to remember that in the 60s and 70s, the elimination of sexual exploitation was a driving cry for the feminist movement. I guess Bill Clinton has helped change all that.

So women have now “progressed” to the point where they can be exploited by men like Chris Rock and their local abortionist.

Friday, February 18, 2005

Planned Parenthood Is Back for Your Wallet

One of the great outrages of the era is the unceasing drive by the Abortion Industry to gain public subsidies for its dark business. We see Planned Parenthood & Co. draining the federal treasury of hundreds of millions each year. Without public financing in record amounts, there is little doubt that Planned Parenthood would be a relatively innocuous fringe organization.

Idaho taxpayers have been involved for years in supporting this organization through a contract with the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare. Under the guise of “family planning”, our tax money has been used to finance their campaign to corrupt and seduce our children.

Idaho Chooses Life fought a battle in the 2003 session of the Legislature against Planned Parenthood, which eventually resulted in an end to this contract.

Now Planned Parenthood is back, seeking to expand their portion of the public treasury.

Sen. Shawn Keogh of Sandpoint and Rep. Margaret Henbest of Boise have introduced a bill in the Senate to expand “family planning” services by appropriating $212,000 in the coming year and $300,000 the year after to pay for “family planning” services. Without doubt most or all of that money would end up in Planned Parenthood’s coffers. The bill calls for escalating appropriations over the next five years.

SB 1140 is now in the Senate Health & Welfare Committee – a panel very friendly to the Abortion Industry’s agenda. We need your vigorous help to stop this bill.

Please call Sens. Dick Compton and Joyce Broadsword from Coeur d’Alene. The toll-free number is 1-800-626-0471. For listeners in the Magic Valley, new senator Charles Coiner should be urged to vote no on SB1140.

Thursday, February 17, 2005

SD Abortion Ban Defeated

I have the sad duty to report that a South Dakota bill, which would have banned virtually all abortions in that state, was soundly rejected earlier this week. The Senate State Affairs Committee voted 7-2 against a bill by Democrat Frank Kloucek. This legislation is nearly identical to that passed last year by this same legislature, only to be vetoed by the Governor on technical grounds.

The Governor has since told citizens he would be willing to sign legislation challenging Roe v. Wade, and its encroachment upon the state’s duty to protect its citizens.

Kloucek is quoted by the Aberdeen News as saying, “It was a great bill last year, it’s an even better bill this year.”

So what is the difference? An intensive lobbying effort by Right to Life to squash the legislation in the name of “pro-Life unity”. Among the folks they persuaded to back away from the abortion ban is last year’s sponsor, Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, a Republican.

Instead, he praised the Democrat sponsor while opposing the bill. “It’s important this year to have a united, bipartisan approach that I hope will make a difference.”

We have talked about this situation before. I have to tell you that I find this turn of events very troubling. It seems that the “feelings” of pro-Life activists are taking priority over the lives of preborn children. And I say that, knowing that the odds of success in the courts are quite dim.

South Dakota is in a unique position to challenge Roe. I am unaware of many state legislatures with the strength to actually pass a ban – especially with a sympathetic governor. That is a precious confluence of political circumstance which is certain not to last long.

When Right to Life gets around to proposing that abortion might actually be stopped, will they find a patient and dutiful legislature?

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Women’s Health Information Act Introduced

Rep. Ann Rydalch of Idaho Falls has introduced legislation in the Idaho House which would overhaul Idaho’s “Informed Consent” law. HB 196 is known as the “Women’s Health Information Act”. It is meant to ensure that women and girls in Idaho considering abortion do not make a final decision until they know the fundamentals about abortion.

That might strike you as a little strange. Who doesn’t understand about abortion? Hundreds of thousands of people I would venture to say undergo abortion in this country each year without a fundamental understanding of abortion. And don’t forget that we live in an era in which the Abortion Industry is largely free to sell abortion as a simple solution to a temporary “problem”.

How many people understand that abortion may reduce your chance of getting pregnant again? Or that an abortion history increases your chances of premature delivery in subsequent pregnancies? Or breast cancer?

And how many women are encouraged to wrestle with the humanity of the life they are about to snuff out? And if not before – what happens to that girl when she is alone, 2 months or two years from now, as the reality of a human life ended can no longer be denied?

Rep. Rydalch is to be complimented for moving forward with legislation that would protect innocent children and their mothers. Under the language of HB196, women would have to be told about breast cancer and increased risks of premature delivery. Only qualified medical personnel could counsel women. No abortionist could accept money from a woman considering an abortion until the 24-hour contemplation period has expired. This will help make it easier for women and girls to walk away.

This is great legislation – which of course means it will run into fierce opposition from any number of quarters. We can only succeed in improving things for Idaho babies and their mothers with your help. We ask for your prayers and help in asking legislators to support this vital legislation.

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Update on the Schiavo Case

The Terri Schiavo case is coming to a climax – perhaps a last gasp. The woman’s parents have lost another round in Florida courts. A court of appeals there dismissed a lawsuit based on Terri’s religious liberties. According to a Baptist Press article, there are few options left for the family in Florida. But the decision clears the way for another appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The family’s attorney, Barbara Weller, says that the Schindlers are doing “amazing well”, but are saddened that their daughter’s religious beliefs are being so casually dismissed by Florida courts.

Attorneys for Terri’s estranged husband, Michael Schiavo, have stated that they hope to restart the starvation process as early as next week. She has been disconnected from water and food twice before – but has miraculously survived a judicial jihad for over a decade.

Meanwhile, I ran across a column by Father Frank Pavone, who was recently able to visit with Terri in her hospital room. I’ll quote from some of his observations:

“Terri is not dying. She has no terminal illness. She is not in a coma. She is not on life-support equipment….She has not requested death. Yet a battle rages over whether Terri should be starved to death. She cannot speak or eat normally; nevertheless, the only tube attached to her is a small feeding tube that provides nourishment directly to her digestive system.

“I have been able to talk to her, to listen to her struggle to speak. I’ve watched her focus her eyes and smile and attempt to kiss her parents. I have prayed with her and assured her she has many friends around the country.”

May you and I continue to be among them, as we pray for her protection.

Monday, February 14, 2005

Now Washington Wants in on Great Gamble

LifeNews.Com is reporting that the Governor of Washington state is making headway in her bid to compete for cheap bucks with neighbors in California. She wants Washington to enter the frenzy of embryonic stem cell research, and is proposing a billion dollar “Life Sciences Discovery Fund”.

Doesn’t that sound great? It could hardly sound more pleasant, like to fund to expand scientific teaching in our high schools. But behind the great p.r. is a deadly strategy to attract elusive biomedical investment in the state as a cheap economic development ploy.

A state legislator is proposing a new law which would make it clear that cloning and killing human embryos is legal. The bill seems necessary as a prelude to the big experiment extravaganza.

Dr. Sharon Quick, speaking on behalf of the American Academy of Medical Ethics, opposes the whole initiative. “We are crossing a line that protects human life,” she said.

Pro-Life groups in the state are working to remind legislators that money from the tobacco settlement is meant for basic health care, not the destruction of innocent life. They also point out that embryonic stem cell research has not produced a single medical breakthrough.

So what is the obsession with destroying new life?

In England, the government has just given formal permission for a scientist to begin cloning humans. He will then kill them for their stem cells.

Dr. David Stevens blasted the development: “It’s dressing a wolf in sheep’s clothing to claim that you’re somehow helping humanity when in fact you’re killing living human beings.”

The scientist receiving permission is the genius behind Dolly the cloned sheep. She has since been put down. Dr. Wilmut has said he will not allow the reproduced human beings to mature.

Friday, February 11, 2005

Pro-Life Potpourri

Today, I’d like to share a few different stories from around the nation

In California, we read that 400 health care employees will be cut at UCLA hospitals because of financial strain on the budget. The financial woes are blamed on a higher demand for health care services from low-income patients without health insurance.

The situation is expected to worsen, as other hospitals in Los Angeles County begin to close.

I bring this to your attention because it seems strange to me that health care workers, providing basic, essential health care to Californians, will no longer be there to help care for folks – while at the same time, we see the state going into some 6 billion dollars of debt to finance high-tech research into embryonic stem cell research. Aside from the immorality of the matter – this seems a clear case of insanity.

And in South Carolina, the Supreme Court has just dismissed a law suit against a doctor for “wrongful life”. That’s right – wrongful life. A couple claims they would have killed their 8-year old son if they had known he had birth defects. The parents claim to represent their son in the lawsuit. In other words, the lawsuit by the boy claims that he should never have been born – and seeks millions in “damages”. South Carolina becomes the 20th state to deny that premise that “wrongful life” is even possible. How can a man who does not know what it is like to not exist make a decision as to whether it would have been better to never have born?

And, lastly, the BBC reports that the birth rates in 20 developing nations are now below the rate to replace current population levels. Much of that decline can be traced to international efforts by the abortion industry.

Thursday, February 10, 2005

A Kinder, Softer Sort of Democrat

Strange doings to report among some national Democrat operatives. It seems that a few key players have discovered that zealous abortion advocacy is bad politics.

A Washington Times article details efforts by Sen. Hillary Clinton to reposition herself – perhaps as part of a bid for national power. She is quoted as saying that religious charities should be encouraged in their mission to serve communities; and she recently told an abortion rally that abortion can be a “sad, even tragic” event for women. She has repeated her husband’s mantra that abortion should be legal, safe and rare.

Such rhetoric is designed to mollify the masses into thinking that Hillary is a moral, sensitive person. And certainly her talking points must be acknowledged as something of an advance – but in no way do they represent a substantive retreat from a hard-core abortion rights position. Gary Bauer has called Clinton’s new public relations effort “the ultimate makeover”.

More than anything else, Hillary’s new rhetoric is a sign that some leftist operatives recognize that the nation is turning away from an unmitigated war against preborn children.

This emerging politics is even more validated by actions taken by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Folks there are actually working overtime to recruit two pro-Life Democrats for key senate races in 2006. And that strategy already has feminists screaming about betrayal.

It is possible that these developments might one day translate into life-saving public policy – but don’t bet much on genuine repentance from the national Democrats. With the imminent election of Howard Dean, it seems quite clear that abortion rights will remain a sacred tenet for the Democrat Party. For those who have forgotten, Dean served on the Board of Planned Parenthood in New England.

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

Colliding Court Edicts in Chicago Offer Hope

A lightning strike occurred in Chicago this week as a Cook County judge ruled that an embryo accidentally killed by a fertility clinic was a human being. The ruling allowed the baby’s parents to proceed with a wrongful death lawsuit against the clinic.

Covenant News is reporting that it is the first ruling of its kind – at least within the Roe era. And it comes at a time when the nation is torn between the claims of embryonic stem cell research advocates and the profound moral issues related to intentionally killing preborn children.

The case came about because a couple was seeking help getting pregnant. Even with technology, only one egg became fertilized – and that is the life accidentally thrown out by a clinic worker.

Defense lawyers for the clinic argued that it was not possible for the clinic to be sued for wrongful death, since there was not a human being involved.

But Judge Jeffrey Lawrence II wrote that a “pre-embryo is a human being … whether or not it is implanted in its mother’s womb.” In issuing his opinion, Lawrence cited clear findings of the Illinois legislature that life begins at conception.

Colleen Connell, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union out of Chicago said she expected the judge’s ruling to be overturned on appeal.

Northwestern University law professor Victor Rosenblum agreed that appeals would probably be made to the state’s higher courts, but apparently did not offer such a pessimistic view as to the outcome.

Obviously the stakes are potentially huge. At least one analysis of how Roe will eventually implode is not through frontal assault – but by forcing the courts to confront the violence of several colliding rivers of court precedent.

Tuesday, February 08, 2005

Increase in Premature Births

The Washington Times reports that infant mortality rate is rising in the United States. That increase is due primarily to a rise in the number of premature babies who didn’t survive long outside the womb.

Researchers were quoted as saying that more study is needed to determine why so many more tiny infants are being born early.

Since 1958, U.S. infant mortality rates have generally been on the decline – thanks largely to medical advances which allow low birth weight babies to survive. But in recent years, that number has begun to grow. It seems science is unable to keep pace with the growing number of post-abortive women.

In 2001, 27,568 infants died before their first birthday. The next year, that number increased by some 500 – giving America an infant mortality rate of 6.8 per 1,000 live births. Analysis showed that 81% of these babies were born weighing less than 2 pounds.

What is especially fascinating about this Times article is that government researchers are quoted as befuddled about what could be causing the rise in premature births. They go through a list of possibilities – like race, reporting anomalies, and income. None of these seem to account for the increase.

But no where in the article is the subject of abortion mentioned. It is obviously outside the “Safe Think Bubble”.

That is particularly curious because many studies – including the one I’m looking at now from the summer of 2003 – have demonstrated a concrete link between abortion and premature births. The lead paragraph of this article, published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, states that 49 separate studies have established a significant increase in risk of premature births in subsequent pregnancies.

Women are generally never told these things before getting an abortion. And its no wonder – despite the body of research, abortion was simply a non-factor for the Washington Times and the government researchers interviewed for the story.

It seems the holocaust for babies doesn’t end when they survive the womb.

Monday, February 07, 2005

Breast Cancer Case Leads to Judgment in Portland

An important development to report from Portland. One that may have crucial impact on the national abortion debate.

A young woman has won a landmark judgment against an abortion facility for failing to inform her that her odds of breast cancer greatly increased as a result of her abortion. This is only the second breast cancer case in the nation to be successfully prosecuted – but the first to involve a monetary judgment.

The attorney for the woman, Jonathan Clark, told media that the settlement “makes a pretty powerful statement about the [current] scientific [research],” because the clinic did not want to defend its policy of ignoring the link between abortion and breast cancer.

Clark spent a good deal of time preparing for the trial, investigating many of the research studies which show that breast cancer rates increase substantially when a woman’s first pregnancy results in an abortion.

He placed particular emphasis upon a 1994 study conducted by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle. This research focused on teenagers, and found that they could increase their chances of breast cancer by some 800%.

Idaho Chooses Life also used this study when we filed briefs in the Parental Consent lawsuit.

The Portland abortion clinic seemed particularly vulnerable to the legal liability because the teenager indicated during her intake that there was breast cancer in her family; nevertheless, the abortion clinic still ignored the issue and failed to discuss it with the young woman.

As we seek to re-engage the Idaho Legislature on the crucial issue of ensuring that women and girls receive the best information available about the risks and alternatives to abortion – this case in Portland may prove quite helpful. The stakes for preborn babies are obviously huge. But there are grave consequences for women as well. And, of course, as gratifying as it is to see this young woman win a lawsuit – it will be small consolation if she is one of millions who develop breast cancer in the next ten or twenty years.

Friday, February 04, 2005

Kudos for President Bush

During the President’s State of the Union address, he used the phrase, “culture of life”, several times. He vigorously defended his policy that human life should not created so it can be destroyed for research. He reminded the nation that scientific research must be bridled to moral standards – in other words, he reasserted his position that embryonic stem cell research should not move forward.

We should pray for the president as he faces down his opponents in Congress.

And, while he did not discuss these measures during the address, President Bush has already endorsed two pieces of legislation introduced before the Congress.

The first would make abortionists inform women in later stages of pregnancy that their babies may feel pain during an abortion. It is known as the “Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act”. It would apply after 20 weeks’ gestation, and also require the abortionist to offer anesthesia for the baby.

Some in the pro-Life movement have criticized this proposal, claiming it will provide a flavor of human decency to the act of killing a child. Perhaps – but my own view is that it would be well for Americans to better understand the suffering of preborn children. It is another way to bring home the humanity of preborn children. Perhaps most importantly, I am moved by the knowledge that God’s little ones are tortured and burned during their death. Surely it is better to ease their suffering if that is the only kindness available.

The President also supports legislation to defend the many states with Parental Consent laws. This bill would make it illegal to transport a girl across state lines to avoid parental involvement. That is vital help for Idaho families, given the large number of abortions performed in Salt Lake and Spokane.

Thursday, February 03, 2005

Where Do They Go?

Scandal has erupted in Boulder, Colorado over the treatment of the remains of aborted babies. It seems that a Catholic church there has been quietly receiving the remains for years. And – most shocking to abortion fans – these babies have actually been buried with a service marking their human and eternal dignity.

A local mortuary has a contract with an abortionist to receive and cremate the bodies of killed children. Without fanfare, a worker at the mortuary has been sending the ashes over the church for burial. And, with equal discretion, services have been held, with thousands of ash remains buried under a Memorial Wall for the Unborn on church property.

The abortionist became aware of the arrangement and expressed outrage. Warren Hern denounced the practice as a “public spectacle” and a “macabre death ritual”. He has threatened legal action, saying that women have been calling his office because the news report has opened wounds of their abortion.

Now a local hospital has entered the fray. It, too, has been sending killed babies to the funeral home for cremation. John Sackett, CEO of Avista Adventist Hospital, said he was “troubled” by the arrangement. He added that burying the remains at a church violated the hospital’s “values”.

I realize this is a heart-breaking story. We rarely wonder what happens to the millions of babies killed each year. In stark contrast to the respectful treatment of human remains by this small Christian community – an abortionist in New Jersey was recently arrested for flushing aborted babies down the toilet or tossing them into garbage bins behind his office. Apparently the practice violates laws regulating the disposal of “medical waste”.

The Colorado church has publicly stated that they don’t expect to be able to receive more remains in the future.

Nothing, not even decency, can be permitted in this era of cheap abortion to suggest that God’s little ones are being sacrificed and disposed of like so much trash. Even after death they can be afforded no consideration.

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

A Pro-Life Democrat Stands Up

We talked about divisions within the pro-Life movement over the pace of progress in ending abortion. Frankly, some organizations seem all-too content to nip-and-tuck at the fringes. Every day is a day of life and death for thousands of preborn children, and there ought to be a sense of urgency in everything we do on their behalf.

In that context, I was disturbed to read on LifeNews.Com that a movement was well underway in South Dakota to abandon efforts aimed at banning all abortions in that state. You’ll recall that such a bill actually passed the Legislature last year over the strenuous, all-out opposition by “Right to Life”. Their pressure was sufficient, however, to gain a gubernatorial veto of the bill.

Just last fall, South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds said he would sign similar legislation this year – as long as care was taken to protect current abortion restrictions pending a certain court challenge. His announcement raised hope that South Dakota would provide valuable and much-needed leadership to the nation.

LifeNews reported that Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, a Republican and sponsor of last year’s bill, would not introduce another bill this year. Instead, he felt like further “right-to-know” regulations would help to rebuild relationships within the pro-Life community.

Needless to say – it is disturbing to see that pro-Lifers would place the feelings of pro-Life activists over the lives of innocent children. I mean to say that relationships are certainly important – but they do not trump getting the job done. Peace can only be built on integrity and justice.

The total ban strategy can not now work in all places; a more complex strategy is necessary. And for those pro-Life leaders who say that a ban is not practical right now – I ask, “What is your strategy for ending this horror?” It is obviously not enough to continue placing all our hopes on the president, awaiting the day when a miraculous change in the federal courts takes place.

You can imagine, therefore, how happy I was to read in the Aberdeen, South Dakota paper that a Democrat pro-Life legislator, Frank Kloucek, plans to introduce a ban in the South Dakota Legislature this month.

Praise the Lord.

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

Coulter Busts the “Safe Think” Bubble

I’ll confess that Ann Coulter is one of my favorite commentators on current events. There is a power to her intellect which is impressive. She has learned to live outside the bubble of “safe-think” – that zone of acceptable ideas in which even most conservatives live.

A recent Coulter column provides a perfect example. She challenges a statement by President Bush at the recent March for Life in Washington, D.C. He told the crowd via telephone that “a culture of life cannot be sustained solely by changing laws. We need, most of all, to change hearts.”

Coulter’s weakness for thinking springs immediately to the fore: “Actually,” she writes,
“what we need least of all is to ‘change hearts’. Maybe its my law background, but I think its time we changed a few judges.”

She goes on to argue that the time for changing hearts has passed. We’ve been talking about abortion for some 32 years, and changing most hearts along the way. A recent poll by the Los Angeles Times found that 57% of Americans believe abortion is wrong.

The National Abortion Rights Action League has posted on their website and in national news releases that they believe 19 state legislatures, comprised of elected officials, would ban abortion immediately if given the opportunity by an oppressive legal system. Another 19 would be likely to do so within several years. That is an impressive data set in making the case that we have largely won the debate.

And in an America divided sharply into blue and red – how many Americans would have to be convinced in order to make it possible for substantial progress in closing down the abortion industry in this nation?

Now is the time for concrete action.

Coulter challenges the “Pro-Choice” movement by demanding they let Americans decide whether they want to continue with this dark social experiment. The country is ready to support massive restrictions on abortion. The impediment? A legal system originally sculptured by seven male justices, as a perverse monument to “woman”.

Most people have already come to see this sculpture as an ugly thing, sitting atop the steps of the Supreme Court building; an “idol of death” which has placed millions of women in bondage to a history they cannot escape.