Posts Tagged ‘Roe v Wade’


Read Full Post »

Don’t forget that March 31 is Red Envelope Day.  RED is a grassroots effort to show Washington, specifically Barack Obama, that we are outraged that abortion is still legal in the U.S.  Every empty red envelope is a representation of an aborted baby that never had the chance to make an impact on the world.

Please take a look at redenvelopeproject.org for more information and how to format your red letters for the White House.  I realize this is short notice, but they need to be in the mail tomorrow, March 31.  You can have redenvelopeday.com send them for you tomorrow if you purchase them online.

Read Full Post »

The Alliance Defense Fund has filed lawsuit against Community Colleges of Spokane and Spokane Falls Community College officials for violating the First Amendment rights of pro-life students who were first denied permission to hold a pro-life event then threatened with explusion.  School officials deemed the pro-life message ‘discriminatory’ because it did not contain any pro-abortion message.

Wash. college students threatened with expulsion for ‘discriminatory’ pro-life message

ADF attorneys file suit against Community Colleges of Spokane officials for silencing pro-life message on campus
Wednesday, March 11, 2009, 7:55 AM (MST) |
ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

SPOKANE, Wash. — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund Center for Academic Freedom filed a lawsuit Monday against Community Colleges of Spokane and Spokane Falls Community College officials for violating the constitutional rights of pro-life students.  SFCC officials threatened Beth Sheeran and members of a Christian student group with disciplinary measures, including expulsion, if they chose to hold a pro-life event on campus to share information with other students because the message was “discriminatory” and did not include a pro-abortion viewpoint.

“Christian students shouldn’t be threatened, silenced, and discriminated against for attempting to share their beliefs on public college campuses,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Heather Gebelin Hacker.  “But this school goes beyond censorship to actually try to compel the students to make statements they don’t believe.  Such a requirement is nothing short of Orwellian.”

SFCC Director of Student Funded Programs Heather McKenzie rejected Sheeran’s timely request to hold a pro-life event on campus on January 22, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, that involved flier distribution and materials posted in an announcement display case in the student center.  McKenzie said college policy prohibits one-sided events and expressive displays on campus and that the pro-life display would not be allowed because it did not include any pro-abortion viewpoints.

As a member of SFCC’s “Stop the Hate” committee, McKenzie told Sheeran that her “biased” event fell under the program’s jurisdiction because of its “discriminatory” pro-life message and because someone might construe statistics cited in their literature–breaking down abortions by ethnic group–as hate.

SFCC Associate Dean of Student Services and “Stop the Hate” committee chair Gregory Roberts eventually told Sheeran that the group could hold the event if its members voted in favor of it.  However, after they did, Roberts, McKenzie, and the group’s faculty advisor, Stormy Kurtz, went to a club meeting and intimidated the students into not holding the event.  Kurtz told the students that their flier was “offensive” and that their event violated the district’s “Stop the Hate” policy and Washington law, and the students would face expulsion if they “offended” anyone.  Out of fear of disciplinary action, Sheeran and the fellowship never held the event.

ADF-allied attorney Jeffrey Smith of The Smith Law Group in Spokane is local counsel in the case.

The ADF Center for Academic Freedom defends religious freedom at America’s public universities.  ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith.  Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

www.telladf.org www.centerforacademicfreedom.org

Note: Facts in ADF news releases are verified prior to publication but may change over time. Members of the media are encouraged to contact ADF for the latest information on this matter.

Read Full Post »

CNSNews reports that a pro-life Catholic group, Human Life International (HLI), has sent a letter to the Pope calling for Nancy Pelosi to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church.  The group states that the Speaker has broken several Catholic Canon Laws, and that the Bishops in charge of where Pelosi attends church refuse to excommunicate her.

Catholic Group Petitions Pope to Excommunicate Nancy Pelosi

Friday, February 20, 2009
By Michael Chapman

(CNSNews.com) – Human Life International (HLI), a Catholic pro-life group based in Front Royal, Va., had a letter from its Rome office delivered to the Vatican this week, in which it called upon Pope Benedict XVI to “formally excommunicate” from the Catholic Church House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). The pope met with Pelosi on Wednesday.

Experts in Canon Law, the rules that govern the Catholic Church, said this action is not unprecedented and noted that similar appeals for excommunication were made against Catholic judges who were enforcing racially discriminatory laws during the civil rights era. They also said that regular Catholics have a right to petition their pastors, bishops, and the pope in matters that pertain to the well-being of the church.

“The reason we called for the pope is because so many people have called on the bishops in the jurisdictions she lives in, who could possibly do it—and they won’t,” HLI President Rev. Thomas Euteneur told CNSNews.com. Pelosi has a home in the archdiocese of San Francisco, headed by Archbishop George Niederauer, and works in Washington, D.C., the archdiocese overseen by Archbishop Donald Wuerl.

Pelosi describes herself as “pro-choice,” and has voted for laws that promote abortion and artificial contraception, both of which are contrary to church teaching.  For example, she voted against banning partial-birth abortion, against the Hyde Amendment, which prohibited federal funding of abortion in most circumstances, and against the Mexico City policy, which denied U.S. tax dollars to organizations that perform or promote abortion abroad. She also voted against a complete ban on human cloning and in favor of using tax dollars for research that kills human embryos.

The church’s catechism states: “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception…. Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.”

On Aug. 24, 2008, Pelosi was asked by Tom Brokaw on NBC’s “Meet the Press” about how she would advise then-Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama if he asked her about when human life begins. She answered by claiming that the question of when life begins has been a long-running controversy within the Catholic Church.

“I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time,” said Pelosi.  “And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition.  And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months.  We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose.  Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester.  There’s very clear distinctions.  This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god.  And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins.  As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided–”

Brokaw interrupted her at this point to point out that the “Catholic Church at the moment feels very strongly that it … begins at the point of conception.”

“I understand,” said Pelosi. “And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that.  So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.  But it is, it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions.  And we want abortions to be safe, rare, and reduce the number of abortions.  That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception.  My Republican colleagues do not support contraception.  If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must — it would behoove you to support family planning and, and contraception, you would think.  But that is not the case.”

After this broadcast, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released a statement on Aug. 26 that said, “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi misrepresented the history and nature of the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church against abortion. In fact, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, ‘Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.’”

Archbishop Wuerl also issued a statement, correcting Pelosi’s statements about Catholic teaching, as did Archbishop Niederauer.

Pelosi did not retract her comments made on NBC. But her spokesman Brendan Daly issued a statement about Pelosi that partly reads: “She [Pelosi] was raised in a devout Catholic family who often disagreed with her pro-choice views.

“After she was elected to Congress, and the choice issue became more public as she would have to vote on it, she studied the matter more closely. Her views on when life begins were informed by the views of Saint Augustine, who said: ‘…the law does not provide that the act [abortion] pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation…’ (Saint Augustine, On Exodus 21.22)

“While Catholic teaching is clear that life begins at conception, many Catholics do not ascribe to that view. The Speaker agrees with the Church that we should reduce the number of abortions. She believes that can be done by making family planning more available, as well as by increasing the number of comprehensive age-appropriate sex education and caring adoption programs.”

Dr. Edward Peters, who holds the Edmund Cardinal Szoka Chair at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, Mich., and is one of the most widely known canon lawyers in North America, said Nancy Pelosi is in violation of Canon 915 and likely other canon laws that would prohibit her from receiving communion at Mass and potentially face other penalties.

“I think Nancy Pelosi is in violation of Canon 915 because of her advocacy of abortion and abortion-ism,” Peters told CNSNews.com. “Under Canon 915, she’s ineligible to receive the Eucharist, and if someone wants to contact her bishop, Niederauer, and express that opinion, they are perfectly within their rights to do so–and I also think they happen to be correct.”

Peter Vere, professor of Canon Law at Catholic Distance University and the author of “Surprised by Canon Law: 150 Questions Laypeople Ask About Canon Law,” said that Pelosi is in violation of Canon 915 and that her pastor should not allow her to receive communion.

On Aug. 25, The Hill newspaper quoted Pelosi as saying that she had not been denied communion. “[F]ortunately, for me, communion has not been withheld and I’m a regular communicant, so that would be a severe blow to me if that were the case,” said Pelosi.

Peters added that “Pelosi is also in danger under Canon 1369–those who use public shows and speeches to advocate against good morals. Nancy Pelosi does that all the time. But the penalty here is not excommunication. It’s a sort of generic, appropriate penalty, tailored to fit the circumstances.”

Peters, as well as Vere, however, said that HLI and Fr. Euteneur were certainly within the rights granted under Canon Law to petition the pope to excommunicate Pelosi.

It is not “unprecedented,” even though it is “not a common event,” Peters said of HLI’s actions. Church law “protects the rights of the faithful to raise questions about things that concern the good of the church,” he said. “A group is within their rights to present their arguments on the Nancy Pelosi issue.  I think their arguments are going to fail, but they are within their rights to ask for it.”

Maurice Healy, spokesman for the Archdiocese of San Francisco, confirmed to CNSNews.com that Archbishop Neiderauer met with Pelosi in private on Feb. 8. While details of that “pastoral-private” meeting cannot be disclosed, said Healy, he added that it would be correct, in this matter, to reference the bishop’s Sept. 5 statement that publicly corrected Pelosi’s comments about the church’s position on abortion – a statement in which the archbishop also invited Pelosi to meet with him to discuss the issue.

Inquiries to Pelosi’s office on this story were not answered before this story went to press.  Questions to Maurice Healy about HLI’s appeal for Pelosi’s excommunication and the topic of prohibiting her from receiving communion were also not returned as this story went to press.

Fr. Euteneur told CNSNews.com that “when people call for excommunication it’s not because they’re just angry or have some political ax to grind against some political officials who call themselves Catholic. These are real serious concerns for the faith of millions of people, and a real cause to do so, according to church law, but we can’t do it ourselves because we’re not bishops.”

After Pelosi met with Pope Benedict in Rome on Wednesday, the Vatican released the following statement about the meeting: “His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.”

Speaker Pelosi’s office also issued a statement on Feb. 18 about the meeting, which read: “It is with great joy that my husband, Paul, and I met with his Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI today. In our conversation, I had the opportunity to praise the Church’s leadership in fighting poverty, hunger and global warming, as well as the Holy Father’s dedication to religious freedom and his upcoming trip and message to Israel. I was proud to show his Holiness a photograph of my family’s papal visit in the 1950s, as well as a recent picture of our children and grandchildren.”

Related Posts: Scripture: Life Begins at Conception
Freedom of Choice Act Supporters Could Face Excommunication

The ‘Unaborted Obama’ Ad

“Right to Choose” Advocates Want to Remove the Choice from Doctors

Read Full Post »

FOX News is reporting that a bill has passed the House of Representatives in North Dakota that gives human rights to fertilized human eggs.  The bill passed the House 51-41 and goes to that State’s Senate for a vote.

North Dakota House Gives Fertilized Eggs Human Status

The measure that would make it all but impossible to get an abortion in the state now goes to the North Dakota Senate after the state House.


Wednesday, February 18, 2009

BISMARCK, N.D. — A measure approved by the North Dakota House gives a fertilized human egg the legal rights of a human being, a step that would essentially ban abortion in the state.

The bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended abortion rights nationwide, supporters of the legislation said.

Representatives voted 51-41 to approve the measure Tuesday. It now moves to the North Dakota Senate for its review.

The bill declares that “any organism with the genome of homo sapiens” is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

The measure’s sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, R-Minot, said the legislation did not automatically ban abortion. Ruby has introduced bills in previous sessions of the Legislature to prohibit abortion in North Dakota.

“This language is not as aggressive as the direct ban legislation that I’ve proposed in the past,” Ruby said during House floor debate on Tuesday. “This is very simply defining when life begins, and giving that life some protections under our Constitution — the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Critics of the measure say it will cost millions of dollars to defend. Ruby said the state has been willing to go to bat for other principles that were less important.

In Oklahoma, meanwhile, a state House committee Tuesday approved legislation that would prohibit physicians from performing abortions solely on account of the gender of a woman’s fetus, even though the measure’s author said there is no evidence the practice has ever occurred in the state.

The legislation passed 20-2 by the House Public Health Committee. The bill now goes to the full House for consideration.

The author of the bill, Rep. Dan Sullivan, R-Tulsa, said it is designed to stop couples from using the gender of a fetus as a reason to get an abortion. Sullivan said a doctor would be prohibited from performing an abortion if the mother specifically said the fetus’ sex was the reason.

However, he said there is no evidence the practice has occurred in Oklahoma. “I haven’t received any definite information that proves it,” Sullivan said.

Read Full Post »

WorldNetDaily reports that CatholicVote.org has a new ad promoting the pro-life stance.  It features a sonogram of a baby who grows up to be Barack Obama.

Watch the ad showing ‘unaborted Obama’ in womb

‘This child will become the 1st African American president’

Posted: January 22, 2009
12:45 am Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A pro-life ad is celebrating President Barack Obama’s mother’s decision not to abort the first black American president, and the video has already caught the attention of more than 200,000 viewers.

The commercial begins with an ultrasound image of a baby moving in his mother’s womb.

“This child’s future is a broken home,” it says.

“He will be abandoned by his father.”

“His single mother will struggle to raise him.”

“Despite the hardships, he will endure,” the ad states. “This child will become the first African American president.”

It features a photo of President Obama and concludes, “Life. Imagine the potential.”

The ad comes just as a number of events are scheduled in Washington to mark the 36th anniversary of the 1972 U.S. Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade opinion that struck down state restrictions on abortion, essentially installing that “right” in the Constitution.

The promotion is sponsored by CatholicVote.org, a faith-based educational program. The organization website states that it launched its “Life: Imagine the Potential” campaign “to reach Americans who are either indifferent, or who have not yet thought about the great potential of every human life.”

President Obama’s agenda regarding “reproductive choice” has been posted on the White House website.

It states, Obama “has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration.”

Related Posts: Scripture: Life Begins at Conception

Read Full Post »

WorldNetDaily is reporting that Washington D.C. police are denying pro-life groups their annual gathering to show off their sidewalk chalk display near the White House during Inauguration Week.  The D.C. police have given permission for the last 16 years for this demonstration; however, this year Commander James Crane has denied the request stating that the “sidewalk chalking” would be deemed graffiti.  Other groups have also been given permission in the past for their chalk displays.

D.C. cops ban pro-life messages

‘Is this the future of free speech and political dissent under President Obama?’

Posted: January 16, 2009
12:10 am Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

White House

The Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department has forbidden a pro-life gathering and chalk display during Inauguration Week – and now the group is fighting back with a lawsuit against the department.

Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, said the department is banning the event because of its message.

“For over 16 years, law enforcement officials have given permission to the Christian Defense Coalition to use public ‘sidewalk chalking’ as a part of their demonstrations and vigils in the nation’s capitol. The City of Washington, D.C., has also allowed numerous public ‘chalk art displays’ throughout the city,” he said in a statement. “It is therefore most troubling that for the first time the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department is banning this practice when it involves a pro-life display in front of the White House.”

Thursday, Jan. 22, marks the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Since 9714, pro-life activists have gathered in Washington, D.C., each year to protest the decision and call attention to millions of lives lost.

The Christian Defense Coalition and Generation Life and Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust asked for permission to meet and draw sidewalk chalk messages on the sidewalk near the White House, as many groups have often done during public assemblies.

However, Commander James Crane denied their request in a Jan. 7 letter. He also said applying chalk to Pennsylvania Avenue and adjacent sidewalks “would constitute defacing public property in violation of D.C. Official Code 22-3312.01.”

Terrence Ryan, general counsel for the American Center for Law & Justice, immediately responded to Crane’s letter, claiming the commander applied laws intended to prevent graffiti to the group’s chalk display.

Washington, D.C., 2005 event invited children to “chalk for peace.”

He cited other cases where police permitted sidewalk chalking – including a youth chalk art contest the city hosted for three years, and a D.C. event in 2005 where children were invited to “chalk for peace.” He included pictures of the incidents.

Ryan said permission was denied to Rev. Mahoney based on the groups’ viewpoint and content of speech.

Now the Christian Defense Coalition is filing a lawsuit in U. S. District Court on Friday, accusing the police department of infringing on First Amendment free speech rights. The pro-choice activists are seeking a temporary restraining order against police.

“Is this the future of free speech and political dissent under President Obama?” Mahoney asked in his statement. “The streets in front of the White House should be open to all views, opinions and thoughts. It should not be a place of censorship and intimidation. I hope this was not the kind of change President Obama was talking about.”

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »