The Georgia state legislative committee voted to table HR 536, the GA Human Life Amendment. This means a vote on it has indefinitely postponed...and not a moment too soon.
It is not against pro-life principles to be against a state human life amendment at this juncture. Consider that the GA committee chairman said that the proposed amendment "[sought] to make a direct attack on Roe v. Wade." Simply based on observations like this, the US Supreme Court could easily strike the state amendment down based on passed precedence. The amendment is crafted specifically to attack Roe and meant to place a significant obstacle in the way of women seeking an abortion. Those aren't necessarily bad things, but they will create a judicial precedent used to kill federal Human Life Amendment.
I know Georgia Right to Life had supported the amendment, but neither National Right to Life nor the Catholic Bishops did. It may be that the state group needed to give support in order not to offend their members, but it certainly shows a lack of understanding. But that's just me.
20.2.08
12.2.08
Now it's really sad!
There was a tremendous blog on the destructive behavior of "American Right to Life," a group which exists for some unfathomable purpose. They are truly the terrorists of the pro-life movement who have taken the easier path of tearing things down over the difficult and right path of building things up.
A further example of their despicable behavior is their explicit lying in a recent press release which was picked up by a few media outlets in which they said National Right to Life had endorsed both Fred Thompson AND Mitt Romney. It's just as I had said in my January 17th entry: they are putting out disinformation. There was a reply to that entry which was as misleading as the press releases themselves.
If this group tries to tear down any more pro-life towers and hand delivers the presidency to the pro-aborts (and by this I DON'T mean John McCain who is the pro-life option), then they are simply people "principled" beyond reason.
A further example of their despicable behavior is their explicit lying in a recent press release which was picked up by a few media outlets in which they said National Right to Life had endorsed both Fred Thompson AND Mitt Romney. It's just as I had said in my January 17th entry: they are putting out disinformation. There was a reply to that entry which was as misleading as the press releases themselves.
If this group tries to tear down any more pro-life towers and hand delivers the presidency to the pro-aborts (and by this I DON'T mean John McCain who is the pro-life option), then they are simply people "principled" beyond reason.
24.1.08
Fred's Out
It's too bad that Fred Thompson is out of the race. I know better than to badmouth any of the other candidates because I will end up having to vote for one of them. I'm just disappointed that this election will be based on superficialities. Democrats can vote for the black one, the woman or the lawyer, Republicans can vote for the wealthy Mormon, the 9/11 guy, the Baptist preacher, the war vet, or the crazy (that's right, Ron Paul...or quite frankly anyone who believes in him). No one will try to get any deeper. That's something to be frightened about.
17.1.08
It's more than a little sad...
"American Right to Life" Action put out a press release yesterday condemning, among other thing, the support National Right to Life has given to Mitt Romney in his presidential bid. What planet are they on? What support was that? Did it help him when they endorsed Fred Thompson? Or maybe when a couple of their state organizations endorsed Mike Huckabee...surely that's what must have helped Mitt's campaign along?
Maybe they're just hoping that if they say something that people will think it's true. Between that and the creepy anti-Romney ad they produced, I'm not sure how anyone can take them seriously.
Maybe they're just hoping that if they say something that people will think it's true. Between that and the creepy anti-Romney ad they produced, I'm not sure how anyone can take them seriously.
13.12.07
Kudos to Fred
Fred Thompson has picked up not only the endorsement of the National Right to Life, but also so many of its affiliates that I think it would be hard to say that he does not have the support of pro-lifers across the country.
I read this Fred blog talking about him making a comeback and taking Iowa. I certainly hope they are on to something. I believe it.
Fred did a tremendous job at that last debate. Kudos to him for refusing to answer the ridiculously over-simplified question regarding climate change.
I read this Fred blog talking about him making a comeback and taking Iowa. I certainly hope they are on to something. I believe it.
Fred did a tremendous job at that last debate. Kudos to him for refusing to answer the ridiculously over-simplified question regarding climate change.
19.11.07
Interesting
How interesting it is that this Washington Times editorial finds it so interesting that the National Right to Life endorsed Fred Thompson. Interesting because the same publication, in the same edition, carried the comments of Romney supporter Paul Weyrich who outright accused NRLC of taking money for their endorsement.
I would say it's interesting that bribery is the first place Mr. Weyrich's mind goes when he hears the word endorsement. I would also say that it's interesting that the Washington Times found it necessary to reiterate all the possible complaints about this endorsement for which NRLC provided concrete answers.
In other news, I was encouraged to see somebody making more sense about the endorsement.
I would say it's interesting that bribery is the first place Mr. Weyrich's mind goes when he hears the word endorsement. I would also say that it's interesting that the Washington Times found it necessary to reiterate all the possible complaints about this endorsement for which NRLC provided concrete answers.
In other news, I was encouraged to see somebody making more sense about the endorsement.
17.11.07
HLA
Thank you, Kathryn Jean Lopez! At least somebody's paying attention to the fact that recent Human Life Amendment initiatives are going nowhere fast.
And items like this do seem to be turning out rather quickly. The Colorado Supreme Court recently allowed the language of a ballot initiative there that could put to a referendum vote whether their state constitution should be amended to recognize fertilized human embryos as persons. It's a beautiful sentiment. It truly is, because they are human persons. But considering the fact that it will end up doing nothing means that it's only a sentiment. I guess that kind of sentimentality would at least be in time for Christmas.
Oh, I guess it wouldn't do nothing. Let's see, they need to collect a little over 76,000 signatures in a state with a population of 4,753,500 (which also the mega church capitol of the country, so they can probably get the signatures without too much trouble). That means they're looking for a little more than 1.5% of the population to sign on and bring it to a vote where it will likely fail. Even if it didn't, it would be struck down by the US Supreme Court. So I guess it would set a pretty nasty precedent in the Supreme Court for how to decide on the personhood of the unborn.
Well, even if they ruin the chances for ultimately protecting the lives of the unborn, they can always pretend that these personhood petitions and votes were some sort of moral victory and fund raise off of it. I can hear it now: "This past year, millions of Americans came together to defend the humanity of the unborn...send help/contribute/donate now!" Talk about blood money.
And items like this do seem to be turning out rather quickly. The Colorado Supreme Court recently allowed the language of a ballot initiative there that could put to a referendum vote whether their state constitution should be amended to recognize fertilized human embryos as persons. It's a beautiful sentiment. It truly is, because they are human persons. But considering the fact that it will end up doing nothing means that it's only a sentiment. I guess that kind of sentimentality would at least be in time for Christmas.
Oh, I guess it wouldn't do nothing. Let's see, they need to collect a little over 76,000 signatures in a state with a population of 4,753,500 (which also the mega church capitol of the country, so they can probably get the signatures without too much trouble). That means they're looking for a little more than 1.5% of the population to sign on and bring it to a vote where it will likely fail. Even if it didn't, it would be struck down by the US Supreme Court. So I guess it would set a pretty nasty precedent in the Supreme Court for how to decide on the personhood of the unborn.
Well, even if they ruin the chances for ultimately protecting the lives of the unborn, they can always pretend that these personhood petitions and votes were some sort of moral victory and fund raise off of it. I can hear it now: "This past year, millions of Americans came together to defend the humanity of the unborn...send help/contribute/donate now!" Talk about blood money.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
