Showing posts with label abortions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortions. Show all posts
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Catholic Church, the Election, and Freedom of Religion
Will You Vote the Values that Stand the Test of Fire?
Dinner Topics for Friday
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
Abortion, Supreme Court, and Roe v. Wade
Supreme Court Ruling Admits Roe v. Wade Abortions Can Be Bypassed
End Abortion on Demand; Help Congress Overturn Roe v. Wade Video
56 MILLION BABIES CONDEMNED TO PAINFUL DEATHS
A BOLD,
AGGRESSIVE CAMPAIGN
A simple piece of legislation to bring the “legal” definition of life in line with the biological, in effect, bypassing Roe v. Wade
Sign petition to help end abortion-on-demand once and for all.
Dear
Concerned American, I've prepared a brief but urgent video regarding breaking news in the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade in our nation.
Please take a moment to listen to my urgent message by clicking here.
After you listen, please sign the petition to finally end abortion on demand.
Sincerely,
Rand Paul,
U.S. Senator (R-KY)
Thank you for briefing me on the
National Pro-Life Alliance's campaign to pass a Life at Conception Act which
will reverse Roe v. Wade and end abortion on demand.
The Supreme Court itself said in Roe that once Congress
establishes the personhood of unborn children, they must be protected by the
14th Amendment.
Since the Supreme Court is waiting for someone to tell them who the law counts as persons, let’s not wait another minute!
To help in the battle for a Life at Conception Act, please sign the petition and donate if you can.
Since the Supreme Court is waiting for someone to tell them who the law counts as persons, let’s not wait another minute!
To help in the battle for a Life at Conception Act, please sign the petition and donate if you can.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Congress Fails Ban on Sex-Selective Abortion
House Fails to Pass Sex-Selective Abortion Ban
Planned Parenthood endorses Barack Obama
Planned Parenthood is under fire for a string of undercover videos being released that show the organization clearly has no problem aiding pregnant women in their quest to abort babies if it’s not the preferred gender they desire. Planned Parenthood says they opposed abortion based on sex-selection... what’s Barack Obama say? (hint: he wouldn’t support a partial birth abortion ban and doesn’t want his kids ‘punished with a baby’). ~Glenn Beck
What is it New Yorkers love about Mayor Bloomberg? He tells them where they can and cannot smoke, what they can and cannot eat, and now how much soda they’re allowed to drink. They’re totally fine with all that -- but if someone tells them they can’t kill a baby inside the womb, well then, it’s a woman’s body & her choice! ~Glenn Beck
Newsmax:
House Fails to Pass Sex-Selective Abortion Ban
Thursday, 31 May 2012 04:32 PM
By Todd Beamon
Despite
contentious debate in the U.S. House on Thursday, legislation to ban
sex-selective abortions could not muster the two-thirds support necessary to
pass, according to Fox News.
The final vote was 246-168 — 30 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to pass the Republican-backed proposal, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.
"There has never been a more pro-abortion president in the White House,” Franks said. “I'm astonished the leader of the free world would fail to protect the unborn from being aborted on the basis of sex."
Under the bill, carrying out an abortion based on the gender of the fetus would have been a federal crime. The measure targeted the aborting of female fetuses. The practice is more common to such countries as India and China, where sons are strongly preferred, but is thought to take place in the U.S.
The White House and Democratic lawmakers objected to the bill out of concern that it could end up subjecting doctors to strict punishment, suggesting the law would be difficult to follow.
"The administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.
Still, GOP lawmakers cited the opposition as further proof of the administration's abortion advocacy.
"It is inconceivable to me how our Nobel Prize-winning president can refuse to protect little girls from the violence of sex-selection abortion," Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said on Thursday.
Supporters characterized the vote as a sex-discrimination issue just as Democrats are accusing Republicans of waging a war on women. A day before the vote, Planned Parenthood attacked GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney as planning to "deny women the right to make their own medical decisions."
The legislation would have made it a federal offense, subject to up to five years in prison, to perform, solicit money to perform, or coerce a woman into a sex-selection abortion. Bringing a woman into the country for such a procedure also would be punishable by up to five years in prison.
Franks and others say evidence of sex-selection abortions exist in the United States among certain ethnic groups from countries with a traditional preference for sons. The bill notes that countries like India and China, where the practice has contributed to lopsided boy-girl ratios, have banned the practice.
The final vote was 246-168 — 30 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to pass the Republican-backed proposal, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.
"There has never been a more pro-abortion president in the White House,” Franks said. “I'm astonished the leader of the free world would fail to protect the unborn from being aborted on the basis of sex."
Under the bill, carrying out an abortion based on the gender of the fetus would have been a federal crime. The measure targeted the aborting of female fetuses. The practice is more common to such countries as India and China, where sons are strongly preferred, but is thought to take place in the U.S.
The White House and Democratic lawmakers objected to the bill out of concern that it could end up subjecting doctors to strict punishment, suggesting the law would be difficult to follow.
"The administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.
Still, GOP lawmakers cited the opposition as further proof of the administration's abortion advocacy.
"It is inconceivable to me how our Nobel Prize-winning president can refuse to protect little girls from the violence of sex-selection abortion," Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said on Thursday.
Supporters characterized the vote as a sex-discrimination issue just as Democrats are accusing Republicans of waging a war on women. A day before the vote, Planned Parenthood attacked GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney as planning to "deny women the right to make their own medical decisions."
The legislation would have made it a federal offense, subject to up to five years in prison, to perform, solicit money to perform, or coerce a woman into a sex-selection abortion. Bringing a woman into the country for such a procedure also would be punishable by up to five years in prison.
Franks and others say evidence of sex-selection abortions exist in the United States among certain ethnic groups from countries with a traditional preference for sons. The bill notes that countries like India and China, where the practice has contributed to lopsided boy-girl ratios, have banned the practice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)