|
|
|
|
Pro-Lifers on the March
Part Three of Three By Dave Andrusko
That momentum is a reflection of substantive gains, the effect of which is multiplied by the enthusiasm that those substantive gains have generated. For example, at the federal level, we've improved our legislative prospects by adding 40-55 votes (depending on the issue) in the House of Representatives. At the state level both sides agree there are now 29 pro-life governors. Both pro- and anti-life forces acknowledge that hundreds of pro-legislators have replaced pro-abortion members of state Houses and Senates. Put those two truths together and as explained in today's POLITICO story pro-abortionists (NARAL specifically) believe that "The number of states with fully anti-abortion governments -- where the governor and the legislature find themselves on the same side of the issue -- increased from 10 to 15." By contrast National Right to Life believes that number could be as high as 19. The POLITICO story, written by Sarah Kliff, does a good job capturing the energy and focus of NRLC's State Legislative Strategy Conference, which took place last week just outside of Washington, D.C. She writes that the "flagship" law that NRLC affiliates will focus on will be modeled after Nebraska's "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" which prevents abortion after 20 weeks gestation based on compelling scientific evidence that by 20 weeks, if not before, unborn children have the capacity to experience pain. Among other measures state affiliates will promote are laws: to ensure that ultrasounds are available to women contemplating abortion; to prevent public funds from being used to subsidize health insurance that covers abortion as permitted by the ObamaCare; and (at the other hand of the life spectrum) to fight the increasingly common practice by which so-called ethics committee in health care facilities authorize denial of lifesaving medical care---including food and fluids--against the will of the patient or his/her surrogates. Referring to the Nebraska law, Kliff writes, "But while multiple abortion rights groups indicated they expected the law would be immediately challenged as unconstitutional, it has remained uncontested since becoming effective Oct. 15." In response, pro-abortion representatives insisted once again it is only a matter of time before they challenge Nebraska's law, which they claim is unconstitutional. "We are looking for the right case and will file a challenge when the circumstances are appropriate,' Dionne Scott, a spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Rights, wrote in an e-mail [to Kliff]." Kliff added, "Scott declined to comment on why the group has not challenged the Nebraska law because the center does not discuss legal strategies of specific cases." Perhaps their reluctance is because they understand that a legal challenge would only ensure that more people learn the ugly, deeply unsettling truth about abortions performed later in pregnancy. That's enough to give pause to even NARAL and the Center for Reproductive Rights. Please send your comments on Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha. |
Day
by day more and more news accounts are recognizing a staggeringly important
truth. As POLITICO headlined it today, "Anti-abortion push gains momentum."