April 2002

In Historic Speech, President Bush Urges Senate to Ban Human Embryo Cloning, But Democratic Leader Says No

Pro-life Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Ks.) has authored only bill that bans the cloning of human embryos.	Pro-life President George W. Bush, emphasizing his opposition to cloning human embryos.

WASHINGTON (April 14, 2002) ­ In a historic speech, President George W. Bush has called on the U.S. Senate to approve a total ban on the cloning of human embryos.
If the Senate fails to pass the pending Brownback-Landrieu bill, America faces the prospect of human "embryo farms" and widespread "destruction of nascent human life," the President said.
The President's speech was delivered on April 10 in the White House East Room to an audience of about 175 representatives of various organizations supporting the ban, including National Right to Life.
"As we seek to improve human life, we must always preserve human dignity," the President said. "And therefore, we must prevent human cloning by stopping it before it starts."

McCain-Feingold Passes, Broad Coalition Takes Law to Court

 

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) speaks at a news conference. With him is Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.)

WASHINGTON -- Within hours of its passage, "campaign finance reform" legislation that places substantial new restrictions on free speech about politicians was challenged in court. The National Right to Life Committee is among many citizen groups to file legal challenges to the so-called "Bi-partisan Campaign Reform Act," popularly referred to as "McCain-Feingold." Unless struck down by the federal courts, most of its restrictions will take effect after the November 5 general election.
As NRL News goes to press, opposition continues to grow. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) held a press conference April 10 to announce that nearly two dozen additional co-plaintiffs have joined the challenge he brought against the law. The coalition which includes National Right to Life, ranges from the ACLU on the left, to the Christian Coalition on the right.

• Fearing No Evil
  
• What a Deal!
  
• PRO-LIFE NEWS IN BRIEF
  
• Be a Friend for Life
  NRLC Convention 2002
  
• Proponents Now Want "Suicide Pill"
  Dutch Euthanasia Law Goes into Effect
  
• Deathly Quiet:
  
  The Subtle, Stealthy Advance of Euthanasia
  
• PROGRESS CONTINUES IN STATE LEGISLATURES
  
• "Noah's Law" Signed by Governor; Recognizes Unborn Victims of Violence
  
• Races Underway as Control of Senate Up for Grabs
  
• President Bush Calls on Senate to Back Human Cloning Ban
  
• Male Role is Frequently Crucial in Abortion Decision
  
• TEN DIFFERENT TYPES OF "ABORTION SURVIVORS"
  
• Urgent Congressional Alert:
  U.S. Senate to Vote on Human Embryo Cloning Ban Before May 24!
  
• 30th Annual Convention
  
• Another Casey on the Campaign Trail
  
• Senate Sponsors of the Good and Bad Bills on Human Cloning
  
• "Cures not Clones"
  
• Hawaii Assisted Suicide Measure Reaches Senate
  
• MISUSE OF SCIENCE ABOUNDS
  
• What is cloning?
  
• Chapter Profile: Corvallis Right to Life
  Real Education in a College Town
  
• West Virginia Pro-Lifers Push for Special Session
  
• ABORTION-BREAST CANCER CONNECTION BEGINNING TO HAVE ITS DAY IN COURT
  
• Senate Approves Bill to Restrict Free Speech About Politicians
  
• Attention: Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner Attendees
  
  

BULK SUBSCRIPTIONS of

NRL News
are available!!!

click here

|HOME - - www.nrlc.org|

From the President

Roe v. Wade: Partial Truths and Polls

A high school student wishing to inform herself on the legal status of abortion might reach for the 2001 New York Times Almanac. In the "U.S. Health and Medicine - Abortion" section (page 370) she would find this: "The deliberate termination of a pregnancy before the fetus is capable of living outside the womb has generally been legal in the United States since 1973, when the Supreme Court ruled (in Roe v. Wade) that abortions cannot be prohibited during the first three months of pregnancy."

This high school student would not find in the almanac a reference to a 1983 report from a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee concluding that "no significant legal barriers of any kind whatsoever exist today in the United States for a woman to obtain an abortion for any reason during any stage of her pregnancy."

In fairness to the New York Times, I should point out that its editorial news policy on the description of Roe has changed. Responding to a letter from our legislative director, Douglas Johnson, an assistant to the editor announced on July 26, 1982--nine years after Roe v. Wade--the New York Times' new policy: "After examining the substance of your point, our National News editor is promulgating a memorandum for our national desk and our Washington Bureau instructing our editors and reporters that brief references to the Supreme Court's 1973 decision on abortion should say simply that the Court legalized abortion. As you indicate, the phrase 'in the first three months of pregnancy' might be incorrectly interpreted to mean that abortions in the last six months of pregnancy remain illegal." And for the most part, the Times has stuck to this policy in its newspaper reporting.