AUGUST 2005
Vol. 32, No.
8
Supreme Court
to Hear Ayotte Case November 30
November 30 has been set as the date for the United States Supreme
Court to hear Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of N. New.
England.
In Ayotte, the newly constituted Court will hear the challenge to
New Hampshire's 2003 parental notification law.
The measure, which enjoyed widespread bipartisan support, requires
that abortionists may not perform an abortion on an unemancipated minor
until "at least 48 hours after written notice of the pending abortion"
has been delivered to one of her parents. This requirement is waived if
the "attending abortion provider certifies in the pregnant minor's
medical record that the abortion is necessary to prevent the minor's
death and there is insufficient time to provide required notice."
The law, signed by then Governor Craig Benson in June 2003, was to
take effect in December. However, in November, Planned Parenthood of
Northern New England, Concord Feminist Health Center, Feminist Health
Center of Portsmouth, and a private physician successfully filed a
complaint with the United States District Court for the District of New
Hampshire for a declaratory judgment that the act was unconstitutional
and an injunction to prevent its enforcement once it was to become
effective.
Last November the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston
agreed with the lower court. Both cited the absence of an explicit
exception to protect the mother's health. As required by prior Supreme
Court decisions, the law also contains a judicial bypass by which minors
can avoid telling their parents by going to a judge.
The law was closely modeled on the Minnesota law upheld by the
Supreme Court in Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990). The law has saved
many lives.
Continue article...
You can help us defeat pro-abortion attacks
Unfair Attacks Begin in Earnest Against Judge John Roberts
There have been a lot of "theories" about the recent Supreme
Court nomination.
Theories about who would retire from the court. Theories about
who the new nominee would be, with pundits claiming "inside information"-- only
to be proved wrong.
There have been theories about the nominee's politics, or how he
would vote once on the court.
But one thing was never theoretical. Whoever President Bush
named to the U.S. Supreme Court, pro-abortion groups were going to attack.
They were pre-programmed to do so. Like attack dogs let loose
from the leash, they could only respond to whomever was nominated by viciously
and relentlessly attacking their prey, in this case Federal Appeals Court Judge
John Roberts.
Roberts, by all accounts, is a good and decent man of deep faith
who loves his family and has a deep respect for his profession, the law.
So perhaps it's not surprising, knowing the modus operandi of our
pro-abortion opponents over the years that the first attacks, or "concerns" as
the media likes to call them, have come against Judge Roberts' family, his
faith, and his view of the law.
Continue article...
|
|
From the President
 |
|
Wanda Franz, Ph.D. |
A MASSIVE
DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN FOR EMBRYONIC STEM CELL
RESEARCH
On July 10, 2005, about 36 million
households received Parade magazine as a Sunday supplement. The cover page
was emblazoned with “Now…what the American people think about Stem Cell
Research—A New Parade/Research!America Health Poll.” Inside, readers found
Micah Morrison’s article about “the state of stem cell research around the
world” and a poll that is the cleverest piece of propaganda yet in support
of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
Morrison reviews the state
of ESCR in various countries and suggests that ESCR in the United States is
coming up short.
To his credit, Morrison
states that “[t]he promise of embryonic stem cell science remains just
that—a promise. Adult stem cells, derived primarily from blood, have helped
thousands with leukemia and genetic disorders. Embryonic stem cell
research, still relatively new, has yet to produce any groundbreaking cell
therapy cures—and may never, some critics say. But that hasn’t stopped
scientists from believing in their potential.”
Read Dr. Franz's Entire Column
Complete NRL News
2004 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
2001 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
2000 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1999 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1998 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1997 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1996 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1995 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1994 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1993 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1992 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1991 Subject Index
Complete NRL News
1990 Subject Index
NRL News
Archive
2001
January
2001
February 2001
March 2001
April 2001
May 2001
June 2001
July 2001
August 2001
September 2001
October 2001
November 2001
December 2001
2002
January
2002
February 2002
March 2002
April 2002
May 2002
June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002
2003
January
2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
2004
January
2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
2005
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August
2005
Subscribe
Today to NRL News
|