 |
|
|
Embryo-Killing Bill Dies After Presidential Veto, House Vote
Despite 65–34 vote for passage Senate Democratic Leaders Block Progress of Parental Notification Legislation WASHINGTON (August 11, 2006)--Both houses of Congress have passed bills to protect the rights of parents to be notified before an abortion is performed on a minor daughter--but Senate Democratic leaders, led by Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nv.), have thrown up an extraordinary procedural obstacle in an attempt to prevent the bill from becoming law during the final weeks of the 109th Congress. The House and Senate have passed different versions of the legislation by sizeable majorities. But with only five short weeks remaining before Congress adjourns for the year, pro-abortion lawmakers are trying to "run out the clock" by throwing up roadblocks to the normal legislative process, according to NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. "The Senate Democratic leadership is doing the bidding of the abortion industry, obstructing parental noti-fication legislation that is supported by over 80 percent of the public," Johnson explained. The House has passed versions of the legislation four times since 1998. Each time, the bill has been killed by actions of the Senate Democratic leadership.
NRLC-Backed Fetus Farming Ban Enacted Into Law WASHINGTON (August 11, 2006) – A bill to require federal funding of the type of stem cell research that requires killing human embryos died in July, when President Bush vetoed the bill and 193 members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted to sustain his veto.
The bill, H.R. 810, strongly opposed by NRLC, initially passed the House by a substantial margin in 2005, and was passed by the Senate on July 18 by a vote of 63-37. (See Senate roll call, page 23.) President Bush vetoed the bill on July 19. At a White House event at which he was flanked by "Snowflakes" – young children who were adopted while they were still frozen embryos – and by patients who had benefitted from treatments using stem cells from sources other than human embryos, the President said that the bill "crosses a moral boundary" that he is determined to defend. 
PDF
version
EDITORIAL
The
UNALIENABLE RIGHT TO LIFE and the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED
Adult Stem Cell Treatment for Spinal Cord Injury
Shows Promise
New U.S. Study Shows Abortion Is Riskier to
Adolescents' Mental Health than Carrying an Unintended Pregnancy to Term
New Zealand Abortion and Mental Health Study
Exposes Unfounded Claims of Pro-Abortion Organizations
ATTENTION: Be a part of the National Right to Life E-mail List. We are sending out up-to-the-minute alerts that deal with pro-life legislation, breaking pro-life news, and much, much more. This will not be a daily abortion update, but rather a way to bring crucial, time-sensitive material to our grassroots supporters. So, don't delay and sign up today!! The address again is
BULK SUBSCRIPTIONS |
From the President
The
UNALIENABLE RIGHT TO LIFE and the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED
We hold
these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of
Happiness--That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted
among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the
Governed… Consider the above words, and this is what we learn: The right to life is a "self-evident truth;" it is not based on the speculations and shifting opinions of men. The right to life is "unalienable" and an essential part of us. It exists independently from what others want. It is not a grant from government. It exists, whether there is a government or not. And it certainly can't be ruled out of existence by unelected judges. The government derives its "just Powers from the Consent of the Governed," namely us. The Founding Fathers believed in "the capability of a people to govern themselves," as Abraham Lincoln put it. The reason for government is "to secure these Rights." So the Constitution is, to use the words of the political scientist Paul Rahe, the "instrument for the im-plementation" of the Declaration of Independence. Thus, judges are not free to ignore the principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence. Read Dr. Franz's Entire Column NRL News Archive2006
2005 2004 2003
2002 |
