 |
|
|
|
Schindler Family to be Honored at
Bush’s
Veto and Executive Order Advance Research On June 20, President George W. Bush coupled a veto of a bill to mandate federal funding of the type of stem cell research that requires the killing of human embryos with an Executive Order to promote more federal funding for promising types of stem cell research that do not require harming human embryos. “Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical †and it is not the only option before us,” the President said of the bill, S5. “We’re already seeing remarkable advances in the science and therapeutic uses of stem cells drawn from adults and children, and the blood from umbilical cords †with no harm to the donor.” Predictably, Mr. Bush came under withering attack from proponents of embryonic stem cells. “It’s just one example of how the president puts ideology before science, politics before the needs of our families,” said Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) the day of the veto. The June 7 comments of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) were also revealing. “Science has taken us to a place that is biblical in its power to cure,” Pelosi said, “and that is the embryonic stem cell research.”
Democrats
in Congress Launch Attack on Ban on WASHINGTON (June 26, 2007) – The U.S. House of Representatives on June 21 narrowly approved legislation that would provide certain types of U.S. government assistance to private organizations that promote abortion as a method of family planning in foreign countries. However, the pro-abortion provision still has considerable obstacles in front of it — including a threatened veto by President Bush. The pro-abortion language, authored by Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), was approved as part of the State-Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill (H.R. 2764). Under the Lowey language, the agency that administers foreign aid programs, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), would be required to provide contraceptive supplies to overseas organizations even if they promote abortion as a method of family planning. The Lowey language would severely weaken a vital pro-life policy (called the “Mexico City Policy”), which was originally adopted by President Reagan and announced at a 1984 population conference in Mexico City. The policy was reinstated by President Bush in 2001.
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
PRODUCTIVE
PRO-LIFE WORK The Supreme Court’s recent Gonzales v. Carhart decision, upholding the legality of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (PBABA), has been a source of great satisfaction for the focused and hard-working pro-lifers of this country. The reaction to the verdict is not uniformly positive—especially not in the camp of hardcore pro-abortionists. Badly misguided as they otherwise are, they correctly perceive the serious damage done to their cause by Gonzales v. Carhart and by our campaign leading up to it. Hence, their fury and disappointment. It is harder to understand why some “friends” have so angrily denounced us over the PBABA. In view of this “friendly fire,” let’s take a sober look. During the 14 years of intensive debate about partial-birth abortions, the public’s attitude became more pro-life as the abortion debate was re-focused: away from pro-abortion slogans and towards the horrific reality of abortion; the annual number of abortions decreased; and, defending the indefensible, the pro-abortion side was caught in so many lies and deceptions that its credibility greatly suffered. NRL News Archive2007 2006
2005 2004 2003
2002 |
