click here for Today's News & Views

February 2005
Vol. 32, No. 2


Will you stand with the unborn?

Real Heroes Standing in the Gap
By Don Parker
NRLC Development Director

Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist administered the oath
of office to President George W. Bush.

On January 20, I had the honor to stand on the chilly grounds of the U.S. Capitol and watch as history was being made.

As the 55th Inauguration of a President of the United States unfolded before me and thousands of other Americans, it was hard not to think of the hope and promise that the first President, George Washington, must have felt for the new republic that he would lead. This reminded me of the hope that we pro-lifers have today for our nation and its unborn children.

History has brought us to a time when hope is rife that we can change our laws and our culture so that they protect every precious life, as promised in the Declaration of Independence. Could this be the time in history when the promises of our nation's founding documents are finally fulfilled?

As I was thinking about this, a truly amazing thing happened. On a large viewing screen, I could see the leader of one of the institutions charged with protecting those precious rights, the U.S. Supreme Court, begin to walk down the long series of stairs just inside the Capitol Building.

For most people, this would not be a remarkable feat. But for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who has been fighting what is thought to be a particularly aggressive form of thyroid cancer, it was an act of sheer willpower.

Continue Article...

New Congress Brings Pushon Bills on
Pain of Unborn Child and
Parental Notification

Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)   Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fl.)

WASHINGTON (February 3, 2004) - - Pro-life forces have hit the ground running in the just-convened 109th Congress, hoping to fast-track two major pieces of pro-life legislation.

One high-priority measure is the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act (UCPAA), a bill to require abortionists to inform a woman who is seeking an abortion after 20 weeks that the baby will feel pain during the abortion, and, if she proceeds, to require that she accept or refuse administration of a pain-reducing drug to the baby.

Also a top priority is legislation to protect the right of parents to be notified before a minor undergoes an abortion in a state other than her state of residence.

"President Bush supports both pieces of legislation," White House press spokesman Trent Duffy told reporters on January 24.

Continue Article...


From the President

Wanda Franz, Ph.D.


I want all of you, our members and friends, to have a clear view of what we are facing.

What is ahead is a much tougher struggle than the elections of 2004. In the past, some pro-lifers made the faulty assumption that election victories would almost automatically transform themselves into new pro-life laws and policy changes. By now, it should be clear to everyone that it is not so.

To change law is always difficult.

First, a law that gives "rights"--no matter how questionable--is hard to repeal because people are reluctant to take "rights" away. It's hard, but it can be done.

Second, and more importantly, our Founding Fathers didn't want government to be able just to wave a wand and change the lives of millions of people. They wanted deliberation. And deliberation is what they--and we--got. Look at how pro-abortionists in Congress exploited the process of legislative deliberation to stall passage of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. The Senate couldn't muster the votes to override two vetoes by Bill Clinton.

The third, and most difficult, obstacle to legislative change arises in the case of Supreme Court-imposed law--law that was never subject to legislative deliberation. What our Founding fathers did not anticipate was an arrogant Supreme Court "waving the wand" and "legislating" massive social change "from the bench"--as it did in Roe v. Wade--inventing the "right" to abortion-on-demand through the entire nine months of pregnancy. Overriding Court-imposed law requires us either to persuade the Court to reverse itself or to pass a Constitutional amendment correcting the Court's arrogance.

Continue Dr. Franz's Column

Complete NRL News
2004 Subject Index

NRL News


DECEMBER 9, 1997


FEBRUARY 11, 1998
MARCH 11, 1998
APRIL 14, 1998
MAY 7, 1998
JULY 8, 1998
JUNE 9, 1998
AUGUST 12, 1998
SEPTEMBER 28, 1998
OCTOBER 12, 1998
NOVEMBER 17, 1998
DECEMBER 10, 1998


JANUARY 22, 1999
FEBRUARY 19, 1999
MARCH 15, 1999
APRIL 8, 1999
MAY 11, 1999
JUNE 10, 1999
JULY 6, 1999
AUGUST 10, 1999
SEPTEMBER 14, 1999
OCTOBER 12, 1999


January 2000
February 2000
March 2000
April 2000
May 2000
June 2000
July 2000
August 2000
September 2000
October 2000
November 2000
December 2000


January 2001
February 2001
March 2001
April 2001
May 2001
June 2001
July 2001
August 2001
September 2001
October 2001
November 2001
December 2001


January 2002
February 2002
March 2002
April 2002

May 2002

June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002


January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003


January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
une 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004

December 2004

January 2005

February 2005

Subscribe Today to NRL News

Click here for ordering information