 |
          
  |
|
|
|
It
appears the Colorado Legislature is trying to keep up with California for
nuttiness. As the Colorado Springs
Gazette reports, Gov. Ritter signed a bill into law which would allow
the “transgendered” to use whichever restroom they prefer and no private
business is allowed to prohibit this activity, all in the name of so-called “non-discrimination”
and “equality.” Excerpt:
One aspect of the law enables transgenders
- those who were born one gender but identify with the other - to use public
restrooms in which they feel most comfortable.
…
Focus founder James Dobson said Thursday:
"Who would believe that the Colorado
state Legislature and its governor would have made it legal for men to enter
and use women's restrooms and locker room facilities without notice or
explanation?
"Henceforth, every woman and little
girl will have to fear that a predator, bisexual, cross-dresser or even a
homosexual or heterosexual male might walk in and relieve himself in their
presence." Don’t
think this kind of legislation won’t be coming to a state near you in the near
future. Liberal activist are pushing for
similar legislation on the federal level such as ENDA and other items.
Keep
checking AdvanceUSA Blog for the latest news on these important issues.
The New York
Times reports. Excerpt:
Opponents of same-sex unions were pondering
a range of legal and legislative challenges to Gov. David A. Paterson’s new
policy of having state agencies honor same-sex marriages that have been
performed outside New York.
Denis
Boyles unravels the twisted tale of allegations of illegal abortions,
investigations, obstruction, cover-up, and other peculiar political
circumstances. This article is well
worth the read for any pro-lifer and perhaps could hopefully open many eyes to
the corruption
and deviousness of Planned Parenthood.
Excerpt:
Caleb Stegall, Kline’s lead attorney, saw
the case in simple terms. “Laws restricting and governing abortion are
worthless if they cannot be enforced,” he said, “and up until today, they have
not been enforced. Planned Parenthood wants to keep it that way. So the message
being sent by this case as a whole is if you try to enforce these laws, if you
even try to talk about enforcing these laws, we will bury you. This overriding
message has seeped into our body politic and threatens to corrupt some of our
most basic and cherished principles such as freedom of speech and political
debate, the rule of law, and the principle of equality before the law.”
 New York Governor David Paterson is
seeking to change state regulations in order to recognize same-sex marriages
from Canada and states like California and Massachusetts. As the assault on traditional marriage
continues the need for a Federal Marriage Protection Amendment becomes all the
more clear. The
New York Times reports. Excerpts:
Gov. David A. Paterson has directed all
state agencies to begin to revise their policies and regulations to recognize
same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, like Massachusetts,
California and Canada.
…
Groups that oppose gay marriage said the
governor was essentially trying to circumvent the Legislature.
“It’s a perfect example of a governor
overstepping his authority and sidestepping the democratic process,” said Brian
Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a national
organization opposed to same-sex marriage. “It’s an issue of public policy that
should be decided by the voters.”
Sen.
Sam Brownback and David Blankenhorn write an enlightening piece about the destructive
incentives our government engenders toward the family through its tax
policy and welfare programs and what Congress should do to eliminate the “marriage
penalty.” Excerpt:
We believe that the time is ripe to
transcend the usual partisan politics and implement a plan to stop penalizing
lower-income couples who do the right thing — for themselves and their children
— and get married. That's something all of us, regardless of political
persuasion, should be able to agree on.
This
post
by newsUSA is a helpful reminder of the difference between ethical adult
stem cell research (which are already producing amazing results) and unethical
embryonic stem cell research.
Daniel
Herbster reporting
I had the
opportunity to interview Mark Tooley about his work with UMAction
at the Institute on Religion and Democracy. The following is my interview
with Mark.
DH: What is UMAction
and how would you sum up its mission? Do you see it as more of a
theological or political movement or both?
MT: UMAction
is the Methodist program of the IRD. Its goal is to foster accountability
and reform within United Methodism. We’re not political in the sense that
we endorse candidates or specific legislation in civil society. We are
political in that we are concerned about the church’s public policy witness. We
are theological in that we vigorously affirm the official, orthodox teachings
of our church. DH: I understand
that you were very active in the recent United
Methodist Church’s
global conference in Forth Worth, Texas.
Are you encouraged by what took place there?
MT: Yes,
I’m encouraged by the growing numbers and influence of the non-U.S. church,
especially in Africa. They are the hope of the church’s future.
But the church still faces many battles ahead.
DH: What kinds of
decisions were reached on pro-life issues?
MT: There
were some small, incremental steps supporting parental consent and affirming
the sacredness of unborn human life. We narrowly failed to remove church
agencies from the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Had the
vote been NOT on the last day, when many of the Africans had left, we probably
would have won.
DH: What progress
was made in affirming the traditional definition of marriage and Biblical
teaching on sexual morality?
Zenit
reports on a new book citing evidence from experts which demonstrates that unborn children can feel
pain. Excerpt from article:
The contributions from the large number of
experts who contribute to the book agree in affirming that a fetus can feel
pain before birth, the two editors explain in their introductory essay.
"Recognizing human dignity and human suffering from life in the womb is a
clinical duty in the service of better treatment," they declare.
Evidence
like this shows the need for the Unborn
Children Pain Awareness Act now in Congress (check home page and scroll
down for more information on this important pro-life bill).
LifeNews
provides helpful commentary in
reading through euthanasia spin.
Excerpt:
Even the most despicable ideas can be made
palatable when euphemisms are used to spin them. That's why abortion advocates
call themselves "pro-choice" rather than "pro abortion."
It's also why they talk about "terminating a pregnancy" rather than
"killing a baby."
Controlling the language not only controls
the argument, it often determines the outcome of the argument.
Proponents of euthanasia understand the
power of language in shaping debate. Therefore, instead of using the term
"physician-assisted suicide" to describe the practice they advocate,
they use euphemisms like "death with dignity" and "end of life
choices" to sugar coat the reality of the killings they have in view.
Frank
Turek at Townhall.com explains.
Excerpt:
Why not legalize same-sex marriage? Who could it possibly hurt? Children and the rest of society. That’s the
conclusion of David Blankenhorn, who is anything but an anti-gay “bigot.” He is
a life-long, pro-gay, liberal democrat who disagrees with the Bible’s
prohibitions against homosexual behavior. Despite this, Blankenhorn makes a
powerful case against Same-Sex marriage in his book, The Future of
Marriage.
He writes, “Across history and cultures . .
. marriage’s single most fundamental idea is that every child needs a mother
and a father. Changing marriage to accommodate same-sex couples would nullify
this principle in culture and in law.”
NBC Augusta reports that Congressman
Paul Broun (R-GA) intends to
reintroduce the Federal Marriage Protection Amendment. Apparently the recent outrageous decision by
the California Supreme Court convinced Rep. Broun of the necessity of federal action in this
case to prevent unelected judges from spreading “gay marriage” from one state
to another.
We
thank Rep. Broun for his leadership in this issue and encourage our readers to call their
representatives and urge him or her to cosponsor and vote for Broun’s
marriage amendment.
Paul
Weyrich explains. Excerpt:
For many years the teachers unions used
scare tactics to prevent school choice programs from enactment. They claimed
that voucher programs would destroy the public school system. In fact, faced
with competition, school choice has actually strengthened the public schools.
Now that the public is able to see that union propaganda was a big lie citizens
are more willing to consider vouchers. This is especially true now that it is
widely acknowledged that the public school system is broken, graduating young
people who hardly can read or write and who fail math and science.
At a time when conservatives are in a funk,
believing that nothing good is happening in America, it is time to celebrate
this milestone development in Georgia. This is a victory not just for Georgians
but for all parents who are concerned with the state of public education in
these United States.
CitizenLink
reports on the outrageous
“non-discrimination” legislation in Colorado which would make “open to men,
women, bisexuals, transsexuals and ‘transgendered’ individuals.” If ENDA
or similar legislation is passed in Congress, the entire country could be
subjected to these kinds of policies.
Fred
Thompson talks
about the recent ruling in California.
Excerpt:
So, more power to the people of California
in their uphill battle for an amendment to their state constitution. But the
real, long-term solution in the future for supporters of the rule of law is
ensuring the selection and election of good judges, judges who know their role
in a constitutional republic, in the first place, and holding them – and the
politicians who appoint and confirm them – accountable.
We
would also point out that the CA ruling illustrates the need for a Federal Marriage Protection
Amendment to permanently protect the traditional definition of marriage
from activist judges who would love to spread same-sex marriage from states
like California and Massachusetts to the rest of the country.
 Yesterday, Steven Agee
was appointed to the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
President Bush issued a statement expressing his gratefulness for Agee’s
confirmation, but also firmly rebuking the Senate for its unprecedented
judicial obstruction. Here is an excerpt
from a White House press release:
Unfortunately, many of my other judicial
nominees have not received a timely confirmation process and their nominations
have been pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee for significantly
longer.
Since the beginning of the 110th Congress,
the Senate has only confirmed eight Circuit Court nominees. In the last two years of the past three
Administrations, the Senate has confirmed an average of 17 Circuit Court
judges. I encourage the Senate to
provide all judicial nominees with a swift and fair confirmation process.
The
confirmation of Steven Agee brings the total number of Circuit Court judges
appointed in the last two years of President Bush’s term to 8 which, as our appellate court judges
chart demonstrates (below), is far below the 15 President Clinton had
confirmed by a Senate controlled by an opposing party.
Click here to see a
larger image.
 Yesterday Senator Hillary Clinton
won the Democrat Primary in Kentuky by a wide margin, while Senator Barack
Obama won the contest in Oregon. Despite
trailing in the delegate count, Sen.
Clinton promises to continue campaigning, at least until June. Senator John McCain, as expected, handily won
both states’ Republican primaries.
ABC
News has the full results for Kentucky
and Oregon.
Make
sure you know where the remaining major presidential candidates stand on
important issues with AdvanceUSA’s 2008
Candidate Comparisons.
The
Baltimore Sun reports. It is a shame
that such a common sense ruling should be so surprising. In the interests of parental rights and
traditional marriage, let’s hope that the precedent set by the Maryland Supreme
Court will be followed by courts across the country (especially
in Virginia).
Daniel Herbster reporting
 Dr. David Prentice is one of the foremost experts on bioethics in the country. He has valuable science experience from his days as researcher and teacher, and he now works for groups like the Family Research Council and Do No Harm speaking out on some of the most important (though sometimes confusing) ethical issues facing our society today. I’ve had the opportunity to meet Dr. Prentice a number of times and have heard him speak often so it is a distinct pleasure to interview him today and share with you his scientific expertise.
DH: First off, tell our readers a little about yourself. What did you do before you came to FRC? What are your responsibilities at FRC and Do No Harm?
DP: Before FRC, I spent almost 20 years as Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State University, at the same time as Adjunct Professor of Medical & Molecular Genetics for Indiana University School of Medicine.
During those years I taught and did lab research, and also spent a few years in administration.
My job description now is somewhat similar: I lecture, give briefings, and testify about science, especially the scientific facts regarding stem cells, cloning, and other biotechnologies.
DH: You often hear people say that we should “leave science to the scientists,” that we who have ethical concerns with particular research techniques have no right to an opinion if we are not scientists ourselves. Is this true? Do we as a society have a stake in deciding what research should or should not be allowed? Why is this notion so dangerous?
 DP: Some scientists might like that, but the fact is that society sets the agenda, both in terms of what's allowed as well as what resources are provided to science. Everyone has a stake in this discussion, because everyone is affected. Leaving these decisions just to one group means we abdicate our responsibility to help form a strong society.
DH: Dr. Prentice, what are stem cells?
DP: A stem cell has 2 main characteristics: (1) It continues to grow and divide, making copies of itself, and (2) given the correct signal, a stem cell can form many different specialized cells of the body.
DH: What are the two general types of stem cells, and are there any ethical differences between them?
 Unfortunately our pro-life compatriots in Great Britain were unsuccessful in passing a ban on the creation of human-animal hybrid embryos for unethical stem cell research in Parliament (for more details check this BBC report). However, it looks as though a move to lower the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 22 or 20 weeks might prove successful. It in encouraging to know that pro-lifers are fighting the good fight elsewhere in the world, but the fact that Britain will likely allow the creation of hybrid cloning is a sobering warning that such research could be coming to American shores in the near future (unless legislation like H.R. 5910 and S. 2358 is passed).
The fact that Great Britain even has a gestation limit on abortion illustrates the surprising fact that the United States is among the nations with the most unrestrictive abortion laws in the world. Many Americans are unaware that the Supreme Court decisions of Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton basically mandate that abortion for whatever reason is permissible at almost any stage of prenatal development.
See also: pro-life page, stem cell page
Photo source: roots-travel.co.uk
|
|
|
| |