Thursday, May 3, 2012 12:54
Senator Rand Paul is partnering with the National Pro-Life Alliance in support of the Life Begins At Conception Act. The act states the following:
Your U.S. Senators and Representative
You can sign it here
Thursday, May 3, 2012 12:13
A new law in Georgia which bans late-term abortions has recently been signed by governor Nathan Deal. Prior to the signing of this law Georgia had one of the most liberal abortion policies. Citizen Link reports the following:
Georgia made a dramatic shift in protecting life Tuesday, as Gov. Nathan Deal signed into law bills banning late-term abortions and making it a felony to assist in suicides.
The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2013, shifts Georgia from having one of the most liberal abortion policies nationwide to becoming a state with one of the strictest. Currently, abortions may be obtained in the state for almost any reason throughout the entire pregnancy.
Under the new law, abortions cannot be performed after the twentieth week of pregnancy. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) estimates that change will save as many as 1,500 babies annually.
You can read the full story here.
Thursday, May 3, 2012 11:24
The following is taken from an email release from Live Action
The Arizona senate passed (18-8) the Whole Women’s Health Priority Act last week, which would defund abortion providers like Planned Parenthood of state family planning money. This bill has passed through the House and Senate, and is now headed for the desk of Governor Jan Brewer to be signed into law.
If Governor Brewer passes the bill, Arizona would join nine other states that voted to strip Planned Parenthood of tax-payer funding in 2011. These nine states were responsible for pulling over $61 million from the abortion giant PP over the course of a single year. Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report shows that they receive over $487 million in federal funding every year. Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion chain in the United States and commits over 300,000 abortions each year, so with each defunding, the lives of innocent unborn children in each of those states could be saved.
The efforts to defund Planned Parenthood are going strong in other states, as well. Last week, a provision to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood was abruptly stopped by lawmakers in Ohio, but efforts are underway for an amendment to defund Planned Parenthood in Ohio in the near future. Other states are working towards a full defunding of Planned Parenthood, and we must continue to encourage them to follow the lead of Arizona and the eight other states who have claimed pro-life victories over the past year.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012 12:11
Earlier this week more drama unfolded in Texas as Planned Parenthood wanted to receive funding and be covered under the new Women’s Health Care Program. On Monday a federal court ruled that Texas was required to continue funding Planned Parenthood. Within a few hours of that verdict was blocked by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Here is the full report from Citizen Link.
Planned Parenthood only had hours to celebrate a federal court’s decision Monday saying Texas must keep funding the group for the time being.
Before the day was over, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the lower court’s decision, allowing the new state law to be implemented that prevents groups affiliated with abortion businesses from receiving taxpayer dollars. Though Planned Parenthood had been receiving a share of state Medicaid funds for women’s health screening programs, it refers women to other health care providers for mammograms.
Judge Jerry Smith also ordered the attorneys representing eight Texas Planned Parenthood centers to present their arguments to him by 5 p.m. today. The abortion seller says the law, passed last year, violates its constitutional rights.
According to the state’s filings, abortion providers have no right to that money.
“Planned Parenthood and its affiliates have every right to … advocate for elective abortion, but they are not entitled to receive taxpayer subsidies from a government program that is designed to encourage preventative birth control and discourage abortion,” they wrote.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012 12:39
The story of Nicholas and Alexander Bolden is one of the most life affirming stories I have read in a while. Nicholas and Alexander are twins that were born prematurely at 25 weeks. They were born on April 6th and are still in the hospital. The birth weight of Nicholas is 1 pound 9 ounces and Alexander’s was 1 pound 4 ounces.
What makes the story so amazing about these twins is they were born a month after their mother died. Christine Bolden, mother of Alexander and Nicholas, suffered two brain aneurysms on March 6th and was declared brain dead. Despite her death, the twins in utero were in excellent prenatal health. For a month Christine was connected to life support so she could carry the twins to a date when they could be delivered via caesarean section.
You can read the full story from mlive media here.
In a culture that doesn’t prioritize life and chooses who should live based on what they can contribute to society, it is encouraging to see this hospital not worry about cost as they sustained Christine for the purpose of her pre-born twins.
Friday, April 27, 2012 9:17
If you are like me, you have been a part of at least one online debate about abortion. Unfortunately, I have made my share of mistakes in those debate. Reversely, I have also learned from those mistakes. Big Blue Wave has the following excellent advice for debating abortion online.
When you debate abortion online, your purpose is not to convince the person you`re talking to. So DON’T EXPECT ANY MOVEMENT ON THEIR PART and that will lessen your frustration. Abortion supporters will cling to their opinion even in the face of facts and logic because they have a strong emotional reason for doing so. It’s not your job to be their personal psychologist. Don’t play arm chair psychologist and try to get them to spill the beans about their reasons. That doesn’t convince anyone.
Your purpose is to persuade anyone who might be reading. Because online debates often have silent readers, either at the time of posting or later on when people find your discussion through search engines.
If you present facts and logic respectfully, without hitting back when they hit you with their insults, that garners a lot of respect and makes people open to thinking about the pro-life point of view.
Resist the temptation to think that when pro-aborts put you down “in front of everyone” that your degradation somehow undermines the pro-life cause.
It’s the opposite.
Thoughtful and intelligent people can see the difference between someone arguing rationally and calmly, and someone who uses insult to persuade his audience to reject your point of view.
So don’t even sweat it. The more you resist their outrage, the calmer you appear, the more credible your argument is. Your confidence in facts and logic gives credibility to your own case, whereas their recourse to insults and put downs betrays a lack of knowledge for the basis of their own beliefs.
If you argue this way on abortion, I promise you will sway people, even if you don’t think you’re doing any good. I’ve had a few people come and tell me that I’ve moved them to a more pro-life position and I’ve seen it myself. So I think it’s safe to say that I’ve helped sway people who haven’t told me.
You can read the full post here.
Thursday, April 26, 2012 13:42
In 2011 on the state level there many strides made for the pro-life cause. Although the pace has slowed down a bit in 2012, the pro-life movement has a new boldness that is continuing to make positive gains for the rights of the pre-born. Below is an excerpt from the articles, “Abortion Restrictions Gain Steam In The States” from USA Today.
New restrictions on abortion are sweeping through legislatures from Virginia to Arizona, and voters in some states could see proposed constitutional amendments on November ballots that would define life as beginning at conception.
The 2012 anti-abortion push is not as heavy as last year, when legislators in 24 states, many elected in the 2010 Republican tide, passed a record 92 laws restricting abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a group that conducts sexual and reproductive health research, policy analysis and public education.
The abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America is tracking 235 bills in legislatures that it says would restrict abortion. The group says a dozen have passed so far this year.
Some proposals would put new restrictions on when women can have abortions. Some would prevent insurance coverage of abortions. Some are aimed at funding or activities of the reproductive health organization Planned Parenthood, which provides abortions as one of a broad array of women’s health services.
“We are still feeling the ramifications of the 2010 election and what happened in 2011,” says Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for Guttmacher.
Ten major court challenges in seven states are underway against some of the new laws, and they may take four or five years to resolve, Nash says. A Texas law requiring women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound was upheld in a court challenge.
Abortion opponents say they feel emboldened…
You can read the full article here.
Thursday, April 26, 2012 12:47
One of the principles upon which Roe V. Wade is founded upon is that the right to an abortion is supposed to be a private decision between a woman and her doctor. In essence, a woman can have an abortion and keep her pregnancy a secret so that her character remain intact. The “need” for an abortion is because of a failure in birth control, so a life has to be terminated.
Tonight is the NFL draft and one of the big question marks is Janoris Jenkins. He is one of the top rated cornerbacks in the draft, but might get drafted late because of character issues. Some of the character issues are red flags, but one of them is something that might be potentially blown out of proportion. Jenkins has had four children with three different women. When asked about that he told the West Palm Beach Post, “It’s weird because I had those kids while I was playing college football and it didn’t affect me not once…I’m proud to have my four kids. If they want to throw that in my face, so be it. Everybody has kids. Where in the book do it say you can’t have kids? It doesn’t say that in the law. I’m a great father. I’m there whenever they need me.”
I don’t agree with sex before marriage, but I respect that he didn’t make the mother’s of his children choose abortion. That is a decision which shows true character, instead of taking care of a mistake in private and making it go away via abortion he has owned up to it and is seeking to be a father to his children. It is easy to look down on people who have children outside of marriage or who make mistakes like this repeatedly, but he is showing responsibility by being there and not an absentee father. The cost of an abortion would have been nothing compared to the millions that he is losing by his character being hurt, but the blessing of children is worth much more then any monetary gain.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012 13:43
First of all, a big thank you to all of our readers and your support.
We’d love to take this opportunity to get to know, so we have a little questionnaire for you to feel up so we can know more about our audience.
1) How did you discover our site
2) What do you wish we blogged about more?
3) What do you enjoy most about the site?
4) Do you follow us on twitter? https://twitter.com/#!/wetheposterity
5) Are you fan on facebook? http://www.facebook.com/WeThePosterity
6) Is your preference when we provide links to pro-life news or commentary/analysis on pro-life issues
Tuesday, April 24, 2012 8:26
New England is a very pro-choice culture, but in New Hampshire there are currently several pro-life bills that will be voted on tomorrow. Please take time to pray that the senate will pass these and that the governor will approve them.
The New Hampshire Senate is taking up a half dozen abortion bills Wednesday, including one that could jeopardize the state’s federal funding for its Medicaid program.
The bill would cut off taxpayer funding to hospitals, clinics and others who perform elective abortions, although an amendment proposes exempting hospitals. That would end funding to six Planned Parenthood of Northern New England centers and several other rural clinics. The amendment’s sponsor — Republican Sen. Gary Lambert of Nashua — hopes to reduce the financial impact on the Medicaid program, but he says he does not know what risk remains.
Health and Human Services Commissioner Nicholas Toumpas cautioned the Senate in a series of letters that the bill could imperil the state’s $1.4 billion annual state-federal Medicaid program. About half the funding is federal.
“That wasn’t feasible. That would have been a financial nightmare for the state,” Lambert said Monday.
But Toumpas stressed Monday that the amendment does not eliminate the risk to the entire Medicaid program that includes services to the disabled, mentally ill, women, children and the elderly in nursing homes.
“All that would become at risk (if the bill became law),” said Toumpas.
The Senate Health and Human Services Committee voted 3-2 last week to recommend passing the bill with the amendment…
Other bills before the Senate on Wednesday would ban partial-birth abortions, ban abortions after 20 weeks, require a 24-hour wait before an abortion, exclude contraceptives from coverage in health plans if employers have religious objections and establish a committee to determine a method to collect statistics on abortion.
Senate committees recommend passing the partial-birth abortion ban which already is prohibited by federal law and statistical study bills. They recommend killing the bill to require a 24-hour wait and studying bills to ban abortions after 20 weeks and to give employers the power to exclude contraceptive coverage from health plans.
The ultimate fate of the bills is uncertain, however, since most of the committee votes represent a fraction of the 24 senators.
Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who supports abortion rights, said Monday he is in the process of reviewing the bills. Lynch would not say whether he would veto any that reach his desk, but has in the past expressed concerns about the state becoming involved in a decision that should be made by a woman and her doctor.You can read the full story at boston.com, here