Barack Obama is losing votes among women. So his campaign concocted a claim that his opponents are conducting a “war on women.”
The Obama campaign is known for this kind of demagoguery. A policy disagreement becomes a “war.” Exaggeration fades into lies.
So what would constitute a “war”? Killing people, to start with. Ironic, then, that the Obama Administration strongly supports a policy – abortion – that does just that. And in some places, it’s baby girls who are being targeted by abortion, because some people prefer to have a baby boy.
It’s called sex-selection abortion. A test is done to determine the sex of an unborn child. Often, if the test shows the baby is a girl, she is killed.
And it’s happening right here in the United States. An Austin, Texas Planned Parenthood employee was recently caught on tape counseling a woman how to get a sex-selection abortion. These kinds of abortions are usually done in secret because they’re so disturbing to the public, but they are occurring.
We can stop this war on baby girls by enacting legislation to ban sex-selection abortions in the United States. A solid majority of the U.S. House of Representatives just voted in favor of a bill (H.R. 3541) to ban the killing of an unborn baby because of gender.
Yesterday the White House announced that the Obama Administration opposes the bill! Is there any form of abortion Obama doesn’t support?
The National Right to Life Victory Fund is dedicated to defeating Barack Obama and pro-abortion members of the U.S. Senate and House who are blocking life-saving legislation like the ban on sex-selection abortions and other compassionate pro-life bills. Your financial support of the NRL Victory Fund will hasten the day when children will no longer be targeted for death because of their gender.
Unborn children deserve so much more than the violence of abortion. We work for the day when every unborn girl and boy can enjoy their first months of life in peace and protection of the law.
Less than one week before the historic June 5th Wisconsin recall election, pro-life Governor Walker leads his pro-abortion challenger, Tom Barrett, by seven points – 52% - 45% — among likely voters. Conducted by the Marquette University Law School, the poll was taken between May 23 and May 26. Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch leads her pro-abortion challenger, Mahlon Mitchell, by 46% to 41%. This is likely to be the last poll released prior to the election. Poll results can be found here.
Governor Walker is a long-time hero for the pro-life cause, having begun his advocacy as the student pro-life leader at Marquette University, the same entity which conducted the poll. Tom Barrett has an extensive voting history in favor of abortion, having voted for taxpayer funding of abortion and for partial-birth abortion when he was a member of Congress. Barrett was also a co-sponsor of the Freedom of Choice Act, a measure so extreme that it would even remove state restrictions on abortion. Barrett is a favorite of Planned Parenthood and has received its strong endorsement.
Asked if they were “absolutely certain” to vote on June 5th, 92”% of Republicans responded yes and 77% of Democrats said yes. Since all pundits and both campaign managers believe the vote will come down to turnout, this is good news for Walker. However, absentee voting began over a week ago and this voting appears to favor Barrett. Wisconsin Right to Life urges its supporters not to be complacent due to poll results and to do everything possible to ensure that they vote Walker/Kleefisch on June 5 and bring others to the polls.
Barbara Lyons
Authorized and paid for by the Wisconsin Right to Life Political Action Committee, Richard Fox, Treasurer. Not Authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. The committee is the sole source of this communication and the committee did not act in cooperation or consultation with, and in concert with, or at the request or suggestion of any candidate or any agent or authorized committee of a candidate who is supported or opposed by this communication.
In 2008, President Obama enjoyed wide support from American Catholics, with 54% voting for him compared to 45% for John McCain. The Catholic vote is critical to his re-election, and now that voter segment’s support for the President is in doubt. One of the key reasons is the Obama administration HHS mandate which forces Catholic institutions to pay for drugs and treatments that violate the principles of the Church.
In early March, a Pew Research Center survey found that President Obama was ahead of any opponent by nine points with Catholic voters. A more recent poll by the same group shows considerable slippage with 47% of Catholics stating they would vote for President Obama compared to 52% for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. If these numbers hold up, President Obama would lose some 18 million voters, a very significant swing in the wrong direction for the President’s re-election chances, especially in key election states.
How could the President have gone so wrong with a large voter group so enamored with his message in 2008? Some genius adviser apparently convinced him that creation of a “war on women” would advance his candidacy. Even Catholic women would side with the President instead of their own church, and large numbers of other women, especially young women, would swing to his side to compensate for the loss of other Catholics.
Not only has the President alienated numbers of Catholics with the mandate, but he single-handedly strengthened the resolve of members of other faiths who smell an unprecedented assault on religion that will impact all churches. A gross miscalculation on the President’s part which, added to his undeterred support for abortion on demand, could lead to his defeat in November. Let’s hope so.
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the nation’s largest pro-life organization and the parent organization of Wisconsin Right to Life, today urged members of the U.S. House of Representatives to go on record against “the escalating war on baby girls,” by voting to pass a national ban on sex-selection abortions when the bill reaches the House floor tomorrow (Wednesday, May 30).
The legislation is a recently revised version of the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA) (H.R. 3541), sponsored by Congressman Trent Franks (R-Az.). The House will consider the bill under “Suspension of the Rules,” which means that a two-thirds vote will be required for passage. The debate is expected around 2:30 PM EDT, and the vote at about 7:00 PM EDT.
In a letter sent this morning (May 29, 2012) to House members, NRLC quotes the recent observation of political economist Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute: “In terms of its sheer toll in human numbers, sex-selective abortion has assumed a scale tantamount to a global war against baby girls.” The letter also cites studies that indicate the practice is becoming increasingly prevalent in the U.S., particularly within communities of immigrants from Asia. The letter notes that NRLC may include the roll call on H.R. 3541 in the NRLC congressional “scorecard” for the 112th Congress. Read the full letter here.
The bill would make it a federal offense, punishable by up to five years in federal prison, to knowingly do any one of the following four things: (1) perform an abortion, at any time in pregnancy, “knowing that such abortion is sought based on the sex or gender of the child”; (2) use “force or threat of force. . . for the purpose of coercing a sex-selection abortion”; (3) solicit or accept funds to perform a sex-selection abortion; or (4) transport a woman into the U.S. or across state lines for this purpose. However, “A woman upon whom a sex-selection abortion is performed may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable for any violation . . .”
NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson commented, “Those lawmakers who recently have embraced contrived political rhetoric asserting that they are resisting a ‘war on women’ must reflect on whether they now wish to be recorded as being defenders of the escalating war on baby girls.”
The best “brand” that abortion proponents have had for decades is the “pro-choice” label. For years, pro-choice has been the “in” position. Even people who thought abortion was terrible and shouldn’t be legal would self-describe as “pro-choice” because it seemed like the tolerant thing to do. No more.
Gallup has polled on this label question going back to 1995. The latest poll released this week shows that 50% of Americans now self-identify as pro-life and, according to Gallup, a record low of 41% as pro-choice. “The 41% of Americans who now identify themselves as ‘pro-choice’ is down from 47% last July and is one percentage point below the previous record low Gallup trends, recorded in May 2009,” states Gallup.
Gallup continues: “…identification with labels has shifted from a wide lead for the pro-choice position in the mid-1990s, to a generally narrow lead for ‘pro-choice’ — from 1998 through 2008 — to a close division between the two positions since 2009. However, in the last period, Gallup has found the pro-life position significantly ahead on two occasions, once in May 2009 and again today.”
So, who is driving the numbers? Republicans have become more pro-life from 68% a year ago to 72% now. Independents have moved from 51% pro-choice a year ago to 41% now. Finally, even Democrats have moved, with 68% identifying as pro-choice a year ago to 58% now.
In addition to the label question, the Gallup poll found that 51% of Americans believe abortion is “morally wrong,” and 38% say it is “morally acceptable.” Regarding the legality of abortions, the poll found that 52% of Americans believe abortion should be “legal only under certain circumstances,” 25% say “legal under any circumstances,” and 20% favor “illegal in all circumstances.” It is important to note that while only 25% favor legality in all circumstances, that is the current state of the law across America.
At this time, RU 486 chemical abortions, which comprise 26% of all Wisconsin abortions, are not readily available in Wisconsin. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, which operates three abortion clinics in Wisconsin, suspended RU 486 abortions last month. Affiliated Medical Services, located in Milwaukee, has also suspended them. Will this moratorium last? It’s not likely as abortion clinics valiantly try to make Governor Walker and the legislature villains in the fictitious “war on women.” Watch for chemical abortions to resume sometime after the June 5 recall elections.
The “logic,” or lack thereof, for eliminating this “service” is laughable. Affiliated Medical Services proclaims on its website that — “Effective 5-11-12 Due to pending legislation in Wisconsin, we are no longer able to offer the Abortion Pill. We regret this inconvenience and encourage you to contact state legislators and the Governor to express your frustration!” Hint, hint.
The new Wisconsin law enacted by the legislature requires that prior to prescription of an abortion-inducing drug, the prescriber must perform a physical exam on the woman and be physically present to give the drug. Abortion proponents wail that these provisions are, in the words of NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin, “vague, unnecessary and intrusive restrictions for abortion providers.” During debate on the new law, pro-abortion legislators insisted that telling women to return for follow-up at the clinic that administers the drug is detrimental as women should be able to go to a medical provider in their own community.
So, what does the Affiliated Medical Services website say about administration of what they call the Abortion Pill?
“Requires 3 visits to the clinic” (Not to a medical provider somewhere else)
“Requires a pelvic examination on day medication is given” (A physical exam! Pro-abortion legislators made this sound like an unprecedented invasion on the woman’s body — a war on women!)
NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin Director Lisa Subeck states in a news release on the suspension of RU 486 abortions by Affiliated Medical Services that “Wisconsin women are worse off with Governor Walker than with any other Governor in recent history. The June 5th recall election provides an unprecedented opportunity to put a decisive end to Walker’s War on Wisconsin Women.”
If it weren’t so deadly and serious, one could have a good laugh at the easily-refuted rhetoric employed by those who take money from women for destroying their children.
It was inevitable. To protect itself and its institutions from an unprecedented HHS mandate that violates religious liberty, 43 Catholic organizations have filed lawsuits in a dozen federal jurisdictions across the country asking that the mandate be declared unconstitutional. Two of the primary litigants are the Archdiocese of New York, headed by Cardinal Timothy Dolan, and Notre Dame University. These two litigants are significant because Cardinal Dolan and the President of Notre Dame were both personally assured by President Obama that respect for religious freedom was important to him. So much for empty words.
Cardinal Dolan called the lawsuits “a compelling display of the unity of the Church in defense of religious liberty.” “We have tried negotiation with the Administration and legislation with the Congress — and we’ll keep at it — but there’s still no fix,” continued Dolan.
In addition to the lawsuits, the General Counsel of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Anthony Picarello, Jr., sent a 21-page letter to the Obama Administration denouncing the mandate and outlining the concerns of the Church. “We believe that this mandate is unjust and unlawful — it is bad health policy, and because it entails an element of government coercion against conscience, it creates a religious freedom problem,” says the letter. Picarello states the obvious — that individuals, insurance companies and employers with a moral objection to the mandate will have to either violate their consciences to comply, or drop their health insurance coverage as some Catholic institutions have already done.
“The simplest and best solution…is the one the Administration so far has declined to adopt: to rescind the mandate. Failing this, the Administration should provide an exemption that protects all stakeholders with a religious or moral objection, in keeping with the consistent language and longstanding tradition of federal conscience protection law,” the letter states.
Wisconsin Right to Life remains concerned that the preventive health services provision of the Obamacare law, which provides the authority for the HHS mandate, could be used in the future to declare that there is an abortion mandate.
Chen Guangcheng, the blind Chinese human rights activist who was imprisoned and brutally beaten for exposing forced abortions in China, is now safely in the United States with his family. Chen’s story is a major media sensation and was a diplomacy nightmare for the United States and China. A media sensation except for one thing. The media in general when reporting on Chen’s plight leave out the part about forced abortions in China — virtual silence in most major news stories.
But, even more appalling is the silence of the Abortion Establishment. Where are the champions of choice? Planned Parenthoood? NARAL? NOW? The Obama administration? They have ignored the atrocities committed by the Chinese government and cannot bring themselves to denounce the brutality visited upon Chinese women who dare to try to have a second child. In fact, they routinely support taxpayer funding to the UNFPA which supports China’s one-child policy.
A beautiful exception to the silent treatment is Melinda Henneberger, a columnist for the Washington Post, who wrote a compelling article about a Chinese woman who testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights last week. Henneberger tells the story of Mei Shunping who, according to her testimony, was forced into five abortions. “That fifth was the saddest day of my life,” Mei told the subcommittee. According to Henneberger, “Mei was alone — her husband had been tossed in jail — and there was no one to lean on as she collapsed in pain after the ‘procedure.’” “My young son didn’t know what was happening and kept crying for his father. I didn’t know what to do and could only hold my son and cry with him. Even now, when I think of all this, my heart shudders and the pain throbs.”
Henneberger zeroes in on the silence of the Obama administration and pro-abortion groups by pointing to pro-lifers “who’ve provided most of Chen’s support.” “But if the brutal oppression of women robbed of any semblance of ‘choice’ isn’t something we can all agree on, I don’t know what would be.” Good question, Melinda.
ABORTION FUNDING: Walker: Voted against taxpayer funding of abortions for public employees. Signed into law a provision to prohibit the UW Hospital Authority from being involved in performing abortions and from using taxpayer dollars to pay medical students to learn to perform abortions. Signed into law legislation allowing Wisconsin to opt‐out of taxpayer‐funded abortion coverage under ObamaCare. Barrett: Voted for use of taxpayer funds for abortions in military hospitals, for Medicaid recipients, for prison inmates, for federal employees, for residents of the District of Columbia and for women overseas.
TAXPAYER FUNDING OF ABORTION PROVIDERS: Walker: Voted to prohibit taxpayer dollars from going to organizations that provide or promote abortions. Signed into law a provision to prohibit Title V taxpayer dollars from going to organizations that perform abortions. Barrett: Supports taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood.
PROTECTING UNBORN CHILDREN: Walker: Supports making abortion illegal. Voted to recognize an unborn child as a separate victim of a criminal act against the pregnant mother. Voted to prohibit partial-birth abortions. Voted to protect unborn children at risk due to drug or alcohol use by the mother. Barrett: Supports continued legal abortion on demand. Voted against recognizing an unborn child as a separate victim of a criminal act against the pregnant mother. Voted against prohibiting partial-birth abortions.
PROTECTING FAMILIES: Walker: Voted to strengthen Wisconsin’s law requiring parental consent before a minor’s abortion. Signed into law the return of sex education curriculum to local control and to allow abstinence‐only programs. Barrett: Voted for every loophole in state law to keep a minor girl’s abortion a secret from her parents. Voted to allow transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain a secret abortion.
PROTECTING WOMEN: Walker: Voted for the Woman’s Right to Know Act which requires that women be given full information prior to an abortion and establishes a 24‐hour waiting period. Signed into law legislation to protect women from coerced abortions and to prohibit unsafe RU 486 chemical web cam abortions designed to expand abortions into local communities. Barrett: Voted for FDA approval of RU 486 chemical abortions. Supports repeal of new law which prevents coerced abortions and prohibits web cam RU 486 chemical abortions.
CONSCIENCE PROTECTIONS: Walker: Authored legislation to strengthen conscience protections for medical professionals and institutions who do not want to participate in anti-life activities. Barrett: Voted to allow health care providers to be penalized for declining to participate in abortions.
OTHER: Walker: Voted in favor of legislation to prohibit lawsuits based on the “wrongful” life of an unborn child. Voted to prohibit the sale of body parts of aborted babies. Barrett: Voted to allow human cloning. Stated that embryonic research is the “Lord’s work.”
Complete Walker/Barrett voting records can be found here.
It is appalling that babies can be legally aborted in this country even in the final months of pregnancy. It is even more appalling when you realize the pain felt by the baby during this brutal act. The National Right to Life Committee, Wisconsin Right to Life’s parent organization, is strongly supporting the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803) which will have a public hearing on May 17 in the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Late-term abortions in the District are openly advertised. One abortion clinic not far from the White House advertises abortion up to the beginning of the seventh month of pregnancy by the dilation and evacuation procedure where the baby is literally extracted limb by limb as the abortionist tears the baby apart. This dismemberment procedure certainly is extremely painful for the little baby. By the way, this place of horrors will complete this heinous act for money, but “checks and money orders are not accepted.”
Six states have enacted Pain-Capable laws — Nebraska, Kansas, Idaho, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Georgia. This type of legislation does not stop all abortions, but certainly takes the country in a new direction which is further recognition of the humanity of the unborn child.
![[Email]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Twitter]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
