Expect to hear this argument over and over as the November 2 election gets closer. According to Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor, Henry Sanders, Jr. in an op ed, “Wisconsin’s legislature must decriminalize reproductive choice because women and their doctors deserve safe, legal healthcare options.” He is, of course talking about repealing Wisconsin’s longstanding abortion ban. This ban will go into effect immediately once Roe v. Wade is overturned and Wisconsin will be one of the first states in the nation to shut down its abortion clinics. And, the pro-aborts know it.
In their zeal to influence the public to favor repeal of the ban, Sanders and his pro-abortion friends resort to misinformation. Women will go to jail, they say, when the ban goes into effect. Rubbish. The legislature in 1985 changed the law so that there are no penalties for women who have abortions, only for those who perform them.
Sanders is not a household name — yet. His abortion position is just another reason to ensure that he does not become one.
It is a roller coaster ride. The State Supreme Court weighed in on free speech issues late last week, issuing a temporary injunction of the GAB rule that would limit the speech of Wisconsin Right to Life and other groups. The vote was 4-3, with Justices Prosser, Roggensack, Ziegler and Gableman voting to enjoin the rule. Now, briefs must be filed later this week before the court makes a final decision.
Briefs are due later this month in the free speech suit filed by Wisconsin Right to Life in federal court. If the State Supreme Court permanently enjoins the GAB rule, there are other provisions in state law that WRTL is challenging in federal court which will go forward.
In the meantime, leaders in the U.S. Senate say they will try to bring up the federal DISCLOSE Act again which would limit speech about federal candidates. This is the act that gives special privileges to the unions and the NRA but cuts out groups like WRTL. The last time the bill was brought up, there were not enough votes to break a filibuster. Senator Reid and company think they can garner the votes of Republican Senators Brown, Snowe and Collins. Senator Mitch McConnell says the Republicans will hold firm and block a vote on DISCLOSE. Stay tuned.
LeRoy Carhart (I refuse to call him a doctor) is the late-term abortionist of record, filling the shoes of the late George Tiller of Kansas. Carhart practices in Nebraska. He did a radio interview in Boston in July before he spoke at a convention of the National Organization for Women.
When asked in the interview why he does late-term abortions, he replies: “Well, someone has to do it.” What is his opinion of pro-lifers? “I feel that the anti-abortion movement is purely an anti-woman movement to keep them literally in their place,” says Carhart.
Here’s the kicker. When asked if there was a point in pregnancy where he would deny an abortion, Carhart says: “No, I don’t believe there is a point where I cannot do it.”
What are your thoughts about this man and his grisly practice?
Two pieces of news from The Netherlands, the country with the longest and most extreme history of caring out acts of assisted suicide and euthanasia. The Dutch government released its 2009 report which reveals a 13% increase in deaths by euthanasia or assisted suicide. There were 2,636 cases of patients being killed or being helped to kill themselves, accounting for 2% of all Dutch deaths. Most of the deaths were direct killing by euthanasia.
But, being the world champ at killing people isn’t enough for the Dutch proponents. Apparently envious of their Swiss counterparts who openly operate suicide clinics, the Dutch Association for a Voluntary End to Life (NVEE) wants to establish its own suicide clinics. The reason? They want to extend the death “benefit” to those who are not terminally ill. Targeted are patients who have dementia, or ones who feel they have “completed” their lives and just want to die. The latter fit the new category of people “tired of living,” a concept being widely promoted in Europe.
Our friend Alex Schadenberg of the Canadian Euthanasia Prevention Coalition points out there may be a profit motive. The individual who established and runs the Swiss suicide clinics has become quite wealthy. Suicide clinic services in Switzerland can run up to $8,000 per patient.
Our friend Wesley Smith says: “There is no denying the evidence that euthanasia consciousness leads to a broader culture of death that eventually accpets all comers….their logic is impeccable. Once killing is considered an acceptable answer to human suffering, nihilism is unleashed and the ‘what’ that causes ’suffering’ ceases to matter.”
Last week, Wisconsin Right to Life filed a challenge in the Eastern District Federal Court asking that the new Government Accountability Board regulation on free speech be declared unconstitutional. Club for Growth and One Wisconsin Now filed a separate and different challenge in the Western District Federal Court.
Now, six more organizations have appealed to the State Supreme Court to strike down the new regulation. And, yesterday, Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen issued a formal opinion on the impact of the Citizens United U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this year in regulating speech.
The Van Hollen opinion is interesting. He states that “the reasoning and conclusion of Citizens United are clearly applicable and that any ban on corporate independent expenditures under Wisconsin law violates the guarantees of freedom of speech and association under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.” He also cautions that while Citizens United does not necessarily prohibit regulations, it does not “independently authorize regulatory action. Only state law may do so, and those laws must pass ‘exacting scrutiny’ to be constitutional.”
You may wonder, why the fuss? We thought McCain/Feingold was bad – and it was. McCain/Feingold prohibited speech only in broadcast ads. The GAB rule regulates all speech – print, broadcast, Internet, email, etc. As one of the groups pointed out, it may impact a farmer who wants to speak about issues by painting a sing on his barn.
This issue is about America and the freedom we enjoy as citizens and as citizens who gather together to petition the government to express our opinions. At least, until now.
Every fall, Congress passes numbers of authorization and appropriations bills to keep the government funded and running. Every year, we right-to-lifers are successful in prohibiting the use of federal taxpayer dollars for abortions by adding amendments to dozens of these bills. It has been fairly routine each year for taxpayer funding of abortions to be prohibited. NO MORE!
Buoyed by the success of the abortion-laden Obamacare and stung by the President’s regulation to prohibit abortion funding in high-risk insurance plans, pro-abortion groups and legislators are more determined than ever to force you, the taxpayer, to pay for abortions in every instance imaginable.
First on the list is funding abortions at military hospitals. Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) successfully added an amendment to a defense authorization bill to allow abortion at taxpayer-funded military base hospitals. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) objected to unanimous consent to allow the bill to be considered. McCain’s objection forces the leadership to find 60 votes to consider the bill. And, so it will go on… bill after bill.
It is strange that legislators would actually vote in favor of taxpayer funding of abortions when polls over the past three decades indicate the American public does not want its taxpayer dollars used in this way. For those up for re-election, they do so at their own peril.
Wisconsin Right to Life and its state political action committee are challenging Wisconsin law.
The challenge, filed Aug. 5 in federal district court in Milwaukee, asserts that Wisconsin law, including two new Government Accountability Board regulations, unconstitutionally impose full-fledged political-committee burdens on entities such as Wisconsin Right to Life.
“The Supreme Court has held that regulating entities as political committees is not only burdensome but also onerous,” said James Bopp, Jr., lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “Almost 35 years ago, the Supreme Court established that government may impose such burdens only on entities that are under the control of, or have the major purpose of nominating or electing, candidates.”
Nevertheless, Wisconsin imposes such burdens on entities such as Wisconsin Right to Life.
“These requirements are so burdensome and onerous that they in effect are a ban on speech,” Bopp said.
“For too long, so-called campaign finance reform advocates have attempted to silence citizen groups. The net result, if they are successful, is that the only ones who will be allowed to speak and inform the public are candidates themselves and the media. This is unacceptable in a country built on a foundation of free speech,” Bopp said. “Wisconsin Right to Life has been at the forefront of protecting speech in America, winning a landmark case in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007. This challenge is another step towards the goal of protecting First Amendment rights.”
On behalf of the Wisconsin Right to Life State Political Action Committee, the suit also challenges requirements that political committees disclose particular contributions and spending within 24 hours, a burdensome oath political committees must take saying their independent expenditures are independent, political-committee reporting thresholds, the limits on contributions to committees doing only independent expenditures, and particular attribution and disclaimer requirements.
“Some political-committee disclosure requirements are constitutional, but the disclosure requirements that the Wisconsin Right to Life State Political Action Committee challenges are not,” Bopp said. “In addition, limits on contributions to political committees doing only independent expenditures are unconstitutional.”
The culture of death has many facets. The latest twist? A Georgia man with Lou Gehrig’s disease wants to be killed for his organs. He believes his diagnosis is “a death sentence, positively, no questions asked.” In an act of what he believes to be magnanimous compassion, Garry Phebus wants other people to live by having his good organs transplanted into them, knowing that removal of his vital organs will cause his death.
Causing his death in this manner is, of course, not legal. So, Phebus has taken his appeal online to get backing from others. “I am not suicidal. I just know that it is a matter of time before I die and wish to do a good thing for those people who have a good life expectancy” he says in a youtube video.
A new “selling” point for the culture of death. A macabre one at that.
Despite concerns about the rapid growth and potential harmful effects of putting embryonic stem cells in human beings, the FDA and the Obama Administration have approved the first human trials using embryonic stem cells. Geron, a California cloning company, received approval for the human clinical trials well over a year ago but the trials were put on hold because of safety concerns encountered in animal studies. The approved early stage trial is for patients with spinal cord injury.
Dr. David Prentice says, “It’s unfortunate that the FDA has released Geron from the safety hold on their embryonic stem cell trial. Even many pro-embryonic stem cell scientists have expressed reservations about Geron’s trial, that it is not proven even in rats. The concern for many of us is that Geron is endangering patient’s health and very lives to make a political point and increase their stock price.”
Yesterday, I wrote about the success of adult stem cells in treating real patients with real diseases. The Geron story once again moves adult stem cells to the back of the bus.
It’s what good friend Dr. David Prentice has been telling us all along. Ethical adult stem cells are the only stem cells that are helping real people with real diseases. Now comes public confirmation in an August 2 Associated Press story.
“For all the emotional debate that began about a decade ago on allowing the use of embryonic stem cells, it’s adult stem cells that are in human testing today,” says the article. “Adult stem cells are being studied in people who suffer from multiple sclerosis, heart attacks and diabetes. Some early results suggest stem cells can help some patients avoid leg amputation.” The story talks about how early this research is and describes success stories with real patients.
If you watch the news cycle carefully, you will see stories that appear regularly about stem cell success in human patients. The key to understanding these stories is to know that ALL of these successes come from using ethical adult stem cells. Sometimes the stories make this distinction, and sometimes they falsely lead the reader to believe that unethical embryonic stem cells are lifting the load.
Dr. Prentice has done yeoman work to help the public understand that you don’t need to destroy living human embryos to successfully treat patients. It is great to see an independent news source substantiate Dr. Prentice’s findings.
![[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)
