A chapter of the breast-cancer-fighting Susan G. Komen foundation has given a grant to a Planned Parenthood affiliate in Austin TX. The amount is
reportedly $45,000.
By the way, Texas PP affiliates are suing over a state
de-funding law. That means that even if this affiliate doesn't do
abortions, it has the money for litigation. Komen is therefore
effectively paying $45k for health care so PP doesn't have to.
Press release here.
You'll recall that PP & its supporters were quick to ramp up an attack campaign when Komen decided earlier this year to curtail its grants to PP. A few days of pressure from PP did the trick, and now the pipeline's back open. Apparently, once an agency makes a grant or contract to Planned Parenthood, stopping is not an acceptable option. I know three NH Executive Councilors who found that out the hard way.
Of course, while Komen folded within days, the Councilors did not yield to the bullies. (PPNNE had to do an end run around the state Title X contract process by going to Sen. Shaheen, who persuaded the Obama administration to send money.) Komen could learn something here.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Chuck Colson, RIP
Chuck Colson died today at the age of 80. I owe him thanks, and so does anyone else who holds dear religious freedom and the right to life.
When I first heard of him, he was a villain of the Watergate scandal. I was a teenager at that time, in the early stages of political activism, and Watergate's figures were clearly divided in my view between the Good Guys & the Bad Guys. Colson was decidedly and unapologetically one of the Bad Guys, seeming to deserve the media characterization of him as a "hatchet man" for Nixon. He wound up in prison for a brief time, where he experienced deep and fundamental conversion of heart. Like many people, I was skeptical that a "Bad Guy" could change.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. I was humbled to realize how mistaken I could be. He wore himself out in life-affirming ministries, most famously prison ministry.
Among the gifts he left us is the Manhattan Declaration from 2009, a "call to Christian conscience." (Among Colson's other work, he was a champion of ecumenical progress.)
Discover it for yourself here.
When I first heard of him, he was a villain of the Watergate scandal. I was a teenager at that time, in the early stages of political activism, and Watergate's figures were clearly divided in my view between the Good Guys & the Bad Guys. Colson was decidedly and unapologetically one of the Bad Guys, seeming to deserve the media characterization of him as a "hatchet man" for Nixon. He wound up in prison for a brief time, where he experienced deep and fundamental conversion of heart. Like many people, I was skeptical that a "Bad Guy" could change.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. I was humbled to realize how mistaken I could be. He wore himself out in life-affirming ministries, most famously prison ministry.
Among the gifts he left us is the Manhattan Declaration from 2009, a "call to Christian conscience." (Among Colson's other work, he was a champion of ecumenical progress.)
Discover it for yourself here.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Basic Books
I expect this to become a recurring feature in this blog. I'll recommend books that have influenced me in my pro-life journey. I'd like to hear your recommendations as well; I always enjoy discovering new good reading!
Today, it's something old & something new.
Deadly Compassion: the Death of Ann Humphry and the Truth About Euthanasia by Rita Marker (1995, William Morrow & Co., ISBN 9780688122218; also available as PDF download at www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/deadly-compassion/)
Unplanned: the Dramatic True Story of a Former Planned Parenthood Leader's Eye-Opening Journey Across the Life Line by Abby Johnson with Cindy Lambert
(2010, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., ISBN 9781414339399; also available as e-book)
Today, it's something old & something new.
Deadly Compassion: the Death of Ann Humphry and the Truth About Euthanasia by Rita Marker (1995, William Morrow & Co., ISBN 9780688122218; also available as PDF download at www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/deadly-compassion/)
Unplanned: the Dramatic True Story of a Former Planned Parenthood Leader's Eye-Opening Journey Across the Life Line by Abby Johnson with Cindy Lambert
(2010, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., ISBN 9781414339399; also available as e-book)
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
It Takes a Village to Kill a Mandate
The Nashua Telegraph is reporting this afternoon that a NH Senate committee has recommended "polite death" for HB 1546, a bill to repeal the state's mandate that health insurers cover contraception. It was tough enough getting that one through the House. The full Senate has yet to vote, so the outcome is still open. The committee's recommendation will be overturned if and only if enough senators recognize that this mandate and its federal counterpart are attacks on religious liberty.
When NH's mandate passed a dozen or so years ago, I didn't recognize its significance. I opposed the bill, but I settled for quietly shaking my head instead of taking up the argument. After all, in accordance with my religious faith, I wasn't using contraceptives, and I wasn't working for a religious institution with moral objections to contraception. It did not occur to me or to anyone else in the room that NH's mandate, and similar measures in other states, would help pave the way for the federal government's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to require that all Americans purchase health care, define contraception and abortifacient drugs as "preventive care", and refuse to recognize conscientious objections to this arrangement.
(I'll save for another day a fuller treatment of just what kind of health problem contraception "prevents".)
Back in 1999, that would have seemed a huge leap. Now, looking back, I wonder how I could have failed to see what was coming. It is to the great credit of American Catholic bishops that they have been so outspoken in defending religious liberty against this encroachment (see their statement here). That's a start. The bishops have done their job. It's now for the rest of us to bring the no-mandate message to Concord and Washington.
When NH's mandate passed a dozen or so years ago, I didn't recognize its significance. I opposed the bill, but I settled for quietly shaking my head instead of taking up the argument. After all, in accordance with my religious faith, I wasn't using contraceptives, and I wasn't working for a religious institution with moral objections to contraception. It did not occur to me or to anyone else in the room that NH's mandate, and similar measures in other states, would help pave the way for the federal government's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to require that all Americans purchase health care, define contraception and abortifacient drugs as "preventive care", and refuse to recognize conscientious objections to this arrangement.
(I'll save for another day a fuller treatment of just what kind of health problem contraception "prevents".)
Back in 1999, that would have seemed a huge leap. Now, looking back, I wonder how I could have failed to see what was coming. It is to the great credit of American Catholic bishops that they have been so outspoken in defending religious liberty against this encroachment (see their statement here). That's a start. The bishops have done their job. It's now for the rest of us to bring the no-mandate message to Concord and Washington.
Introduction: "Still Talking About This"
"I can't believe we're still talking about this."
I must have heard those words fifty times in the past year in Concord, spoken by fellow citizens who style themselves "pro-choice" and are truly surprised that pro-lifers are still active.
Still talking about what? About abortion, how it became legal, and how it has grown into a lucrative business for abortion providers; about women facing challenging pregnancies and sometimes facing the aftermath of terminating those pregnancies; about paying for it and subsidizing the industry. We're still talking because there is no way to shut down a debate when lives are at stake.
To the great dismay of abortion advocates, New Hampshire legislators in the past year have taken up a number of bills that touch on abortion. Every session has some abortion debate, but 2011-12 has been remarkable for the sheer volume of life-issue legislation. Most of the bills are consistent with U.S. Supreme Court decisions that are based on Roe. With the exception of two measures to ban late-term abortion and "partial-birth" infanticide, the bills provide mere regulation, long-overdue and badly needed. One bill is simply an attempt to get the state to order abortion providers to report statistics.
New Hampshire currently is the Wild West where abortion law is concerned. Women's safety and public health policy would seem to call for a degree of regulation and oversight, even if one were to put aside the fact that each abortion takes a human life. Abortion advocates are loud and angry over each and every one of the bills, however, drawing no distinction among parental notification (enacted over a veto), funding restrictions, statistical reporting, and a late-term ban. To them, it's all one big attack on Choice, part of a larger effort to set women back.
This is worse than nonsense. What I see being set back are the rights of women and men who choose not to pay even indirectly for the operation of an abortion facility. I see people lobbying to keep abortion undocumented, so that public health officials will continue to be in the dark about how many New Hampshire women make this "choice" every year. I hear testimony to the need for eugenic abortion, which is a throwback to one of the 20th century's worst ideas. I hear women who should know better equate a 24-hour waiting period with an outright ban on abortion.
Both in New Hampshire and elsewhere, we need to meet this with more than hand-wringing and the occasional letter to the editor. I offer this blog as a tool and a guide to action for all who share my determination to bring an end to the carnage wrought by Roe. I will undoubtedly use the blog sometimes just to vent. At all times, though, I am mindful that if I do this right, I'll be reaching people who disagree with me. Persuasion is always possible. Of course, I have no doubt that someone over on the other side is working to persuade me right back. Fair enough.
I write as a woman who came of age in the years shortly after Roe v. Wade. When I was in high school and a dear friend "had" to have an abortion, I chipped in with some friends for the $250 cost. I found the idea of abortion regrettable & uncomfortable, but it was after all my friend's body & my friend's choice. Over the following five years, many experiences combined to leave me incapable of denying the humanity of the child in utero. The dignity of both mother and child are absolute, regardless of what any court may decide.
Just as the state rep who heads the Reproductive Rights Caucus is careful to mention that she's Catholic, I should be candid about my religious background. While raised Catholic, I spent most of my adolescence shrugging off religion. Later, it wasn't being Catholic that made me pro-life. It was recognizing the miracle of life that brought me back to professing the Catholic faith. This has been significant in more ways than I could have imagined when I was a young woman.
As for politics, I call myself a recovering Republican. I fall off the wagon now and then, but I am a registered "undeclared" voter, in New Hampshire parlance. The rest of the world knows me as "independent." It is true that nearly every candidate I support runs as a Republican. It is also true that GOP leaders tend to take pro-life voters for granted. By not signing up with the party, I can help whatever candidates I choose, and the party need not get annoyed with me for failing to back every candidate on the ticket.
So yes, we're still talking about this. Pro-lifers cannot be effective if they stay huddled together. I propose that we step out in faith and leaven the loaf of public discourse. Let's begin.
I must have heard those words fifty times in the past year in Concord, spoken by fellow citizens who style themselves "pro-choice" and are truly surprised that pro-lifers are still active.
Still talking about what? About abortion, how it became legal, and how it has grown into a lucrative business for abortion providers; about women facing challenging pregnancies and sometimes facing the aftermath of terminating those pregnancies; about paying for it and subsidizing the industry. We're still talking because there is no way to shut down a debate when lives are at stake.
To the great dismay of abortion advocates, New Hampshire legislators in the past year have taken up a number of bills that touch on abortion. Every session has some abortion debate, but 2011-12 has been remarkable for the sheer volume of life-issue legislation. Most of the bills are consistent with U.S. Supreme Court decisions that are based on Roe. With the exception of two measures to ban late-term abortion and "partial-birth" infanticide, the bills provide mere regulation, long-overdue and badly needed. One bill is simply an attempt to get the state to order abortion providers to report statistics.
New Hampshire currently is the Wild West where abortion law is concerned. Women's safety and public health policy would seem to call for a degree of regulation and oversight, even if one were to put aside the fact that each abortion takes a human life. Abortion advocates are loud and angry over each and every one of the bills, however, drawing no distinction among parental notification (enacted over a veto), funding restrictions, statistical reporting, and a late-term ban. To them, it's all one big attack on Choice, part of a larger effort to set women back.
This is worse than nonsense. What I see being set back are the rights of women and men who choose not to pay even indirectly for the operation of an abortion facility. I see people lobbying to keep abortion undocumented, so that public health officials will continue to be in the dark about how many New Hampshire women make this "choice" every year. I hear testimony to the need for eugenic abortion, which is a throwback to one of the 20th century's worst ideas. I hear women who should know better equate a 24-hour waiting period with an outright ban on abortion.
Both in New Hampshire and elsewhere, we need to meet this with more than hand-wringing and the occasional letter to the editor. I offer this blog as a tool and a guide to action for all who share my determination to bring an end to the carnage wrought by Roe. I will undoubtedly use the blog sometimes just to vent. At all times, though, I am mindful that if I do this right, I'll be reaching people who disagree with me. Persuasion is always possible. Of course, I have no doubt that someone over on the other side is working to persuade me right back. Fair enough.
I write as a woman who came of age in the years shortly after Roe v. Wade. When I was in high school and a dear friend "had" to have an abortion, I chipped in with some friends for the $250 cost. I found the idea of abortion regrettable & uncomfortable, but it was after all my friend's body & my friend's choice. Over the following five years, many experiences combined to leave me incapable of denying the humanity of the child in utero. The dignity of both mother and child are absolute, regardless of what any court may decide.
Just as the state rep who heads the Reproductive Rights Caucus is careful to mention that she's Catholic, I should be candid about my religious background. While raised Catholic, I spent most of my adolescence shrugging off religion. Later, it wasn't being Catholic that made me pro-life. It was recognizing the miracle of life that brought me back to professing the Catholic faith. This has been significant in more ways than I could have imagined when I was a young woman.
As for politics, I call myself a recovering Republican. I fall off the wagon now and then, but I am a registered "undeclared" voter, in New Hampshire parlance. The rest of the world knows me as "independent." It is true that nearly every candidate I support runs as a Republican. It is also true that GOP leaders tend to take pro-life voters for granted. By not signing up with the party, I can help whatever candidates I choose, and the party need not get annoyed with me for failing to back every candidate on the ticket.
So yes, we're still talking about this. Pro-lifers cannot be effective if they stay huddled together. I propose that we step out in faith and leaven the loaf of public discourse. Let's begin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)