archive-com.com » COM » E » EUTHANASIA.COM

Total: 651

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Bush Will Lead a "Culture of Life"
    legal and rare Eight years later his Administration closes with the loss of more than 10 million lives to abortion in the United States with an unprecedented positioning of the United States as an international advocate of abortion on demand and with the barbarity of partial birth abortion fleetingly we can only hope enshrined as the law of the land This is the shameful legacy we trust and hope the new Bush Administration will begin at noon tomorrow to reverse Wagner added During his campaign for the White House President elect Bush stated time and again his determination to do all he can to ensure that unborn children are welcomed in life and protected in law The illusion that abortion can be rare while it remains legally available up to and even past the moment of birth has been shattered by the hard reality of the past eight years of Clinton Gore policy making The vast majority of American women remain deeply troubled by abortion and want to find ways to uphold the rights of women without pitting those rights against their own children in the womb FRC president Ken Connor expressed confidence that the incoming Bush Administration will carry

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/bushlife.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • US Supreme Count and Partial Birth Abortion
    1994 by Bill Clinton The following justices voted not to strike down the law that is voted AGAINST partial birth abortion William Rehnquist Appointed 1972 by Richard Nixon Antonin Scalia Appointed 1986 Ronald by Reagan Anthony Kennedy Appointed 1988 by Ronald Reagan Clarence Thomas Appointed 1991 by George Bush If you wish to write your own letters to these justices the following is the address Supreme Court of the United

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/pba-court.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Unborn Victims of Violence Act
    death or injury to a member of the species Homo sapiens at all stages of development Protecting the unborn is not a new idea pro life Rep Lindsay Graham R S C the bill s chief sponsor said adding In fact about half the states have statutes or judicial decisions that criminalize behavior that harms or kills the unborn Graham who has collected 74 co sponsors for the bill said it is not about abortion but instead is about violence against women and holding criminals accountable for their actions Graham noted that 24 states have statutes or judicial decisions that make it a crime to kill or injure an embryo or a fetus Unfortunately federal law is silent on the matter It s time we address that oversight he said However pro abortion groups oppose the bill because they oppose recognizing an unborn child as a person under law According to Gerry Bradley a law professor at the University of Notre Dame the bill would not violate the Constitution because the Supreme Court has never ruled that the unborn are not people He said S tates are free to protect the unborn child against frustrated boyfriends who kick pregnant women in the stomach Pro life Sen Mike DeWine R Ohio who introduced similar legislation in the Senate last week said It s just plain wrong that our federal government does absolutely nothing to criminalize violent acts against unborn children We cannot allow criminals to get away with murder DeWine cited the 1996 case of an airman stationed at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton Ohio who beat his pregnant wife hitting her in the abdomen and causing her to miscarry The Senator said the airman was convicted under Ohio s fetal homicide law but he added It s just

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/unbornvic.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Polls of Republicans - 1999
    a pro abortion Republican candidate In survey after survey the resounding answer has been yes More legitimate polls underscore the pro life advantage A national poll of 1 008 voters conducted by Wirthlin Worldwide following last November s elections showed that if the Republican Party moves away from its pro life position it will hurt its candidate s chances Voters were asked if they would be more or less likely to vote Republican if the Republican Party dropped its stand that supports protecting the lives of unborn children and opposes both partial birth abortion and the use of federal funds for abortion The poll found that 51 would be less likely or much less likely to vote Republican while only 36 would be more likely or much more likely This represents a potential loss of 15 for the Republican Party if it would abandon its pro life position Despite assertions by the media the Wirthlin poll found that Republicans are united on the abortion issue Sixty four percent of Republicans took a pro life position while 32 took a pro abortion position Republican women gave equally pro life responses with 65 taking a pro life position and 33 taking a pro abortion position The Republican Leadership Council asked which of seven prospective Republican candidates for president they would support if the primary were held today 40 chose Texas Gov George W Bush followed by Elizabeth Dole with 27 2 and Dan Quayle with 9 3 About 12 of respondents were undecided The Republican Leadership Council is looking to advance a pro abortion agenda in the Republican party Again they need to look no further than their own polling to see that Republicans want a pro life candidate It s no coincidence that respondents chose either a pro life Governor a

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/repub.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • What hath Roe wrought By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist, 01/20/98
    for 25 years and the results have scarcely budged 57 percent said no in 1972 51 percent said no in 1996 Should abortion be legal if the woman is unwed and doesn t want to marry the father 1972 results 53 percent opposed 1996 results 53 percent opposed According to Gallup which has also tested the issue for decades the proportion of Americans who think abortion should always be legal is 22 percent it was 21 in 1975 while those who say it should never be legal amount to only 15 percent down from 22 But most Americans 61 percent today up from 54 percent in 1975 say abortion should be allowed only under certain circumstances Parental consent for minors A 24 hour waiting period Laws requiring doctors to inform pregnant women of abortion alternatives Mandatory notification of husbands before wives can abort Americans support them all overwhelmingly A generation under Roe may not have noticeably altered the public s self contradicting attitudes on this subject But easy abortion has certainly altered American life For a start it has corrupted romance and sexuality In the ancient times before Roe the price of an unwanted pregnancy could be terrifyingly high That gave unmarried women a powerful incentive to be careful to reserve themselves for men whom they knew to be worthy Sometimes worthiness could be proven only by walking down a church aisle if not that it often required at least courtship love and commitment But after Roe an unwanted pregnancy became little more than a nuisance To undo it you had only to call an abortionist Why be careful Why hold back There was no longer a need to wait for that aisle walk or even for commitment Women were liberated But it was men who were set free Getting

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/roewade.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Pro-Life Council - Frank Pavone
    to those who provide abortions It also happens with many others who favor the availability of legal abortion After all they argue since we have religious freedom in this country people should be allowed to believe what they want about when the soul begins to exist It would be wrong to impose by law one particular religious or theological position on this matter The truth is however that the pro life movement does not seek to impose by law any religious or theological belief whether about the soul or anything eise Such an effort is both misguided and unnecessary Suppose for example that I do not believe that you have a soul Does that give me the right to kill you No it does not Your life is still protected by the law despite my beliefs Does the law that protects your life require me to believe that you have a soul No it does not It doesn t even require me to believe that souls exist at all What it requires is that whatever I believe I refrain from taking your life The law protects both the right to believe and the Iife of the believer That is what the pro life movement wants We are simply calling for the protection of all human beings We also uphold religious liberty This means that religious beliefs should be embraced freely not imposed by law We also recognize that to invoke religious liberty to destroy another s life is an intolerable abuse If someone does not believe the child in the womb has a soul that is his or her business But to go on to say that because one doesn t believe that it should be legal to kill the child is equally as unjust as to say that because

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/pavone.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Administration Skirts Law on Killing Embryos
    knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero that is research on babies living in their mother s wombs which is considered minimal risk The NIH asserts that research on embryonic stem cells does not violate the ban because such cells are not an embryo as defined by the state and do not have the capacity to develop into a human being Well of course not However this research does involve killing these tiny human beings in order to harvest their cells for this research There is no law that prevents privately funded research on human embryos That s how these stem cells first were isolated last year The NIH intends to skirt the law by having someone not using government grant money do the killing or having the researcher clock out and do the killing on his own time If questioned no doubt the researcher will say No one asked me to do the killing nor was I promised money from the government for doing this killing and he or she would be technically correct if you buy the hair splitting defense If members of the Senate let Mr

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/embryos.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Federal Bill To Protect Unborn Victims of Violence
    one that recognizes the humanity of unborn children and protects them against many heinous crimes said Johnson We expect a tough fight to enact the Unborn Victims of Violence Act because most pro abortion lobbying groups will probably strongly oppose it Johnson added These groups are driven by grim ideology that demands that the unborn child remain invisible in the eyes of the law a non entity The bill challenges that ideology by recognizing the unborn child as a human victim distinct from the mother The bill says that whoever violates an existing federal anti violence law and thereby causes the death of or bodily injury to a child who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place is guilty of a separate offense separate that is from the offense against the mother Congressman Graham who consulted with NRLC in the formulation of the legislation is a former Air Force prosecutor with a long interest in bringing to justice those who do violence against unborn children Mr Graham sits on the committees to which the bill has been referred the House Judiciary Committee s Subcommittee on the Constitution and the Armed Services Committee Graham introduced the bill on July 1 with Congressman Chris Smith R NJ and Congressman Charles Canady R Fl as original co sponsors Smith is the co chairman of the House Pro Life Caucus while Canady is chairman of the House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee one of the panels to which the bill has been referred Canady s staff indicated that the subcommittee would conduct a public hearing on the legislation soon Congressman Henry Hyde R Il the chairman of the full Judiciary Committee has also expressed strong support for the bill This bill will be a good indicator of where we are as a society Congressman Graham told NRL News I hope every Member of Congress finds it morally and legally offensive to destroy a child in the womb through an act of violence against the mother STATE LAWS STILL NECESSARY Enactment of the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act would be a landmark pro life victory but it would not diminish the need for strong laws to protect unborn victims at the state level The federal government has no jurisdiction over the great majority of assaults on pregnant women and the bill will not change that Currently there is a wide divergence among the states in how they treat unborn children who suffer injury or death during such assaults Twelve 12 states now have laws under which unborn children are recognized as victims for criminal law purposes throughout the period of their pre natal development Most of these laws have been enacted because of the initiative and lobbying efforts of state NRLC affiliates with the assistance of the NRLC State Legislative Department Fifteen 15 additional states recognize the unborn child as a victim only during part of the pre natal period usually during the later months of pregnancy At least 16 other states operate

    Original URL path: http://euthanasia.com/viol.html (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive



  •