Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Less Abstinence, more abortion
clear

COMMENT:  We keep hearing that this administration wants to reduce the need for abortion.  Someone please explain to me how that happens if the funds for abstinence-based education are reduced or eliminated?????  Do you suppose there is an agenda here???

1.  Obama White House Urges Tax-Funded Abortion-on-Demand in D.C.
2.  Conservatives Angered Over Obama's Plan to Eliminate Abstinence-based Sex Education 
3. Obama budget cuts funds for abstinence-only sex education


1. Obama White House Urges Tax-Funded Abortion-on-Demand in D.C.
By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 8, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - President Obama's budget recommendations unveiled yesterday are being criticized by the National Right to Life Committee for recommending the re-introduction of taxpayer-funded abortion in Washington, D.C. 

The White House submission urges the House and Senate to repeal a law known as the Dornan Amendment that prevents tax-funded abortion, except for cases of rape, incest, or threat to the mother's life, in the District of Columbia for several years. 

Because Congress holds legislative authority over the District of Columbia, the district's budget must be appropriated by Congress through an annual appropriations bill.  The White House called for the ban to be replaced with a requirement that would apply only to funds specifically contributed for federal program purposes.
   
"If Congress goes along with the Obama proposal, the predictable result will be tax funding of several thousand elective abortions annually, including roughly 1,000 abortions annually that would not otherwise occur," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC). 

"Any member of Congress who votes for a bill that contains the White House proposal is, in reality, voting for tax-funded abortion on demand with congressionally appropriated funds."

>From 1988 until 1993, Congress annually included the ban until it was lost for three years, then restored in 1996.  While the ban was not in effect, congressional debates cited evidence that indicated the city's abortion-funding policy was among the most permissive in the nation.  Elizabeth Reveal, D.C. budget director at the time, told the Philadelphia Inquirer that "the District's government has a policy of funding abortion on demand and does not attempt to determine the circumstances of the pregnancy."
Read more here


2.  Conservatives Angered Over Obama's Plan to Eliminate Abstinence-based Sex Education
Monday, May 11, 2009

By Pete Winn, Senior Writer/Editor
(CNSNews.com) - Conservatives say a battle may be looming over the demise of abstinence-education funding.
 
President Barack Obama’s budget adjustment request last week proposed eliminating $138 million in spending on abstinence-only education, and re-directing the money to a new teen pregnancy “reduction” program that is expected to utilize the ‘abstinence-plus” or “comprehensive” sex-ed approach – one that teaches teens how to use condoms and birth control.
 
David Christensen, senior director of legislative affairs at the Family Research Council, says that the Obama administration is taking the wrong path if it wants to  reduce teen pregnancy.

“Unfortunately the president’s budget adjustment would completely eliminate abstinence-education grants for programs that are clearly working for students across the country,” Christensen told CNSNews.com.
 
Obama specifically proposes eliminating a $38 million program that makes grants to states, and $100 million in funding o be spent for abstinence education administered by the Health and Human Services Department (HHS).
 
Robert Rector, a senior analyst at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, said the president’s move came at the request of abortion-rights groups, including Planned Parenthood.
Read more here


3. Obama budget cuts funds for abstinence-only sex education

By Sharon Jayson, USA TODAY
President Obama's new budget would eliminate most money for abstinence-only sex education and shift it to teen pregnancy prevention — a U-turn in what has been more than a decade of sex education policy in the USA.
The proposed budget, sent to Congress last Thursday, "reflects the research," says Melody Barnes, director of the team that coordinates White House
domestic policy.
"In any area where Americans want to confront a problem, they want solutions they know will work, as opposed to programming they know hasn't proven to be successful. Given where we've been in recent years, I think this is a very important moment," she says.
Abstinence-only sex education programs, which emphasize a no-sex-until-marriage message, received almost $1.3 billion in federal dollars from fiscal years 2001-2009, according to the Office of Management and Budget. At the same time, studies of abstinence-only programs have shown little success; the most often-cited study, released in 2007, was congressionally mandated and federally funded and found that abstinence-only programs don't prevent or delay teen sex.
Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association says that 2007 study was "an early study about early programs. Things have changed."
Two weeks ago, she says her organization briefed congressional aides about an analysis of studies that she says refutes arguments that abstinence education doesn't affect sexual behavior.
Read more here

clear
Posted on 05/27/2009 4:05 PM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Tuesday, 26 May 2009
More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time
clear

Also, fewer think abortion should be legal “under any circumstances”

by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Poll, conducted May 7-10, finds 51% of Americans calling themselves "pro-life" on the issue of abortion and 42% "pro-choice." This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995.

qgpmcs1jxuwo2l6achm_cg

The new results, obtained from Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs survey, represent a significant shift from a year ago, when 50% were pro-choice and 44% pro-life. Prior to now, the highest percentage identifying as pro-life was 46%, in both August 2001 and May 2002.

The May 2009 survey documents comparable changes in public views about the legality of abortion. In answer to a question providing three options for the extent to which abortion should be legal, about as many Americans now say the procedure should be illegal in all circumstances (23%) as say it should be legal under any circumstances (22%). This contrasts with the last four years, when Gallup found a strong tilt of public attitudes in favor of unrestricted abortion.

qg8phio020orbfpcihagma

Gallup also found public preferences for the extreme views on abortion about even -- as they are today -- in 2005 and 2002, as well as during much of the first decade of polling on this question from 1975 to 1985. Still, the dominant position on this question remains the middle option, as it has continuously since 1975: 53% currently say abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances.
Read more here

clear
Posted on 05/26/2009 5:04 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Tuesday, 26 May 2009
APA revises 'gay gene' theory
clear


The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there's no homosexual "gene" -- meaning it's not likely that homosexuals are born that way.
 
For decades, the APA has not considered homosexuality a psychological disorder, while other professionals in the field consider it to be a "gender-identity" problem. But the new statement, which appears in a brochure called "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," states the following:
"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles...."
That contrasts with the APA's statement in 1998: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality."
 
Peter LaBarberaPeter LaBarbera, who heads 
Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, believes the more recent statement is an important admission because it undermines a popular theory.
 
"People need to understand that the 'gay gene' theory has been one of the biggest propaganda boons of the homosexual movement over the last 10 [or] 15 years," he points out. "Studies show that if people think that people are born homosexual they're much less likely to resist the gay agenda."
 
Matt Barber with 
Liberty Counsel feels the pronouncement may have something to do with saving face. "Well, I think here the American Psychological Association is finally trying to restore some credibility that they've lost over the years by having become a clearly political organization as opposed to an objective, scientific organization," he states. (Hear audio report)
Read more here

clear
Posted on 05/26/2009 4:58 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Friday, 15 May 2009
Notre Dame: Alan Keyes arrested, students protest
clear

You can view the videos, read Dr. Alan Keyes' statement, see the schedule, sign the petitionDr. Alan Keyes at www.stopobamanotredame.com/




Alan Keyes Arrested While Protesting University of Notre Dame’s Obama Invitation
Friday, May 08, 2009
By Melanie Hunter-Omar
CNSNews.com) – Conservative political activist and former presidential candidate Dr. Alan Keyes was arrested on Friday along with 21 other pro-lifers while protesting the University of Notre Dame’s decision to give President Obama an honorary law degree despite his support for abortion.
 
Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, a pro-life group, said Keyes and the other protesters “walked on campus praying quietly with baby carriages that had dolls covered with stage blood as a show of protest.”
 
The day before, Keyes was approached during a press conference on public property by two plain clothes Notre Dame policemen and told that if he walked on campus for any reason, he would be arrested.
 
According to Terry, Keyes replied: “I have not even stepped foot on the campus, and they give me this warning? They told me: 'We are just doing our job.' I told them I am just coming to witness for the truth."
 
“We have people sitting in jail who defended human life on Notre Dame’s campus and Notre Dame is going to honor someone that takes human life,” Terry told CNSNews.com, referring to Obama’s decision to approve funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports China’s one-child policy that includes coercive abortion.
 
The Bush administration had stopped the $40 million in annual funding for UNFPA six years ago.
 
By giving the order to fund UNFPA, Obama “unleashed American dollars to kill babies in Africa and in China, and when he said start again with embryonic stem cell research, his order is directly responsible for the deaths of innocent human beings,” Terry told CNSNews.com.
Read more here

 

 

 

Alan Keyes arrested in Notre Dame protest

SOUTH BEND, Ind., May 8 (UPI) -- Alan Keyes, who lost to Barack Obama in a U.S. Senate race, was arrested Friday protesting President Obama's invitation to speak at Notre Dame in Indiana.

Keyes and 20 others were charged with trespassing, Dennis Brown, a spokesman for the Catholic university, said. Brown said the university has a long-standing policy that only student-led demonstrations are allowed on campus with approval from the office of student affairs.
Notre Dame invited Obama to deliver the commencement address and receive an honorary degree May 17, causing an uproar because of his support of abortion rights. Many of the protesters Friday pushed baby strollers covered in fake blood.
Read more here

Notre Dame students plan peaceful protest of Obama
By TOM COYNE – 1 hour ago
SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) — University of Notre Dame students who plan to protest the school's awarding of an honorary degree to President Barack Obama on campus during commencement Sunday are calling for a peaceful, prayerful approach.
 
"We believe a lot more can be accomplished through prayerful, respectful witness than can be accomplished in angry protest," said Michele Sagala, a graduating senior and member of ND Response, a coalition of student groups who oppose the school's decision to award an honorary degree to Obama because of his support of abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research.
Not all those who plan to be on campus Sunday, though, intend to honor the request by ND Response that they refrain from using graphic images and signs. Anti-abortion activist Randall Terry, who already faces a trespassing charge after being arrested on campus May 1 while pushing a stroller containing a doll covered in fake blood, said members of his group, The Society for Truth and Justice, plan to be arrested and to carry graphic signs.
"If Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks had played by the rules that these kids are proposing, Barack Obama would still be on the back of the bus," he said.
Read more here
 
 

Some Notre Dame Students to Forego Commencement in Protest of Obama Visit

 

The University of Notre Dame is allowing its seniors to forego their college commencement Sunday to hold a prayer demonstration on the grounds of the university -- the latest protest against President Obama's controversial visit, which some students say undermines the school's Catholic identity.

The University of Notre Dame is allowing a group of seniors to hold a prayer demonstration on school grounds on Sunday, graduation day -- to protest President Obama's controversial visit, which the students say undermines the school's Catholic identity.
 
"The university isn't sponsoring it, but we've approved it," university spokesman Dennis Brown told FOXNews.com on Tuesday.
The demonstration -- spearheaded by the student group ND Response -- is in protest of the honorary law degree Obama will receive during Sunday's commencement. The group claims that by honoring Obama, the university is sanctioning his positions on abortion and embryonic stem cell research, which the Catholic church opposes.
 

"In defense of the unborn, we wish to express our deepest opposition to Reverend John I. Jenkins, C.S.C.'s invitation of President Barack Obama to be the University of Notre Dame's principal commencement speaker and the recipient of an honorary degree," the group states on its Web site.
Read more here

clear
Posted on 05/15/2009 6:42 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
Tea Party Supporters: Don't be Con-Conned
clear


COMMENT:  The call, for ANY reason, for a Federal Constitutional Convention is something that Eagle Forum has steadfastly opposed and worked diligently against for years and years. See the links below.

Now, however, it seems that some clever folks have the bright idea to high jack the Tea Party Movement and turn it into an effort to call for a Federal Constitutional Convention. (See article below Eagle Forum links.)

We MUST not let that happen.  In the perilous times in which we live to open up our Founding Document like this would be fool hardy and dangerous.  The Tea Party Movement has the potential to make a real impact in the political arena in the next few years, especially during th 2010 election cycle,  if the energy is channeled in the right direction. Let's not let it get derailed and into the hands of people who do not have the best interest of this country at heart.

To hear Charlie Daniels' message to Mt. Juliet's Tea Party and see pictures from there and from Nashville's Tea Party go
HERE

Dec 19, 2008 ... Ohio state legislators this month held a surprise hearing on a resolution calling for a national constitutional convention, ...

Congressmen Need Tutorials On The Constitution
Oct 11, 2006 ... The delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 gave Congress complete authority over the District so that it would be insulated from ...
They will be voting to order Colorado state legislators to pass a resolution calling for a new national Constitutional Convention, which is a very different...
The plan to put initiatives on the ballot to instruct state legislators to vote for a Constitutional Convention (Con Con) for Term Limits is well under way...


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Constitutional Convention Backers Want to Hijack the Tea Party Movement

As most of you already know, the Tax Day Tea Parties were a huge success in terms of number of gatherings (over 850) and total numbers participating (over 1 million according to some sources). From what I observed both in person at our Appleton, Wisconsin Tax Day Tea Party and online at various websites, the Tax Day Tea Parties were, for the most part, a genuine grassroots phenomenon. Just the diversity of signs showed that no one person or organization had planned the messages on the highly individualistic signs.

This spontaneous, grassroots nature of the tea party rallies was the most encouraging aspect of them. At last a broad cross-section of America had had enough with fiscal irresponsibility and excessive, inflationary spending, not to mention exorbitantly high taxes, and felt compelled to gather together in public places to protest out-of-control state and federal governments and the legislators of both parties who brought this problem about in the first place.

Nonetheless, less than two weeks after the tax day rallies, backers of a very dangerous threat to our Constitution have surfaced, and are actively working to have their agenda adopted by the Tea Party Movement’s grassroots organizers. This dangerous threat to our Constitution is none other than that perennial temptation, the constitutional convention, also known widely as a con-con.

A con-con would be convened by Congress in accordance with
Article V of the Constitution, if 34 or more state legislatures petition Congress to call such a convention “for proposing amendments.” The dangerous aspect of a con-con is that there’s no way for the state legislatures to ensure that the constitutional convention would restrict itself to consideration of the specific amendment(s) that the state legislatures have based their con-con calls on. Therefore, a constitutional convention could consider and approve a wide range of amendments, never contemplated by the state legislatures who started the whole process. Whichever amendments approved by the constitutional convention that were ratified by three-fourths of the states would become part of the Constitution. Thus, given the huge influence on public opinion exerted by the biased media and political elites, the con-con process could very well result in radical changes in our Constitution which were never intended by the state legislators who called the con-con in the first place.

Here’s “Beware of Article V,” a video the John Birch Society produced in 1999 to help state legislators to understand the high risk to our Constitution involved in petitioning Congress for a con-con. It’s also valuable for informing concerned citizens about this issue. I highly recommend readers of this article take the 36 minutes required to view it or at the very least sample it.

Now back to our story of how enthusiastic backers of a con-con are working to enlist the unsuspecting participants of the Tea Party movement in their very risky con-con project.

On April 23 the Wall Street Journal published
an opinion piece by Professor Randy Barnett of Georgetown University, “The Case for a Federalism Amendment: How the Tea Partiers can make Washington pay attention.” In this article, Barnett correctly observed that the Tenth Amendment “sovereignty resolutions,” under consideration by over half the states this year, are not likely to have the slightest impact on the federal courts. From this reasonable observation, Barnett proceeded to assert that “state legislatures have a real power under the Constitution by which to resist the growth of federal power: They can petition Congress for a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution.”

Barnett then went on to admit that “An amendments convention is feared because its scope cannot be limited in advance.” However, at this point he advocated a dangerous course. He proposed that the “tea-party enthusiasts” adopt the project of getting his Federalism Amendment added to the Constitution and also adopt his strategy of getting enough state legislatures to apply to Congress to call a constitutional convention, so that Congress becomes scared of the prospect of a con-con and agrees to endorse his amendment and present it to the states for ratification.

The problem with this strategy is that there’s no way to ensure that a con-con will not actually be convened in the process of this game of “playing chicken” with Congress with the Constitution at stake.

Next, on April 27
Barnett appeared as a guest on PajamasTV (click on link to view video) with host Michael Patrick Leahy, a leader in the Tea Party Movement. During the four days between his WSJ article of April 23 and his PajamasTV appearance of April 27, Barnett changed his mind about his former strategy of scaring Congress into adopting his amendment with the threat of a con-con. Although he still acknowledges that there is widespread fear of a con-con, and he has some worries about one, he is now convinced that the risks involved with a con-con are worth taking in order to get his 10 amendments presented to the states for ratification. He puts a lot of stock in the requirement that three-fourths of the states are required to ratify whatever amendments might issue from a con-con. He believes this mechanism would surely prevent any truly bad amendment from being ratified.

Of course, this is the crux of the issue. The John Birch Society along with leading constitutional scholars have consistently maintained over the past few decades that there is no way to control what amendments would be considered and adopted by a constitutional convention, and that the requirement that three-fourths of the states must ratify an amendment is not sufficient protection for the Constitution in this age of widespread ignorance of the Constitution and its role in securing our freedoms.

During those same four days, Barnett also changed his project from proposing one amendment, the “Federalism Amendment,” with five parts to proposing ten amendments, to be known as “the Bill of Federalism.”
Read more here

clear
Posted on 05/13/2009 6:08 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Thursday, 7 May 2009
Fabulous Defense of LIFE
clear


COMMENT:  Sometimes, you just 'deserve a break today." This is an inspiring and touching story.  Bouquets to Kathy Ireland for standing for life in such an effective way.

Baby in the Womb


Former Supermodel Kathy Ireland Gives Powerful Defense of Right to Life on National Television
By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
KathyUNITED STATES, April 29, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Former supermodel Kathy Ireland, who became famous in the 1980s and 90s for her appearances on the cover of Sports Illustrated, is not holding back on her pro-life views as she tours the nation promoting her new book on motherhood.
 
In a recent appearance on Fox News' "Huckabee," Ireland gave an explanation of the right to life that host Mike Huckabee said was the most articulate that he had ever heard from any source (see video at http://vodpod.com/watch/1528667-kathy-ireland-on-abortion)
"From the moment of conception a new life comes into being, the DNA, the genetic blueprint is there, the sex is determined, the blood type is determined, the unique set of fingerprints is there," Ireland told Huckabee.

"According to the law of biogenesis, all life comes from preexisting life, and each species reproduces after its own kind, therefore human beings can only reproduce other human beings, so it doesn't start out as one species and suddenly become a human being somewhere along the way," she said.
Noting that she began with the "pro-choice" position, even while a Christian, Ireland says that she changed her mind after researching the topic using her husband's medical manuals.
 
However, Ireland said she didn't want to believe what she was seeing, so she called Planned Parenthood to get their response.
 
"And I picked up the phone, I called Planned Parenthood. 'Help me out here, give me your best arguments'. And the best arguments were, 'Well, it's just a clump of cells. If you get it early enough it doesn't even look like a baby.'"
 
However, noted Ireland, "We're clumps of cells, and that unborn human being does not look like a baby the same way a baby does not look like a teenager, a teenager does not look like a senior, but that unborn human being looks exactly the way human beings are supposed to look at that stage of development, and that human life continues to grow and change."
 
In a later interview with Fox's Pop Tarts, Ireland compared abortion to child abuse, and said that it should be illegal in all cases except saving the life of the mother.
 
"If we're about to demolish a building we make absolute certain there are no human beings in there before we take a wrecking ball to it, but the unborn doesn't have a voice so it's up to us to speak for them," Ireland told Pop Tarts.
 
"If I see someone abusing a child I am going to stand up against that, and that's how I feel about abortion. Women are not given all the facts, they're told it is a harmless procedure and now it has turned into such a political football."
Ireland has publicly opposed abortion since at least 1998, when she argued that the beginning of life at conception is a medically established fact as a guest on Politically Incorrect. However, she says, her views are becoming better known, and she has suffered some retaliation.
Read more here

Related links:
Video of Kathy Ireland interview with Mike Huckabee
http://vodpod.com/watch/1528667-kathy-ireland-on-abortion
Supermodel Kathy Ireland Lashes Out Against Pro Choice
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518087,00.html

clear
Posted on 05/07/2009 7:15 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Thursday, 7 May 2009
More Good News on LIFE
clear

COMMENT: Can you stand good news two days in a row?  You have probably seen:  Dr. Oz to Oprah and Michael J Fox: "The stem cell debate is dead." (if not, click HERE).

Well, now it turns out that Al Gore has done some significant investing in the stem cell arena.  Some time ago I was having a conversation with a business man about the stem cell issue and presented this scenario: If you were looking for a good investment and had the opportunity to invest in one area where there had not been a significant success or in an area where there had been over 70 success stories, which area would you choose to get a good return on your investment? 

Well it looks like Gore got that message -- the real opportunities are in the 'adult' stem cell research area with 'induced pluripotent' stem cells.  This research does not involve the destruction of tiny human embryos.
Could it be that we might live to see the end of this destruction of human life as a commodity? How wonderful would that be??

SIDE NOTE ON MORE GOOD NEWS Public Takes Conservative Turn on Gun Control, Abortion


Al Gore on board for $20M stem cell venture

Former vice president Al Gore is entering the stem cell arena with an announcement today of a $20 million biotech venture in the hot area of "induced pluripotent" stem cells.
 
Induced cells are attracting interest from researchers and biotech firms as an alternative to embryonic stem cells. Induced cells are made by inserting four genes into ordinary skin cells, and they offer a new path for "regenerative" medical treatments.
 
"I just think it's a very important breakthrough that is filled with promise and hope," says Gore, a partner with the venture-capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers, which is backing the research. "I think this is one of those good news stories that comes along every once in a while."
 
The cell technology company, iZumi Bio Inc. of Mountain View, Calif., will collaborate with Kyoto University's Shinya Yamanaka, who in 2006 demonstrated the induced cells could be produced by "reprogramming" skin cells into embryonic cell look-alikes, with similar potential to grow into organ tissues for transplants.
 
Human embryonic stem cells are controversial because their creation requires the destruction of early-stage embryos. Induced cells do not, making them attractive test beds for analyzing the effect of new drugs on diseased cells. And like embryonic cells, they may someday replace organ tissues for patients with ailments ranging from heart disease to diabetes, say cell scientists.
 
"It's great that Al Gore supports iPS research, but who doesn't? Even the pope and the Catholic Church are on board," says stem cell researcher Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass. "Gore's support underscores the urgency and importance of moving this research forward."
Read more here

clear
Posted on 05/07/2009 7:12 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Kathy Ireland On "Life"
clear


COMMENT:  Sometimes, you just 'deserve a break today." This is an inspiring and touching story.  Bouquets to Kathy Ireland for standing for life in such an effective way.

Baby in the Womb


Former Supermodel Kathy Ireland Gives Powerful Defense of Right to Life on National Television
By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman
 
 
KathyUNITED STATES, April 29, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Former supermodel Kathy Ireland, who became famous in the 1980s and 90s for her appearances on the cover of Sports Illustrated, is not holding back on her pro-life views as she tours the nation promoting her new book on motherhood.
 
In a recent appearance on Fox News' "Huckabee," Ireland gave an explanation of the right to life that host Mike Huckabee said was the most articulate that he had ever heard from any source (see video at http://vodpod.com/watch/1528667-kathy-ireland-on-abortion)


"From the moment of conception a new life comes into being, the DNA, the genetic blueprint is there, the sex is determined, the blood type is determined, the unique set of fingerprints is there," Ireland told Huckabee.

"According to the law of biogenesis, all life comes from preexisting life, and each species reproduces after its own kind, therefore human beings can only reproduce other human beings, so it doesn't start out as one species and suddenly become a human being somewhere along the way," she said.
 
Noting that she began with the "pro-choice" position, even while a Christian, Ireland says that she changed her mind after researching the topic using her husband's medical manuals.
 
However, Ireland said she didn't want to believe what she was seeing, so she called Planned Parenthood to get their response.
 
"And I picked up the phone, I called Planned Parenthood. 'Help me out here, give me your best arguments'. And the best arguments were, 'Well, it's just a clump of cells. If you get it early enough it doesn't even look like a baby.'"
 
However, noted Ireland, "We're clumps of cells, and that unborn human being does not look like a baby the same way a baby does not look like a teenager, a teenager does not look like a senior, but that unborn human being looks exactly the way human beings are supposed to look at that stage of development, and that human life continues to grow and change."
 
In a later interview with Fox's Pop Tarts, Ireland compared abortion to child abuse, and said that it should be illegal in all cases except saving the life of the mother.
 
"If we're about to demolish a building we make absolute certain there are no human beings in there before we take a wrecking ball to it, but the unborn doesn't have a voice so it's up to us to speak for them," Ireland told Pop Tarts. "If I see someone abusing a child I am going to stand up against that, and that's how I feel about abortion. Women are not given all the facts, they're told it is a harmless procedure and now it has turned into such a political football."
Ireland has publicly opposed abortion since at least 1998, when she argued that the beginning of life at conception is a medically established fact as a guest on Politically Incorrect. However, she says, her views are becoming better known, and she has suffered some retaliation.
Read more here

Related links:
Video of Kathy Ireland interview with Mike Huckabee
http://vodpod.com/watch/1528667-kathy-ireland-on-abortion
Supermodel Kathy Ireland Lashes Out Against Pro Choice
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518087,00.html

clear
Posted on 05/05/2009 5:36 AM by Bobbie Patray
clear
sun mon tue wed thu fri sat
      1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31