Tag Archive for abortion

Mike Hall | March 17, 2010
One comment

Life And The Healthcare Bill

Does the current health care bill provide for taxpayer funded abortions? The answer to that question changes depending on who you ask. According to the president the bill maintains the status quo and is neutral on the issue. Further scrutiny of the language in the bill, however, reveals that the President isn’t being completely honest.

Charmaine Yoest, President of Americans United for Life, points out that the health care bill represents, “the single greatest expansion of abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.” How can she be right and the President wrong especially if there are no specific provisions in the bill that allow for taxpayer monies to be spent on abortions? Simply put, this bill allows for employees to choose insurance policies that cover abortion procedures. These policies will be paid for by a system of coerced government subsidies funded by taxpayer dollars. It is indirect but the net effect is that under this bill the pool of taxes we will all pay will subsidize insurance policies that include abortion coverage.

There is a law on the books that prevents the government from directly funding abortion procedures with taxpayer dollars. It was passed in 1976 and is called the Hyde Amendment. The house version of the health care bill included an amendment named after Rep. Bart Stupak, a democrat from Michigan, who wanted the health care bill to be under the same restraints covered in the Hyde Amendment. His amendment, known as the Stupak Amendment, would prevent taxpayer funding of abortions directly or indirectly, but the bill currently being debated is not the house bill that includes the Stupak Amendment, but the senate bill that does not.

There has been an effort, spearheaded by Rep. Stupak, to add to the current bill the amendment he was able to add to the house bill. Rep. Stupak has met with all sorts of opposition from the President and his allies in the house and senate. Rep. Stupak went on record explaining why the top democrats do not want his amendment to be added to the current bill:

“What are Democratic leaders saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

So it comes down not to a question of life but of money. The implications of the logical conclusions of this debate are chilling. What is the monetary value of a life? How can the state protect itself from the financial consequences of allowing unwanted children to be born?

We can debate the merits of a government run health care system ad infinitum. I am perfectly pleased to have that debate. I am, however, very disturbed to see a day where we essentially do a cost to benefits analysis on whether or not to allow someone to live. This may sound like a stretch but I urge you to take this legislation to its logical conclusion. I believe an honest examination will convince you as it has me that we are sailing into dangerous waters where the state, not God, assigns us our rights.

HT: Al Mohler

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , ,
Mike Hall | March 15, 2010
One comment

Pro-Lifers Are Not Republican Pariahs

To say that the pro-life position is damaging to the Republican party is both ridiculous and nonfactual. Pro-life advocates have formed the core of the base of the Republican party ever since the party adopted the pro-life portion of its platform. Some weak-kneed republican candidates who have soft-pedaled abortion have been damaged by pro-lifers, but the party as a whole has benefited greatly by their support. Despite the support that the pro-life cause raises, many in Hollywood and in the mainstream media would have you believe that the pro-lifers are an insignificant minority. In a recent article in the Washington Post, Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser demonstrates that this is simply not true:

“A Gallup poll last May showed that the majority of the nation, crossing all demographics, labels itself “pro-life.” Fifty-one percent of Americans prefer the “pro-life” label over “pro-choice.” Meanwhile, only 27 percent of voters identify as Republican, according to a February Washington Post-ABC News poll. Pro-lifers provide the swing votes that are so crucial to winning elections.”

There are also many within the Republican party that would prefer not to have to deal with the abortion issue. The rise of the tea party movement with its emphasis on fiscal policy and its relative silence on social issues has given moderate Republicans cause to think they they can win without emphasizing the pro-life position. According to Mrs. Dannenfelser, this would be a grave mistake for the Republican party:

“Republicans too often treat the abortion issue like an eccentric aunt at Thanksgiving dinner — if they ignore it, maybe it will go away. And lately, Republican heads have been turned by a new, flashy guest at the table — the tea party movement, which has been attracting big crowds, high-profile speakers and money with its message of lower taxes and less government spending. Some party leaders sound as if they are counting on this new energy to deliver victory in November all by itself.

That’s a risky bet. There is no doubt that the tea party movement has invigorated GOP leaders and given them hope of retaking Congress after the crushing defeat of 2008. However, the movement hasn’t been tested nationally at the ballot box; its power to elect or defeat candidates is still largely theoretical. But year in and year out, pro-life voters consistently help carry Republican candidates into office.”

Mrs. Dannenfelser makes some very astute observations concerning the importance of social policy in the upcoming elections. What silences her critics more than anything is the unfolding debate on health care. Of the thousands of policy issues that are raised by this debate, who would have thought that funding for abortion might be the undoing of the whole bill. Or that the greatest opponent of abortion funding in the health care bill would be a democrat? The political winds may be carrying an unpleasant odor this fall but that odor will not be emanating from the pro-life camp.

HT: Justin Taylor

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , ,
Mike Hall | January 29, 2010
No comments

Life is Offensive?

Tim Tebow is a champion on and off the field. The son of missionaries to the Philippines, Tebow is the football phenomenon that almost wasn’t. During her pregnancy, Tebow’s mother Pam was informed that she had contracted dysentery from bad drinking water and that her child would be severely handicapped. She was advised to abort the baby. Pam and her husband Bob refused the suggestion and the rest they say is history.

You would think that such a story would be a source of encouragement and inspiration for millions. It makes perfect sense that such a story would be broadcast in a commercial to be aired during this year’s Superbowl. Who would not want to celebrate life in such a fashion? Well the list of pro-abortion groups who are incensed at this ad and CBS’s decision to air it is long and illustrious.

One of the more notable interviews on the Tebow ad controversy aired on the O’Reilly Factor this past Tuesday evening. Mr. O’Reilly had as his guest Jehmu Greene, president of the Women’s Media Center. It was interesting to note her complaint about the ad. Watch the following clip:

So according to Ms. Greene, and those whom she represents, the ad is objectionable because celebrating life denies women of their rights? If there is one thing that Ms. Greene illustrates by employing such vacuous statements is that there is not one shred of logic, or moral gravitas that favors abortion on demand. The people who support unrestricted abortion are offended by this ad because the message is clear: abortion is murder. If they cant take the heat then get out of the kitchen and spare the lives of millions of unborn innocents in the process.

I congratulate the Tebow’s and the Focus on the Family organization for wanting to air this ad. I hope that millions will see that life is precious. Too precious to be murdered by the abortion doctors saline solution and suction tubes.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , ,
Mike Hall | January 27, 2010
One comment

A Letter To Justice Harry Blackmun

April 13, 1994

Mr. Justice Harry A. Blackmun
United States Supreme Court
Washington, D.C.

Your Honor:

The Orlando Sentinel reports that in the prospect of your impending retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court you are wondering what you will be remembered for…

To my mind nothing else that you ever have done can approximate the impact of your support of the majority opinion of the Court in the case of Roe vs. Wade.
This has opened the door to millions of abortions…

for the sake of expediency or selfish motives. It has encouraged millions of women and thousands of physicians to participate in this murderous course.

In 4 B.C. Herod the Great ordered the killing of perhaps a few dozens of babies, but his name remains famous for this “massacre of the innocents” (Matthew 2:16).

In the Civil War of 1861-65, one of the bloodiest on record in terms of the size of the armies involved, there were perhaps close to 500,000 casualties. But Roe vs. Wade has made already 30 million victims since 1973, and this number grows every day.

In World War II, the USA suffered somewhat more than 400,000 deaths due to the conflict: this is only 1/75th of the number of the abortion hecatomb.

In the Viet Nam hostilities there were some 60,000 fatalities. You would need 500 Viet Nam walls, enough to encircle the whole of D.C., to record those put to death by abortion.

The infamous holocaust engineered by the Nazis brought death to some 6,000,000 Jews and other innocent people. The name of Hitler is inextricably associated with this monstrous atrocity. Yet Auschwitz, Dachau, Buchenwald, Treblinka and others together exterminated only one-fifth of those whose life was snuffed out before birth by Roe vs. Wade.

The Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor cased the death of 2,300 Americans, and President Roosevelt, who surely cannot be accused of being politically right wing, stigmatized this occasion by calling it “a day of infamy.” Now two “decades of infamy” have cost our nation a loss as great as 13,000 “Pearl Harbors.”

Rest assured, therefore, your Honor, that this legacy of yours will ever be remembered and that your name will be associated with it. And unless you repent, when you appear before the Supreme Court of God you may well hear the verdict, “Your brothers; [and sisters'] blood cries out to me from the ground” (Genesis 4:10).

Sincerely,

Roger Nicole, Ph.D. (Harvard)

P.S. If your parents had practiced what you believe, you might have been aborted, and the United States might have been spared this abomination. If my parents had practiced it, you would not receive this letter.

HT: Justin Taylor

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , ,
« Older Entries   Recent Entries »