Life Advocacy Briefing

Time to Start the Calls

THE SENATE IS LIKELY TO TAKE UP the labcoat lobby’s embryo killing subsidy before recessing in February, three to four weeks from now.

It’s time for pro-life citizens to call their two US Senators and urge their friends to do likewise. Since several good amendments could be offered by the time the vote actually comes, the message to lawmakers should include an appeal to support pro-life amendments and to oppose funding embryo-killing experimentation with tax dollars.

The Capitol switchboard number is 1-202/224-3121. Operators can connect callers according to their home states if they do not know both their Senators’ names.

We began last week a series of excerpts from House debate speeches on this issue; we continue that series this week with speeches by Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN). We hope readers find them encouraging and informative.

March Crowds D.C.

WE BEGIN THIS WEEK TO PUBLISH SPEECHES ALSO from the March for Life, which filled Constitution Avenue in a cold, snowy Washington, DC, last Monday. Because the March speeches are not transcribed in an official archive, as are speeches in House or Senate debate, we plan to publish the lawmakers’ speeches in their entirety as a record of the occasion and, we hope, as inspiration to our readers. (Our transcripts were produced by Life Advocacy Briefing’s editor and researcher from videotape of the event telecast.)

Two first-term Representatives, Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Tim Walberg (R-WI), took the occasion to thank participants from their home states for their election victories in November and went on to express their own commitment to the cause of Life. Two “explorative” Presidential candidates, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), addressed the crowd, as did Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, Ohio Representatives Steve Chabot and Jean Schmidt, Rep. Rick Renzi from Arizona, Nebraska Representatives Lee Terry and Jeff Fortenberry, Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, Rep. Todd Tiahrt of Kansas, Maryland Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, and three US Representatives from New Jersey, Chris Smith, Mike Ferguson and Scott Garrett.

The President addressed the huge crowd by loud-speaker telephone hookup from Camp David. Speaking live were the brother and sister of the late Terry Schiavo, Bobby Schindler and Suzanne Vitadamo, as did several clergymen and a representative of the Silent No More campaign of women who regret their abortions, many of whom stood with “I Regret My Abortion” signs as a backdrop behind the speakers on the stage. A powerful speech on genocide was delivered by the passionate Rev. Luke Robinson of the Twin Chapel AME Church of Frederick, Maryland. And the youthful winners of essay, poem and poster contests sponsored by the March organizers were introduced to the crowd.

Even in San Francisco

ABOUT 25,000 PRO-LIFE CITIZENS MARCHED FOR LIFE IN SAN FRANCISCO on Saturday, Jan. 20, just two days before the anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton Supreme Court edicts invalidating America’s abortion laws.

The Western March for Life nearly doubled in size from a year ago, when an estimated 15,000 advocates for Life took to the streets in San Francisco.

Will We Tolerate This, Too?

AN EMBRYO BANK IN SAN ANTONIO, Texas, is stirring controversy and consternation as its first two customers are now five months pregnant with designer babies, making the “Abraham Center for Life” the first known commercial dealer in human embryos.

A Canadian woman and a single mother from California are reportedly the baby market’s first customers. And Daniel Martin reports in Britain’s Daily Mail that a British couple have paid 9,000 pounds (about $18,000) to buy a baby.

“Customers can choose egg and sperm donors after seeing pictures of them and receiving details of their medical history, education and family background,” Mr. Martin writes in the Daily Mail. “An embryo fitting the [British] woman’s requirements will be created over the next fortnight [two weeks],” he writes, “and she will fly out later in the year to have it implanted.”

The baby shop’s director, Jennalee Ryan, whom Mr. Martin identifies as “a mother of six,” told reporters “the British couple wanted to remain anonymous,” reports the Daily Mail. “She would only say,” writes Mr. Martin, “that they had asked that the child be white.

Ms. Ryan said she has “‘about 10 British women so far’” on her waiting list, reports Mr. Martin. British law bars such designer baby operations, but US law is silent.

RU-486 Exposed on Website

A NEW WEBSITE, DEVOTED TO INFORMATION ABOUT THE ABORTION DRUG RU-486, is being posted on the Internet by Family Research Council, whose president, Tony Perkins, described it in his FRC Washington Update, as “an invaluable resource to the public, press and health community who are seeking accurate news and information about the abortion drug.

“While we oppose the use of the RU-486 regimen because it ends a human life,” wrote Mr. Perkins, “we also believe that the legal and safety issues raised by the drug should be a matter of concern to all people of good conscience regardless of their opinions regarding abortion.”

Mr. Perkins cited the growing death toll of aborting mothers who have ingested the drug, “including one,” he said, “this past December.”

Mr. Perkins further announced release of a new FRC policy booklet, “Politicized Science: The Manipulated Approval of RU-486 and its Dangers to Women’s Health.” The booklet can be ordered via FRC’s new RU-486 website at www.ru486info.com.

March Speeches

Life Advocacy Briefing begins our publication of speeches from the Jan. 22, 2007, March for Life with speeches by two Ohio Representatives, Steve Chabot and Jean Schmidt, both Republicans.

REP. CHABOT: Thank you very much. Good afternoon to all of you wonderful pro-life Americans and welcome to our nation’s capital. I know a lot of you have come a long way and braved this cold weather to petition your government to stop the senseless slaughter of innocent little babies. Many of you have traveled all night and it’s a chilly day, but your presence here certainly warms all of our hearts.

I’m Congressman Steve Chabot, and I want to welcome the folks from Ohio and Cincinnati and our Lady of Lourdes parish. I want to offer our special appreciation and thanks to the young people that are here. After all, you are the future of this movement; you are the reason that we will ultimately prevail.

Today, January 22nd, happens also to be a special day for me; it happens to be the day that I was born, January 22nd. It’s my birthday. Thank goodness that my parents chose life. Unfortunately, however, today I can’t help but think of all the millions of babies who didn’t get the opportunity to experience life – our fellow citizens whose lives were snuffed out because of a horrendous decision that took place on January 22nd by the Supreme Court that you’ll be marching up to very soon. Because of that decision, we’re all here today, because we need to reverse Roe v. Wade.

For the last six years, I’ve been honored to be the chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee of the House; all the pro-life legislation goes through that committee. The President who … we heard from before has spoken out and is pro-life. He signed into law the ban on partial-birth abortion. Unfortunately, before the President’s signature was dry on that paper, NARAL and Planned Parenthood and some other pro-abortion groups filed lawsuits, and some federal judges usurped the people’s will and the will of Congress and reversed that decision. We’re now awaiting the US Supreme Court’s decision on that, and I’m cautiously optimistic that they will reverse the lower court decision and uphold the ban on partial-birth abortion.

Elections make a difference, because President Bush put on the Supreme Court Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, who are pro-life. Think, however, the types of choices that would have been on the court had we had a President John Kerry. Or think of the type of justices who would be put on the Supreme Court if we had a President Hillary Clinton or President Obama. We can’t let that happen.

Let me conclude, one of our most famous heroes of the pro-life movement left Congress last year. He retired. Henry Hyde of Illinois. Henry Hyde gave me a saying – I heard him say it on the House floor many times, and I have it framed in my office now – and I’d like to quote from that. This is what Henry said: “When the time comes, as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final Judgment, I’ve often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are standing there before God, and a terror will rip through your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those of us in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there will be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world, and they will plead for every one of us in the pro-life movement. They will say to God, spare him or spare her, because he or she loved us. And God will look at you and say, not did you succeed, but did you try? Thank you all for trying.

REP. SCHMIDT: Thank you all. I am Jean Schmidt. I’m from Cincinnati, Ohio – the other half of the Chabot-Schmidt pro-life team in Ohio. Today you’re going to hear many speeches, because you and I are drawn here to end the evil that is abortion.

For more than three decades on this very important day, we have assembled here in Washington to shine light on the horror of abortion. For more than three decades we have stood here with a very simple but profound message: that Life is a gift from our Creator and not a choice of convenience. Much has changed in these past 34 years. Our voices are indeed being heard. Our cause is more on the move now because of folks like you that stand strong on cold ground on days like today, energized in the resolve that we will overcome and end abortion.

Our beliefs are targeted beliefs. In this last election, pro-abortion forces literally spent over half a million dollars to defeat me. I couldn’t turn on a radio program without hearing message after message of what an awful person I was. But it was because of your prayers – your prayers for me – that I was able to come back once again and be a female voice to fight against this atrocity. And isn’t it time we heard more female voices in Washington speaking up for pro-life issues?

You know, it’s not easy being a woman and being pro-life. They’re always out to get you. They want to target you and silence you. Emily’s List is out there, but so are other voices, the pro-life voices like Susan B. Anthony and so many others.

The road we travel is not easy; it is difficult. And we must make sacrifices, and today you’re making another sacrifice, showing the world that life is a precious gift from God. And when we don’t defend it at its beginning, we compromise its value throughout our lives and our history.

And so in closing, I want to thank you for standing strong and saying to all of the nation, we must protect life, from its beginning, its middle, and its natural end.

Pray for us. Pray for our President, that we can continue to support life over death.

House Debate

The Jan. 11, 2007, House debate on HR-3 – the legislation to force taxpayers to subsidize embryo-killing experimentation – brought forth effective, persuasive appeals on both sides of the ethical divide. We will publish excerpts from the Congressional Record transcript of that debate from the various pro-life speeches given, and urge readers to attend carefully to the arguments made in opposing HR-3. We began this series of speech excerpt transcripts last week and continue as space permits.

REP. DAN LIPINSKI (D-IL): … No one likes to see another human suffer or struggle. This bill intends to provide hope. I can personally appreciate hope, because I have juvenile diabetes. … I want a cure for diabetes and for other diseases that are far more devastating, but I don’t believe this bill is the way to get there. … I believe a key to our better future is scientific research, especially in medicine. Last year I helped introduce and get signed into law the Stem Cell Therapeutic & Research Act that provides for the collecting and researching of human cord blood stem cells. This week it was reported that a hospital in my district, Hope Children’s Hospital, cured a girl suffering from leukemia using cord blood stem cells. This year we need to pass the Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act that recognizes that there are many forms of stem cells that offer great promise. Very recently, we were shown great promise that amniotic stem cells are pluripotent, and this feature gives them the same advantage as sought in embryonic stem cells. But amniotic cells avoid not only the ethical pitfalls of embryonic cells; they also have been shown to be much better, because they do not tend to produce tumors, as embryonic stem cells do. This is all in addition to adult stem cells that are being used today in clinical trials and clinical practice to treat 72 diseases. … Science continues to demonstrate we don’t have to choose between advancing medical techniques and contentious life issues. So, today, I urge my colleagues to reconsider this bill and defeat it.

REP. LOUIE GOHMERT (R-TX): … This is not about no research on embryonic stem cells. That is ongoing. That is not illegal. We have funded tremendous amounts of stem cell research. Frankly, some of us don’t need lectures on what it is to watch someone you love suffer and die and diminish, and want to help them. Most all of us know that. This is about prying money from taxpayers’ hands who believe it is illegal and immoral and unethical to kill living embryos, and some of us have seen our little embryo mature into a beautiful person. This is about taking taxpayer dollars away from them and funding this research.

REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R-TN): … The substance of this debate today is life. Clear and simple, it is life. That is why I rise to support ethical stem cell research and to oppose HR-3. … There are many of us with family and friends who look for breakthroughs for debilitating diseases. But the presumption that only embryonic stem cells have the most potential for success is inaccurate. The growth of these cells can be erratic and uncontrollable. … And we all know that embryonic stem cell research has not given science any successes in treating diseases. In my opinion, I think we would be giving away a little part of our humanity and our sense of ethics for mere hope that this form of research would some day at some point yield results that would surpass ongoing research. So let’s focus on the efforts that are proven alternatives, adult stem cell, cord blood research that have made great leaps, significant success.

REP. MARK SOUDER (R-IN): … Even President Clinton’s bioethics council, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, wrote in 1999 that most would agree that human embryos deserve respect as a form of human life. Is it showing respect to kill embryos for research? To allow the seeds of the next generation to be used for the doubtful sake of our own? Furthermore, does it show respect to the consciences of Americans who oppose the research to provide public funding for it? President Clinton’s bioethics council also wrote that the derivation of stem cells from embryos remaining following infertility treatments, the killing of embryos that HR-3 would encourage, is justifiable only if no less morally problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research. Regrettably, the supporters of this bill seem to have forgotten that advice, and their continued support for embryonic stem cell research seems to display ignorance at the recent developments of stem cell science. Far less morally problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research. Regrettably, the supporters of this bill seem to have forgotten that advice, and their continued support for embryonic stem cell research seems to display ignorance at the recent developments of stem cell science. Far less morally problematic alternatives are exactly what scientists are continuing to find. … Why should I, with my view, be forced, and the many Americans who believe this is the taking of innocent life and killing and murder for that matter, why should we be forced to pay for it? I just do not understand the intensity of trying to drive this down our throats.