Life Advocacy Briefing

May 24, 2010


Winning with Life / Liu Nomination Gets Committee Nod / Residual Effect
/ Getting It Right in Arizona / What’s the Governor to Do? / Noteworthy /
Examine the Record
/ Abortion Law Reform Has a Human Face

Winning with Life

LIFE ADVOCACY WILL OFFER our strategic communication seminar, Winning with Life, on Saturday, June 19, 10 a.m. at 909 E. Rand Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois. Designed for pro-life candidates and officials, the six-hour session is useful, too, for pro-life citizens who wish to equip themselves for more effective communication on Life issues and who wish to better grasp the challenges faced by those who seek their votes and volunteer hours.

Winning with Life is presented by former Illinois State Rep. Penny Pullen, currently the president of Life Advocacy and editor of Life Advocacy Briefing, and by Kevin Burnette, marketing and campaign communication strategist based in Texas. A $40 registration fee includes lunch and a comprehensive Reference Manual in addition to the presentation and discussion of Life Advocacy’s unconventional, practical pro-life communication strategy, Participation may be reserved by phoning 888/344-LIFE or via the Internet website, following the link to “Donations” and completing the information to submit name, address, phone number, e-mail address and a $40 secure credit card payment, noting “seminar” in the “comments” box.


Liu Nomination Gets Committee Nod

ANOTHER OF THIS PRESIDENT’s INEXPERIENCED JUDICIAL NOMINEES (besides Elena Kagan) is coming before the Senate, having cleared the Committee on Judiciary. (Committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy ((D-VT)), incidentally, has scheduled June 28 as the first day for the Kagan hearings and announced he hopes to rush her nomination through committee before the July 4 recess.)

The nomination of Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu was approved last week on a party-line 12-to-7 vote. Committee Republicans had delayed the nomination several weeks, but it is now on the move.

Opposing the Liu nomination to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, panel member Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) called him, reports Perry Bacon Jr. for the Washington Post, “‘the most controversial nominee of Pres. Obama.’” The Liu controversy stems not from judicial decisions – of which he has none – but from what Mr. Bacon terms “a long record of writings espousing liberal positions, such as strongly criticizing the Supreme Court nominations of [Justices] John Roberts and Samuel Alito and endorsing gay marriage and affirmative action.”

Among his controversial writings is this paragraph from his commentary scoring then-nominee John Roberts, published by Bloomberg News on July 22, 2005: “[Mr.] Roberts … co-wrote the government’s brief in a 1991 case where the Supreme Court upheld regulations banning federally funded health clinics from providing abortion-related counseling. Although Roe v.Wade’s guarantee of a woman’s right to choose abortion was not at issue in the case,” wrote Mr. Liu, “[Mr.] Roberts’s brief argued: ‘We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled.’ The Supreme Court,” noted Mr. Liu, “reaffirmed Roe in 1992,” as, clearly, would he.

Listed on his Judiciary Committee questionnaire is his membership, since 2008, on the board of the National Women’s Law Center, a prolific litigator in defense of commercialized abortion.


Residual Effect

THOSE WHO NOTE, FOR THEIR CONSOLATION, that Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s competitor in the June 8 Arkansas Democratic Party runoff is more liberal than she is (so it could not have been, could it, her vote for ObamaCare that put her in such trouble for re-election), need to take note of a third candidate in the primary contest which led to the run-off. Third-place finisher D.C. Morrison, reports, came at Mrs. Lincoln from her right flank. And he took more than enough votes to deny her an outright win against liberal competitor Bill Halter, Arkansas’s lieutenant governor. Had she voted against the massive takeover of America’s medical care system, as she toyed with doing, she might well have pulled into the magic 50%-plus primary vote that she needed to win renomination. She made her choice, and the voters split away from her in theirs.


What’s the Governor to Do?

THE EYES OF ALL MISSOURI PRO-LIFE ADVOCATES ARE ON GOV. JAY NIXON (D) as he deliberates whether to give final approval to the latest reasonable abortion regulation to pass the Missouri legislature.

The amendment to Missouri’s informed consent law would require an abortionist to give his or her customer an opportunity to see the ultrasound image of her developing baby and to listen to her baby’s heartbeat. It would also add Missouri to the growing list of states banning insurance coverage for abortions through the ObamaCare designed insurance “exchanges.”

The bill passed both houses by margins exceeding the two-thirds majorities needed to override a veto, should the governor make that move. The House vote sending the bill to the governor was 114 to 39; the measure had passed the Senate in April by a vote of 26 to 5.


Getting It Right in Arizona

WHEN ARIZONA’s GOVERNOR SIGNED HER STATE OUT of ObamaCare’s state-exchange abortion subsidy, her action was just one in a series of pro-life/family initiatives undertaken by Arizona’s legislature and approved by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) as she seeks election to her first full term.

Here are more pro-life laws recently signed by Gov. Brewer, as reported by the Center for Arizona Policy, which proposed the comprehensive pro-life/family package:

    • “Arizona taxpayer dollars will no longer provide elective abortion insurance coverage for any government employees.
    • “Arizonans now will know the facts about abortion in the state, as abortion providers will be required by law to report data about abortion, including physical harm to women.
    • “Arizona leads the nation in enacting common-sense, ethical regulations for protecting the dignity of human life that do not interfere with legitimate bio-tech research. The new laws include provisions that a) require informed consent before a woman donates or sells her eggs to clinics; b) prohibit the sale of human eggs for research purposes and prohibit the sale of human embryos for any purpose; c) prohibit human cloning, embryonic stemcell research and the creation of human-animal hybrids.”



Comment by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) from a report by Lisa Esposito for the publication of CQ-Roll Call Group, in which Ms. Esposito sees a potential split in the House Pro-Life Caucus stemming from the betrayal by many in the Stupak coalition in voting for the Obama/Reid/Pelosi healthcare takeover scheme: “People are disappointed all the time over here on how people vote on certain issues. It’s like attorneys in small towns. One day they’re on opposite sides and the next day they’re working together on a case. The pro-life issue is bigger than any of us individually, and we’ll do whatever we can.”


Examine the Record

Statement by Judie Brown, president, American Life League, issued May 10, 2010, concerning the nomination of Elena Kagan to the United States Supreme Court

On this Monday morning, the 51% of Americans who self-identify as “pro-life” are demanding answers to Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s rabidly pro-abortion and anti-marriage record.

Kagan’s 2009 confirmation hearings [for her Solicitor General appointment] reveal her deep adherence to stare decisis when it comes to “a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy,” yet Ms. Kagan has demonstrated her willingness to depart from established law in regards to homosexual issues.

Kagan swore in the hearings to represent “with vigor” interests of the United States “even when they conflict with my own opinions,” yet in August 2009, the Dept. of Justice, under Kagan’s watch, filed a reply brief in a California case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act.

Clearly, Kagan has demonstrated a record of interpreting the law in the light of homosexual, pro-abortion activism.

What’s at stake here is the core constitutional question that passionately divides the country: Does our Constitution seek human rights for all human beings or merely some human beings? Kagan’s answers [in] her 2009 confirmation hearings provide clear insight into her future judicial philosophy.

Will Pres. Obama’s nomination of Solicitor General Kagan be another example of his continued disregard for human rights in favor of advancing his favorite pet political agenda – abortion on demand, courtesy of the American tax dollar?

With the nomination of 50-year-old Kagan, will Pres. Obama assure his long-lasting assault on the most fundamental human right of personhood?

[Life Advocacy Briefing editor’s note: For a good look at Ms. Kagan’s bad record on abortion, check out the Americans United for Life website at]

Abortion Law Reform Has a Human Face

Reprinted by Life Advocacy Briefing from Illinois Federation for Right to Life Daily News, which cited “Printed by Pro-Life Blogs with permission from [name given], Nashville, Tennessee”

I know there is a law against coerced abortions* … on the books anyway. This is my story of what happened to me in April of 1972. I know there are countless others who, like me, have been forced into an abortion. My story is unfortunately not unique.

I was a 16-year-old girl from Nashville in a long-term relationship with my boyfriend Steve and living with my mother and stepfather. My mother was very ill, and my stepfather made all the family decisions. When I found out I was pregnant, I knew my stepfather would force me to have an abortion. But Steve and I had a plan. We hid the pregnancy until I was past the stage for abortions, or so we thought. We managed to hide it until I was 5-1/2 months along. Just as we thought, my stepfather took me to a doctor for an abortion. He told my father I was too far along, so we thought our baby was safe.

When I was 7-1/2 months, I was awakened at 4 a.m. and driven in the dead of night to a hospital in Cookeville, Tennessee. I knew this had something to do with the baby, but he was kicking, rolling and very much alive. There was nothing they could do now! I was wrong; a nurse came in to listen for a heartbeat and found a very strong heartbeat. What music to a mother’s ears to hear the heartbeat of her baby! But this would be the first and last time I would hear his heartbeat. No one would answer my questions about what was going on. I was becoming very agitated and scared.

Finally, a doctor came in and explained in a harsh voice that he was going to perform a salt saline abortion. I became uncontrollably upset. I said NO. I screamed NO. I tried to make the deal that if they would just let my baby live, I would give him up at birth. I tried to get off of the bed. I did all a 16-year-old could, until they sedated me and started the procedure. My labor was 12 painful hours of knowing what was happening to my baby.

When I gave birth to my son, I begged to hold him, but I was denied even that. Before they took his little burned body away, I caught a glimpse of his little leg and foot. That is all I saw of my son. He was dead.

Less than 24 hours later, I was taken back to Nashville to inform my boyfriend they had killed our baby; that I couldn’t save our son. I was consumed with guilt and sorrow. Being denied the opportunity to mourn, I was told this was my fault and I must never tell anyone about this; no one would understand or ever love me if they knew what “I” had done. … I believed what they told me.

I left Nashville a pregnant teenager. I returned a broken woman, girlfriend, sister, daughter but most of all, a broken mother.

Steve and I named our son David. As time passed, my world grew darker; the relationship didn’t make it. I spiraled down into my very own private hell. Years passed, and the birthdays and dreams of what David could have been haunted me. The maternal instinct that longed to hold and protect him never left me.

In 2009, after much prayer, I made the decision to find a way to heal. I wanted to acknowledge that my son existed, even if for a short time. God was in control, and I was headed for the journey of my life.

God’s perfect timing … the journey begins.

My research on the issue of abortion led me to Tennessee Right to Life. There I met so many remarkable people who were dedicated to the cause of Life and helping women and men just like me. As I became more involved, I found out that their legislative liaison was working on a piece of legislation, along with two great sponsors, called “Freedom from Coercion Bill,” sponsored by Rep. Susan Lynn and Sen. Jack Johnson. This legislation would require signage in facilities performing abortions that no one was allowed to coerce a woman into an abortion against her will regardless of her age and [that] there is help for them. Many are unaware that there is a law against coercion* to protect a mother when she said NO to abortion.

This was all about what [had] happened to me and my son! I was so excited and wanted to be a part of this historic event. What better way to heal than to educate the public and legislators about the need for this bill. I was now bold enough to go public.

I became concerned about finding David’s father and informing him of my actions. I realized that this bill and my story might get attention in the media. I knew reading about this in the papers might cause him pain. I had looked for him over the years without success but amazingly found him just in time on Facebook. We spoke for the first time in over 30 years. I was able to tell him my plans for the upcoming bill and my planned involvement. I told him I wanted to give our son a voice … a voice that had been denied him … and [to] save other babies from the horrible death he had suffered against the wishes of his own parents. To my relief, he told me that he supported me 100% and would stand with me through the process! We would stand together for our son.

For the next three months, we walked the halls of the Legislative Plaza and told our story to anyone who would listen. We sat through countless meetings in the House and Senate to follow this bill. I went to many county chapter meetings of Right to Life to tell our story and encourage their work. I spoke at their annual Rally for Life, reliving the story I hid for years. The time was right. The story must be told and the truth uncovered. Finally I felt I was able to act on behalf of my son.

On March 31, 2010, both the House and the Senate passed the Freedom from Coercion Act in a historic vote! For the first time in 37 years, Steve and I felt that we had given a sort of rebirth to our son. David’s voice had been heard! On April 19th, two days after the date of David’s birth and death, the Tennessee Governor signed the bill into law.

David’s voice will now be heard in every abortion facility, doctor’s office and hospital that performs abortions, as women read the required signage that: “It is against the law for anyone, regardless of the person’s relationship to you, to coerce you to have an abortion. By law, we cannot perform an abortion on you unless we have your freely given and voluntary consent. It is against the law to perform an abortion on you against your will. You have the right to contact any local or state law enforcement agency to receive protection from any actual or threatened criminal offense to coerce an abortion.”

Our son David finally has a voice.

*Unfortunately, it is not against the law in every state, but Tennessee is showing the way for other states not only to criminalize coerced abortion but also to make that restriction a true protection for the most vulnerable in our society, prenatal babies and their victimized moms.

We at Life Advocacy do not customarily publish first-hand human interest stories like this one, but in this commentary we see confirmation for every public official who toils to limit, regulate or recriminalize the intentional killing of innocent preborn boys and girls, and we see comfort and encouragement for mothers who seek healing from abortion. We publish this today for the sake of the babies whose lives will be saved by Tennessee’s law, especially as it is replicated in other jurisdictions. May this new law – and this personal story – cause many Americans to grasp the reality of abortion; women, men – and their babies – deserve better than abortion. Commercialized abortion is a cancer on our nation’s soul.

Permission granted to quote with attribution. Reproduction rights granted only by express authorization.