DC III: Blogs 4 Life conference
MK, Sandy, and I are attending the Family Research Council headquarters in DC for the Blogs4Life conference.
Go to www.frcblog.com to see the conference via the Internet now.
11:25a, EST: My dear friend Hadley Arkes, who crafted the federal Born Alive Infants Act, is up, and the last speaker. Everyone is surprised we’re running so well on time.
Hadley is saying pro-life politicians have become fixated that abortion is in the hands of the courts. This is diversion – an artful evasion – of responsibility. Hadley says we’re at the end game. There are things to do before or aside from overturning Roe. About 60% of the country believe about 90% of abortions should be overruled.
11:10a, EST: Congressman Chris Smith, head of the Congressional Pro-life Caucus, is up.
Smith says his caucus has asked President Bush to quickly enact new regulations drawing a bright line between federal funding of “family planning” and abortion. His caucus is fighting to expose Planned Parenthood, which he calls Child Abuse, Inc.
10:45a, EST: KS District Attorney Phill Kline is up. What a guy. You’ll recall I’ve been blogging lately about AG Paul Morrison, who recently had to resign in disgrace due to revelations of an affair with a subordinate. Morrison replaced Kline.
Kline is discussing a new frontier in the pro-life movement, prosecuting abortion clinics for underage abortions. Every underage abortion is evidence of rape or incest. Every state has laws against this. Yet abortion has become a haven for rapists. PP and the ACLU strive to protect minor “rights of privacy”.
Kline says we bloggers have tools at hand to uncover complicit abortion mills by finding out the number of underage abortions facilities have reported compared to grant requests, etc.
10:35a, EST: Judie Brown of American Life League (ALL) is up, mentioning most marchers today will be under the age of 30, and ALL has tapped into youth to revamp its site and tap into new ways to communicate.
10:15, EST: Dr. Michael New, who has conducted statistical research on his topic, is speaking on the positive impact of specific pro-life laws on the number of abortions.
Lots of bloggers here. Lower right corner shows Jill with Sandy next to her dressed in militant pro-lifer garb for the day.
10a, EST: Maggie Datiles is up from Americans United for Life. Last year was busy: Over 400 pro-life bills were introduced in various states.
Thanks to the Supreme Court’s partial birth abortion ban decision last April, which loosened standards for enacting pro-life bills, we should expect many pro-life bills to be introduced. Already this year 107 have been.
What to expect from the pro-abortion side this year? More attacks on health care professionals’ right of conscience and expansion of Plan B access.
9:30a, EST: Senator Sam Brownback is up. One good point: Marriage is the major way to escape poverty. Having children without the benefit of marriage is a major gateway into poverty.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Jill –
One good point: Marriage is the major way to escape poverty. Having children without the benefit of marriage is a major gateway into poverty.
And this should be a surprise?:) Hummmmmm, that is why when you look at whether a society is in decline you look at the state of the family.
Darn, I missed Jill.
Phil Kline? Really? His hot air must be great for frigid temps. Phil Kline is a hack. I’m assuming he is there on Johnson County’s (kansas) dime. This is a man who was investigated late last year who works on average, 22 hours a week. Thanks sunshine laws. We cannot talk about this guy anymore. He made PRIVATE medical records public on TV!!!! That is gross.
I missed Jill too! :(
Ah, well, I was reassigned up near the top, near the beginning. I’ll repost my speech here later.
The marriage/poverty connection. Could someone post some statistics supporting Brownback’s statement?
Thanks.
the marriage/poeverty connection is false. It’s correlation without causation.
Here is a short excerpt from an article on the heritage.org website
August 28, 2007
Poor Politics: Edwards’s poverty “plague” examined.
by Robert E. Rector
“The Census Bureau will release its annual report on poverty in America tomorrow…..
…..Much official poverty that does exist in the United States can be reduced, particularly among children. There are two main reasons that American children are poor: Their parents don’t work much, and their fathers are absent from the home.
In both good and bad economic environments, the typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year ? the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year ? the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year ? nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.
As noted above, father absence is another major cause of child poverty. Nearly two thirds of poor children reside in single-parent homes; each year, an additional 1.5 million children are born out of wedlock. If poor mothers married the fathers of their children, nearly three quarters of the nation’s impoverished youth would immediately be lifted out of poverty.
Yet, although work and marriage are reliable ladders out of poverty, the welfare system perversely remains hostile to both. Major programs such as food stamps, public housing, and Medicaid continue to reward idleness and penalize marriage. If welfare could be turned around to encourage work and marriage, the nation’s remaining poverty could be reduced…”
***Robert Rector is senior research fellow in domestic-policy studies at the Heritage Foundation.***
The complete article can be found at http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed082807a.cfm
“If poor mothers married the fathers of their children, nearly three quarters of the nation’s impoverished youth would immediately be lifted out of poverty.”
And if they married Bill Gates, they’d be the richest family in the country.
Cathy Herrod of the Center for Arizona Policy wrote this great piece today.
Please check it out.
http://www.azpolicy.org
Thank you, HisMan.
“And if they married Bill Gates, they’d be the richest family in the country.”
Posted by: Hal at January 22, 2008 12:08 PM
Hal,
You’re right, and Bill Gates could be doing A LOT for the poor children and their families in this country. Instead, he promotes population control and making abortions “safe” around the world.
Blogs for Life Roundup
Many thanks to all of the bloggers who were our guests today at FRC for the 2008 Blogs for Life conference. It was a great event, and FRC gives special thanks to all of our excellent speakers, and bloggers who…
Just because Gates worked very hard to earn his money does not mean he’s obligated to give it away.
and just because he’s giving so much away, doesn’t mean he has to give it to causes you believe in. I’m very happy he’s working on overpopulation and safe abortions worldwide.
Hi Jess.
I think you said a day or so ago that you and Laura were birds of a feather. You may be right. You hold the same pro-choice beliefs but I do see differences. You write with respect. You want to talk issues not attack the person. You seem genuine and sincere. I appreciate that very much about you and wanted you to know. Hope you are having a good day.
Hadley Arkes was great! Am I the only one who has never heard of him before?
Jill –
One good point: Marriage is the major way to escape poverty. Having children without the benefit of marriage is a major gateway into poverty.
And this should be a surprise?:) Hummmmmm, that is why when you look at whether a society is in decline you look at the state of the family.
Posted by: Tara at January 22, 2008 9:16 AM
………………………………………………..
Being married does not guarantee employment. Having children while married does not guarantee an income above the poverty level.
“If poor mothers married the fathers of their children, nearly three quarters of the nation’s impoverished youth would immediately be lifted out of poverty.”
And if they married Bill Gates, they’d be the richest family in the country.
Posted by: Hal at January 22, 2008 12:08 PM
……………………………………….
If dead beat dads were in the least interested in supporting their children, they would be.
What happened to Nellie? I’ve got EWTN on with the encore of the March. I was standing for life at my state capital today in honor of the 40 Million + babies killed by abortion, and forgot to turn on the march (may have been over by 1:00 Central). Can anyone tell me what happened?
What is the proportion which the circulating money of any country bears to the currencies of North America, paper was commonly issued for so small a
Sally makes an important point here:
“If dead beat dads were in the least interested in supporting their children, they would be.”
Posted by: Sally at January 22, 2008 7:06 PM
My question is why are women so excited about sleeping with that kind of guy? What is so attractive about a man like that?
I for one am very happy I live in a world where
people do not feel comfortable aborting babies that have reached or passed “viability”. To me viability means that the baby could and would survive unless it’s life is intentionally or accidentally ended. Question (Especially for you PC’ers). What is your definition of viability?
Truthseeker,
Good question! Here’s my take on it:
“VIABLE”:
1. Capable of living, developing, or germinating under favorable conditions.
2. Capable of success or continuing effectiveness; practicable.
3. Capable of living outside the uterus. Used of a fetus or newborn.
**Definitions 1 and 2 describe a fertilized egg.
**If a fertilized egg is viable, and a fetus starts its growth as a fertilized egg, it follows that a fetus is also viable.
**Definition 3 is not consistent with the first two because it basically re-defines the word with the qualification “outside the uterus”.
Viability exists from the beginning in the womb until natural death.
Babies are surviving earlier and earlier births so I don’t think we should “play god” and assign a point of viability arbitrarily.
aewdsa saf wefrasf adsf sdaf
Question (Especially for you PC’ers). What is your definition of viability?
TS, being able to live outside the womb. It’s lung development that is really the limiting factor.
Sure – there’s also the concept of a seed, etc., being “viable,” but the “viability” of the abortion argument isn’t in doubt.
Doug
There is no happiness like that of being loved by your these returning vnhxtrrpczayd was very pleasant or desirable no magnet drew me.
There is no happiness like that of being loved by your these returning vnhxtrrpczayd was very pleasant or desirable no magnet drew me.