Thumbnail image for blog buzz.jpgby Kelli
Spotlighting important information gleaned from other pro-life blogs…

  • Big Blue Wave discusses the proper use of terminology for the pro-life movement…

    I think pro-lifers should be termed “fetal rights activists.” Pro-lifers are more than just “anti-abortion.” People can be against abortion for reasons other than fetal rights.
    And “fetal rights” is the core of our philosophy. It cannot be disputed that those who support legal abortion oppose fetal rights. I think that would be the most descriptive, respectful and indisputable label for pro-lifers.
    We’re not against the act of abortion, or for a thing called “life”. We fight for the rights of people.

  • mark-sanford1.jpg

  • Albert Mohler submits his two cents on the adultery of Gov. Mark Sanford, (pictured left) who has compared himself to the biblical King David:

    Put simply, Governor Sanford’s… words make clear that his heart is still inclined toward his mistress, and not his wife….
    He refers to his mistress, not his wife, as his soul mate, and speaks wistfully of the affair as “a love story at the end of the day.”
    Governor Sanford may cite King David, and he may even suffer the illusion that his response is similar to that of Israel’s King. Nevertheless, the difference is clear…. David acknowledged the reality of his sin, expressed his hatred of the sin, and became a model for us all of repentance.
    Governor Sanford, on the other hand, demonstrates the audacity to speak wistfully of his sin, longingly of his lover, and romantically of his descent into unfaithfulness.
    Governor Sanford is no King David…. As the Christian church has long recognized, true repentance is reflected in the “detestation of sin.” This is a far cry from what we’ve heard from Governor Sanford….

  • fleming.jpg

  • Dawn Eden writes about an interesting House bill on the Americans United for Life blog. H.R. 615 states:

    … Members who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option are urged to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and agree to enroll under that public option….

    CNS News adds:

    [Rep. John] Fleming (R-LA) (pictured right) said he offered the non-binding resolution after he found out that under both the House and Senate proposals, members of Congress and other federal government employees will not have to participate in the planned health insurance exchanges for at least 5 years.
    After 5 years, they still do not have to participate in the exchanges if they do not want to, while every other American must have a plan that conforms to the government’s rules, Fleming added.

    I thought Obama said the government’s health program would be optional. (If it isn’t, members of Congress should absolutely have the “privilege” of government health care forced upon them.)
    National Women’s Law Center VP Judith Waxman seems to be concerned about the program as well, but for different reasons.
    2 Seconds Faster quotes her as saying, “people will be angry if they don’t get to keep what they already have” in terms of abortion coverage on the government’s program, when currently 80% of private insurers cover abortion.
    In an ironic twist, could the death of government health care hinge on the deaths of the preborn? (See Stanek post earlier today for more info on this.)

  • [Photo attributions:;]

    Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...