In a vote of 247-183, Mike Pence's (R-Indiana) amendment to stop federal funds from going to Planned Parenthood failed. There just weren't enough Democrats joining Republicans to pass the amendment. LifeNews.com has more.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America is a billion dollar non-profit entity. Yes, you read that correctly--one billion. It receives over a third of it's money from federal and state government grants.
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Indiana) has introduced an amendment to cut off federal funds to Planned Parenthood. In a press release yesterday, he noted:
"It is morally wrong to destroy innocent human life through abortion, but it is also morally wrong to take the tax dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use them to promote or perform abortions at home or abroad. The largest abortion provider in America should not also be the largest recipient of federal funds under Title X.
"Americans who cherish the right to life should be heartened to hear that my amendment to deny federal funding through Title X to Planned Parenthood will receive a vote on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives tomorrow. Federal funding should reflect the values of the majority of the American people and this House now has the opportunity and obligation to close this offensive loophole.
"The right to life is not a partisan issue, it is a moral one. The time has come for this Congress to come together in a bipartisan way to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves and to defend the rights of the taxpayer; The time has come to deny any and all federal funding for the Planned Parenthood."
Amen and amen.
The vote on the Pence Amendment is scheduled for some time today.
Tuesday, leaders from pro-abortion groups held a press conference at the National Press Club to highlight their opposition to Initiated Measure 11. This ballot initiative would ban abortions in the state of South Dakota except for cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother. Such a challenge to Roe could possibly make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is the course that ballot initiative organizers want it to run. The goal of course would be to challenge Roe's strangle-hold on abortion legislation and possibly return such decisions to the states.
Whether it is successful is another story. Ballot initiatives often do not fair well (regardless of the issue) because people who would agree with a ballot initiative would rather vote "no" than make changes to state law. This is a large reason why ballot initiatives aren't always the best way to go.
It's interesting however to note the language pro-abortion groups used when arguing against the initiative. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood (PPFA) and Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the political arm of PPFA, said:
"It is a cynical effort, I believe, by anti-choice groups to simply use the state of South Dakota and the voters of South Dakota to do their ultimate goal which is to challenge the fundamental right of women in this country that supported the right decision to make these personal decisions."
That's a long-winded way of saying that the initiative challenges Roe. But the challenge to Roe is justified-- Roe was a deliberate act of legislating from the bench. Previous Court decisions on Roe have frequently justified its continued existence by claiming it as established precedent and therefore the legal equivalent of written-in-stone.
Whatever happens in November, to hold a press conference in Washington, D.C. about a ballot initiative in South Dakota says a great deal about how nervous pro-abortion leaders are about this.
h/t CNSNews.com
Tuesday, I wrote about Planned Parenthood's endorsement of Barack Obama [this is a correction from the original post, I accidentally wrote "John McCain"-- this was WRONG]. In my post, I mentioned that McCain has a zero percent voting record with PPFA and their score was based upon 125 votes McCain cast on legislation "related to abortion on demand." I had someone write a rather juvenile comment in opposition to my position on John McCain and abortion but she did mention something that made me dig a little further into what votes PPFA scored.
In the interest of being accurate, PPFA decribes those votes and McCain's positions as follows:
Prevention of Unintended and Teen Pregnancy
Abstinence-Only Programs
Title X Family Planning Program
Insurance Coverage of Prescription Birth Control
Comprehensive Sex Education
Government Funding for Contraception
The "Global Gag Rule"
Overturning Roe v. Wade
The U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Roe v. Wade
2006 South Dakota Abortion Ban
His "Pro-Life" Credentials
The only ones that are not directly or indirectly related to abortion on demand are prescription birth control coverage and possibly government funding of contraception (I would have to check on that-- it depends on the language as to whether or not there would be a concern). On contraception, I stand corrected. I tend to forget that PPFA would promote that because it was not something National Right to Life scores since NRLC does not take a position on birth control. NRLC also does not take a stand on sex education per se but does oppose efforts that seek to inject abortion as a "solution" to teen pregnancy. Even though I no longer work at NRLC, I still tend to think the same way.
Everything else on the list does have a connection with abortion on demand in some way.
This is a big issue of concern to me and I wish it were of concern to more Black Americans. As noted in the following article, Black Americans make up only about 13 percent of the U.S. Population yet they receive over 1/3 of all abortions. Talk about a tragedy! And of course Planned Parenthood's endorsement of Barack Obama is just all the more ironic.
This LifeNews.com article explains more.
In move that the organization's leaders hope makes them more appealing to upscale clients, Planned Parenthood is building larger building with interiors designed to appear "posh."
I didn't see this until Friday, but the Wall Street Journal blog noted that the centers "include muted lighting, hardwood floors, airy waiting rooms in colors selected by maketing experts. . ."
Wow, talk about wrapping something in clean linen. . .
Although the number of abortions in this country is on the decline, Planned Parenthood made over a billion dollars for the first time in its history during its 2006-2007 fiscal year. And the number of abortions Planned Parenthood affiliates have performed has gone up. PPFA now does about one quarter of all abortions nationwide.
And your tax dollars are supporting them.
Tony Perkins, who heads up the Family Research Council, told LifeNews.com:
"A majority of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion -- however, still Planned Parenthood receives more than $300 million in taxpayer funding each year for 'family planning' projects that help bolster their abortion trade."
This week, I was a little lax on posting because I've been trying to read Angela Franks' book, "Margaret Sanger's Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility." Angela's book is heavy on research but, even so, the book is still very, very readable.
It's truly scary knowing that this billion dollar organization known by the innocuous sounding "Planned" Parenthood performs thousands and thousands of abortions every year and pushes abortion left and right-- that's bad enough. But when you read Angela's book, you discover just how deep the organization's eugenic roots go. Sanger was a big proponent of "negative" eugenics, the goal of which is curbing the birthrate among those Sanger called "the unfit"-- and by fair means or not so fair means. Sanger included the poor, the "feeble-minded," those with disabilities and those who would be considered of average to below-average intelligence among those she considered "unfit."
Planned Parenthood was founded by a woman determined to "weed out" the "unfit." Many of PPFA clinics are located in areas of cities where the poor and minorities are concentrated.
Is this Sanger's Legacy?
Why, oh why, are our state and federal governments pouring money into PPFA coffers?
**National Right to Life makes Franks' book available for a donation of fifteen dollars which is a steal considering that Amazon list's the paperback book for almost $36.
According to an article in NRLNews, you can purchase a copy of Margaret Sanger's Eugenic Legacy from the National Right to Life Trust Fund. You can reach the Trust Fund by e-mail at education@nrlc.org or by calling (202) 626-8829.
It's been a busy week and I have not had a chance to address anything that has happened.
First up, John McCain has said that he will keep the pro-life plank in the Republican platform. This is always a source of controversy on some level every election year. To have the candidate announce his intention publicly curbs the push for change by a minority of party activists who are not pro-life. In the past, the platform was written at the platform hearings held about a week before the convention. For the last two conventions, the platform hearings were held earlier in the summer before the conventions and they were held in different sites-- cutting back on protests and the frenzied news coverage that always happens before a convention. I would think the same would happen this year.
Second, pro-abortion members of Congress, led by Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) signed a letter to House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey asking him to put a stop to abstinence funding. Of course, they argue that the programs don't work but they cite the same flawed studies that groups like Planned Parenthood have cited (of course, PPFA has a vested interest in the outcome). Seventy-six members have signed the letter but that's really not even close to a majority considering how many members there are in Congress. Now, since the CDC has announced that 1 out of 4 teens has a sexually transmitted disease (And, not to be crass, but most of these are spread by skin to skin contact not strictly by intercourse so increased condom use doesn't necessarily help. Even when used correctly, condoms reduce the risk of contracting a STD but do not eliminate it.) one would think that encouraging behavior that prevents this would be a good thing but apparently not.
Last but not least, in what was a surprise announcement, the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Great Britain believes women should be told that abortions can lead to mental health problems. This was followed by Great Britain's General Medical Council, which is the regulatory agency for physicians, announcing that doctors must not allow their personal views on abortion preventing them from referring a woman for an abortion. In other words, if a doctor is pro-life and objects to abortion he or she still has to refer for them and that same doctor isn't supposed to talk a patient out of having one.
Mmmm, abortions can be bad for mental health according to the psychiatrists but heaven forbid that a doctor talk his patient out of one. As my dad says, what a way to run a railroad.
Just as I transcribed Hillary Clinton's July 17th speech before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, I am hard at work finishing the transcript for Barack Obama's speech. I'll be posting highlights tomorrow.
