The John Birch Society on FOCA

11 11 2008

Ann Shibler from the John Birch Society writes a great article on the ramifications of the Freedom of Choice Act–the first bill President-Elect Obama has said he would sign.

Unfortunately, we are getting used to the intrusion and restrictions of big government in our personal lives on a daily basis. But when it comes to abortion and the murdering of innocents, the federal government is willing to turn a blind eye under the guise of freedom of choice, while with the other eye they limit how much toothpaste and shampoo we can take on an airplane.

Proponents of the deceptively titled Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) would have us believe that the purpose of the bill is to codify Roe. v. Wade. Such is not the case. There is no attempt, however, to hide the true intent of FOCA, H.R. 1964 in the House and S. 1173 in the Senate, in any ambiguous terminology. Feeling threats to Roe. v. Wade, as some states try to limit and regulate abortion, the pro-abortion league is going all out to effectively end any opposition to abortion, legally and finally.

FOCA will specifically change the present policy in the United States, guaranteeing that surgical and medical abortions be a fundamental right. It would invalidate any “statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action” of any federal, state, or local government or governmental official, that would “deny or interfere with a woman’s right to choose.”

The far-reaching provisions in the bill will invalidate and nullify the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, the Hyde Amendment, informed consent laws, waiting periods, parental notification laws, limits on public funding for elective abortions (American taxpayers, like it or not, will foot the bill for abortions and the abortion industry), and health and safety regulations for the abortion clinics themselves.

The most egregious provisions of the bill would allow the killing of technically full-term babies for “health” reasons, and would remove legal protections for religiously-affiliated hospitals and the doctors and nurses who staff them.

Cindy McCain Differs from Hubby on Abortion

5 09 2008

The Guardian is reporting that Cindy McCain doesn’t believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

When asked by CBS news last night whether she wanted to overturn Roe v Wade, the 1973 supreme court ruling that permitted women to seek abortions in America, Cindy McCain responded: “No, no.” John McCain vowed last year that he does not support Roe v Wade and would work to overturn it if elected.

Not that I really care what she believes since we’re not electing her, although she will be providing advice to her husband, I’m sure, so okay, maybe I do care what she believes.

Obama Ad Slams McCain on Abortion

3 09 2008

Politico is reporting that the Obama campaign has launched a radio ad that slams McCain on abortion, saying that he wants to ban abortion.

“Let me tell you: If Roe vs. Wade is overturned, the lives and health of women will be put at risk. That’s why this election is so important,” says the nurse-practitioner who narrates Obama’s ad. “John McCain’s out of touch with women today. McCain wants to take away our right to choose. That’s what women need to understand. That’s how high the stakes are.”

Um, what about the millions of children’s lives that Roe V. Wade has already taken? The “pro-choice” crowd always seems to forget the inconvenient truth that abortion ends the life of an innocent human being. Instead, they try to make it only about the woman and her right to choose.

McCain needs to hit back and detail how extreme Obama’s views on abortion really are. Give the details on what the Illinois Born Alive bill that Obama voted against was trying to prevent. Give the details on what the Partial Birth Abortion bill that Obama voted against was trying to end. If mainstream America is reminded again of what abortion really is and it is associated with Obama, I think many people will see how extreme he is.

The Palin Baby Story Matters

3 09 2008

Byron York tells of his experience in talking with some evangelicals at the GOP convention and their reaction to the story of Bristol Palin being pregnant.

…the top McCain staffers revealed that a story would be breaking on the wires in a few hours reporting that Palin’s daughter, Bristol, is, in fact, pregnant now. The father is Bristol’s boyfriend, the staffers were told, and she intends to marry him.

The McCain aides’ assignment was to call a list of about 40 top evangelical and other cultural conservative leaders. Each one would get a personal explanation of the story, and each was asked for his or her reaction. The McCain people reached nearly everyone before the story broke, and the verdict was unanimous — all the leaders supported Palin and her place on the McCain ticket.

In the Colorado section [on the Convention floor], I ran into Sue Sharkey, from Windsor. When I asked what she thought, her reaction was not about Palin but herself.

“For me personally, it hit my heart this morning,” Sharkey told me, “because I was a 17 year-old girl, just like Sarah Palin’s daughter, and I had — I was in those shoes. And my son is with me, who will be 35 years old next week, and so I know what a difficult road there is for her.”

“I chose to have my son, and from that point I realized that I was a very strong right-to-life advocate,” Sharkey continued, her voice wavering ever so slightly. Roe v. Wade had been passed just the year before, and I already knew girls who were going through abortions. It wasn’t a choice for me; it wasn’t in my heart to do that. So when I heard the news this morning, it struck close to home for me.”