Seeing is Believing

When an expectant mother casts her eyes on an image of the thumb-sucking bairn nestled in her womb, it’s difficult to deny the truth – the bundle in her belly is a living, breathing baby. Knowing this, protectors of the preborn are pushing to make it easier for any woman considering an abortion to first look at an ultrasound picture of the little one whose life depends on her mercy.

Click here to ask Congress to pass the Informed Choice Act.

Click here to sign the CMC petition

According to statistical research, a woman is 80 percent more likely to change her mind about an abortion if she has information that encourages her to reflect on the procedure ahead of time. For this reason, the Center for Moral Clarity supports the Informed Choice Act, H.R. 223, which would authorize the federal secretary of Health and Human Services to make grants to nonprofit organizations for the purchase of ultrasound equipment.

Passing this bill would enable clinics nationwide to provide free examinations to pregnant women – and give them a peek through the window to the womb.

Along with funding grants for purchasing ultrasound equipment, the Informed Choice Act would:

• Require clinics to show the visual image of the fetus from the ultrasound examination to each pregnant woman with a general anatomical and physiological description of the fetus;
• Give each pregnant woman the approximate age of the embryo or fetus;
• Provide information on abortion and alternatives to abortion, such as childbirth and adoption, and information concerning public and private agencies that will assist in those alternatives.

“If we are to regain our equilibrium as a society, if we are to rescue our children from a downward spiral of violence, then we must recover our founding ideals,” said Pastor Rod Parsley. “We must resensitize ourselves to the dignity, integrity and sanctity of life by upholding it at every opportunity and in every situation. People matter.”

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in April upholding a federal ban on ghastly partial-birth abortions has invigorated people who love and revere the sanctity of human life. In addition to the Informed Choice Act pending in Congress, a variety of state legislation seeks to include ultrasounds as a prerequisite before a mother could kill her developing offspring.

South Carolina, which is the only state in the nation to recognize a fetus as a person, also could become the only state to require a woman to view an ultrasound before getting an abortion. Several other states are considering laws that would make ultrasounds available but would not make looking at them mandatory.

Of course, as much as the partial-birth ruling has motivated Bible-believing Christians, it has provoked abortion proponents. So it was no surprise that Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., wasted no time in reintroducing the Freedom of Choice Act, a measure to put a woman’s right to have an abortion in federal law.

In order to protect and preserve any rights, courageous leaders – in the press, in medicine, in law, in politics and in the church – have always recognized that they had to protect the fundamental rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Contemporary Christians can do no less.

Click here to ask Congress to pass the Informed Choice Act.

Source:  www.centerformoralclarity.net

Seeing is Believing

When an expectant mother casts her eyes on an image of the thumb-sucking bairn nestled in her womb, it’s difficult to deny the truth – the bundle in her belly is a living, breathing baby. Knowing this, protectors of the preborn are pushing to make it easier for any woman considering an abortion to first look at an ultrasound picture of the little one whose life depends on her mercy.

Click here to ask Congress to pass the Informed Choice Act.

Click here to sign the CMC petition

According to statistical research, a woman is 80 percent more likely to change her mind about an abortion if she has information that encourages her to reflect on the procedure ahead of time. For this reason, the Center for Moral Clarity supports the Informed Choice Act, H.R. 223, which would authorize the federal secretary of Health and Human Services to make grants to nonprofit organizations for the purchase of ultrasound equipment.

Passing this bill would enable clinics nationwide to provide free examinations to pregnant women – and give them a peek through the window to the womb.

Along with funding grants for purchasing ultrasound equipment, the Informed Choice Act would:

• Require clinics to show the visual image of the fetus from the ultrasound examination to each pregnant woman with a general anatomical and physiological description of the fetus;
• Give each pregnant woman the approximate age of the embryo or fetus;
• Provide information on abortion and alternatives to abortion, such as childbirth and adoption, and information concerning public and private agencies that will assist in those alternatives.

“If we are to regain our equilibrium as a society, if we are to rescue our children from a downward spiral of violence, then we must recover our founding ideals,” said Pastor Rod Parsley. “We must resensitize ourselves to the dignity, integrity and sanctity of life by upholding it at every opportunity and in every situation. People matter.”

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in April upholding a federal ban on ghastly partial-birth abortions has invigorated people who love and revere the sanctity of human life. In addition to the Informed Choice Act pending in Congress, a variety of state legislation seeks to include ultrasounds as a prerequisite before a mother could kill her developing offspring.

South Carolina, which is the only state in the nation to recognize a fetus as a person, also could become the only state to require a woman to view an ultrasound before getting an abortion. Several other states are considering laws that would make ultrasounds available but would not make looking at them mandatory.

Of course, as much as the partial-birth ruling has motivated Bible-believing Christians, it has provoked abortion proponents. So it was no surprise that Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., wasted no time in reintroducing the Freedom of Choice Act, a measure to put a woman’s right to have an abortion in federal law.

In order to protect and preserve any rights, courageous leaders – in the press, in medicine, in law, in politics and in the church – have always recognized that they had to protect the fundamental rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Contemporary Christians can do no less.

Click here to ask Congress to pass the Informed Choice Act.

Source:  www.centerformoralclarity.net

Maine Pro-lifers: ‘Not With Our Money!’

Pro-lifers across Maine converged at the state capitol last week to voice their opposition to a bill that would use their tax money to pay for abortions for poor women. The state already doles out $1 million every year to Planned Parenthood, so advocates for life are justified to declare that enough is enough.

State Senate President Beth Edmonds, D-Freeport, is the sponsor of the measure, which would force Maine residents to spend $283,000 more on taxpayer-funded abortions.

The cost of the bill is based on an average out-of-pocket cost of $350 and a count of MaineCare patients who got abortions from one of the state’s three nonprofit providers of the procedure – the Family Planning Association of Maine, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and the Mabel Wadsworth Women’s Health Center.

If the bill passes, terminating life of preborn babies would be paid for through MaineCare, the state’s Medicaid service. Abortion, though, is not a fundamental human right. The issue is about the sanctity of life, not charity, as the bill’s supporters would like people to believe.

Currently, MaineCare only pays for abortions when the mother’s life is in jeopardy or in cases of rape and incest. The bill under consideration would expand that to cover all abortions.

Last week, dozens of pro-life advocates rallied on the capitol steps. Inside, there was standing room only when the Health and Human Services Committee convened a public hearing on the bill. Consistent with their duty as Christians, activists made it clear that they didn’t want their money used to pay for abortions.

“The inescapable fact is that Christians cannot – and should not – divorce their biblical perspective from public policy and law making,” said Pastor Rod Parsley. “Someone’s perspective will influence our laws – it’s just a question of whose. ”

Tax payers in Maine – or in any state of the union – should not have to contradict their own consciences by paying for elective abortions. In addition to the moral considerations, using tax dollars to kill babies is an irresponsible financial decision that will put more strain on the state’s budget.

source:  www.centerformoralclarity.net

There’s HOPE for Ethical Research!

There’s good and bad news this week from the U.S. Senate, where debate on federal funding for human embryonic stem-cell research ended with the approval of two diametrically opposed bills: The HOPE Act and the infamous Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The latter, which would advance medical experimentation at the expense of human life, was vetoed by President Bush last year.

Given that the president has promised to veto it again, it’s disappointing that legislators passed it anyway on a 63-34 vote Wednesday. The good news is that the margin is too narrow to override President Bush, who has voiced support for the ethical alternative – which the Senate also passed 70-28.

Here are the 28 senators who voted against the HOPE Act:

Baucus, D-Mont.; Bayh, D-Ind.; Bingaman, D-N.M.; Boxer, D-Calif.; Cantwell, D-Wash.; Cardin, D-Md.; Clinton, D-N.Y.; Durbin, D-Ill.; Feingold, D-Wis.; Feinstein, D- Calif.; Inouye, D-Hawaii; Kohl ,D-Wis.; Lautenberg, D-N.J.; Levin, D-Mich.; Lieberman, I-Conn.; Lincoln, D-Ariz.; Menendez, D-N.J.; Mikulski, D-Md.; Murray, D-Wash.; Nelson, D-Fla.; Obama, D-Ill.; Reid, D-Nev.; Rockefeller, D-W.V.; Sanders, I-Vt.; Schumer, D-N.Y.; Stabenow, D-Mich.; Tester, D-Mont.; Wyden, D-Ore. 

Click here to thank your senator for voting for the HOPE Act and supporting ethical research.

Although both legislative proposals would remove restrictions on the use of federal funds in pursuit of ground-breaking research to cure diseases, the Hope Offered through Principled Ethical Stem Cell Research – or HOPE Act – would forbid the creation, cloning or destruction of embryos. However, this bill would authorize research on embryos with no chance of survival. The Senate missed an opportunity to make a clear statement about the value of life. Instead, lawmakers are sending America a mixed message.

Stem-cell research is a complicated undertaking. This much, though, is clear – ending life at any stage of development is morally indefensible. Christians know that Scripture plainly admonishes against killing, and invoking the merits of research doesn’t change anything.

Ethical research using stem cells from adults and umbilical cord blood is already contributing to improving health conditions associated with more than 70 diseases and injuries. These advances dispel the notion that cloning, destruction of human embryos or exploiting women by harvesting their eggs are the only avenues for discovering new medical treatments.

“The current adversarial climate has made many Christians think they must choose between science and faith,” said Pastor Rod Parsley. “It has also convinced many decent men and women in the scientific community that they must reject all religious influence in order to be faithful to science.”

The fact that Bible believers condemn senseless destruction of life does not mean they want to stand in the way of all medical research. The HOPE Act would “promote the derivation of pluripotent stem-cell lines without the creation of human embryos” or destroying them. (Read and compare the bills for yourself: the HOPE Act vs. the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.)

The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act isn’t just immoral; it would also be a foolish use of taxpayers’ money. Prudent and fiscally responsible lawmakers shouldn’t divert public funds from promising and less controversial research options. Of course, to some folks death is palatable when it occurs in a petri dish. Not so for Christians. Those who want research to continue, but also respect human life, are backing the HOPE Act.

Click here to thank your senator for voting for the HOPE Act and supporting ethical research.

Source:  www.centerformoralclarity.net

If Not Enforced, Life-preserving Law is Useless

A newspaper columnist in South Dakota suggested last week that it’s time to end the debate over abortion. The writer said she was “bone tired” of the endless discussion of such issues as the right to life and moral imperatives. This is precisely the result abortion advocates hope to achieve.

Christians must not grow weary; the battle for life is far from over. As Bible-believers pursue policies that cultivate a culture of life, they also must follow up and make certain the laws enacted are, in fact, enforced.

Click here to support CMC’s campaign to uphold and enforce the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.

It’s a national disgrace that abortion kills more than a million babies a year in America, and that clinics and hospitals defy the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act – allowing innocent abortion survivors to die. President George W. Bush signed the legislation into law in 2002, mandating medical assistance for any child born alive, even if that birth occurs during an abortion procedure.

Five years later, battle-fatigued Christians must be vigilant to make sure every baby benefits from the provisions of this law. A situation reported last week in Florida reveals how easy it is simply to look the other way, ignoring the inhumanity.

On Feb. 9, when a man came to the back door of an abortion clinic carrying the body of a baby in a bag, a pro-life activist contacted police. The Good Samaritan was concerned that the baby had been born alive, then deprived of medical treatment, in violation of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. Police refused to investigate, noting that as a policy they didn’t get involved in the abortion industry.

What purpose is served by a law that’s not enforced? The law requires that if an infant is born alive, life-sustaining treatment must be provided to that child. These innocent victims can’t speak for themselves. Advocates for the sanctity of all human life must stand up and be heard on their behalf.

Please be a voice for righteousness by adding your name to CMC’s petition, which asks federal authorities to assure that clinics follow the law.

Click here to support CMC’s campaign to uphold and enforce the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.

Source:  www.centerformoralclarity.net