The Lamp

Where truth can be shared.

Archive for the ‘supreme court’ Category

Will the Justices Defend Free Speech?

Posted by thelamp on June 18, 2007

A decision in two historical cases, FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life and McCain v. Wisconsin Right to Life, is expected to be handed down any day as the U. S. Supreme Court approaches the end of its term, which concludes June 30. The central question in these cases – which have been consolidated for one ruling – is whether organizations like Wisconsin Right to Life can air legitimate grassroots lobbying ads during the blackout periods created by the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

In 2004, the Wisconsin Right to Life organization ran a television spot encouraging residents to prevent anticipated filibusters of President George W. Bush’s federal judicial nominees by calling Wisconsin U.S. Senators Russell Feingold and Herb Kohl, both Democrats. Timing of the political advertisements raised eyebrows at the Federal Election Commission (FEC) because Feingold was up for re-election at the time. So the FEC banned the right-to-life group’s ads in the weeks leading up to the November election.

The McCain-Feingold Act, named after the two senators who sponsored the legislation, regulates contributions to federal candidates in an effort to control the influence of special-interest groups on elections. The act is enforced by the FEC. Specifically, the law prohibits unions and corporations from using corporate money to pay for advocacy advertisements targeted at a specific candidate within the designated blackout period 30 days prior to a primary election and 60 days before a general election.

In response to the ad ban, Wisconsin Right to Life sued the FEC, arguing that the ban violated the First Amendment by regulating campaign speech. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of Wisconsin Right to Life in December 2006, stating that it is unconstitutional to prohibit the airing of such ads. The Federal Election Commission and Sen. John McCain, along with other members of Congress, appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments on the cases April 25, 2007.

Here’s an indication of how Americans feel about restrictions on their free speech: A broad coalition of groups representing a wide spectrum of political ideologies filed briefs supporting Wisconsin Right to Life.

The Center for Moral Clarity concurs that the McCain-Feingold law’s “electioneering communication” prohibition should not be applied to grassroots lobbying. Such a limitation stifles citizens’ constitutional right to petition the government. The right to communicate with elected officials should not be suspended during election season.

The nine justices on the nation’s highest court have an opportunity to uphold the First Amendment, which gives citizen organizations a right to participate in self-government by asking other citizens to petition their members of Congress regarding upcoming legislative action. Christian activists are praying that they will do so.


Posted in Anti-Christian attitudes, Center for Moral Clarity, CMC, Equal Rights, Freedom of Religion, pro-life, Recent News & Events, right to life, Rod Parsley, supreme court | Leave a Comment »

A Cause for Celebration: SCOTUS Respects Life!

Posted by thelamp on May 4, 2007

Pro-life advocates across America are rejoicing, and with good cause. In a 5-4 ruling announced Wednesday morning, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the nationwide ban on partial-birth abortions. This victory is significant because the court’s decision moves the nation a step closer to respecting every life as sacred.

The decision comes roughly five months after oral arguments were presented before the justices Nov. 8, 2006, in two cases challenging the baby-killing ban (Gonzales v. Carhart and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood). The highest court in the land confirms what advocates for life have been proclaiming for the past four years: Congress and President Bush have the authority to forbid butchering a baby seconds before he or she can take in the first precious breath of life (click here to read the Supreme Court’s opinion).

Partial-birth abortion is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited. Now it is. This monumental accomplishment would not have been possible without passionate activist citizens, commitment from federal lawmakers to preserve life – and a leader in the White House with enough courage to firmly stand for what is right.

Click here to thank President Bush for his unwavering support for the right to life.

“The Supreme Court’s decision is the best news we’ve heard from the high court in decades,” said Pastor Rod Parsley, who was at the White House in 2003 to witness President Bush signing the partial-birth abortion ban into law. “That the unnecessary and barbaric practice has been legal was a national tragedy. Fortunately, the justices have taken a small, but important step toward restoring some sanity and humanity to our nation’s culture of life.”

The procedure at issue involves partially removing an alive – but unborn – baby from its mother’s womb, then crushing or cutting the tiny skull so that death occurs before the child leaves the birth canal. Clearly, partial-birth abortion is nothing less than infanticide.

For years, abortion mills have insisted that women had a “constitutional right” to kill their offspring in this fashion. Such an argument was outlandish, and in an opinion penned by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court wisely rejected that notion.

Of course, in the landmark Roe v Wade ruling that made abortion legal, the Supreme Court did indeed say that the 14th Amendment grants women a qualified right to terminate a pregnancy. This week’s ruling opens the door to reversing the troublesome 1973 decision that led America down a dark, murderous path.

In a concurring opinion, Justices Clarence Thomas and Anotnin Scalia indicated that they were prepared to consider a challenge to the 34-year-old Roe v. Wade decision.

“I write separately to reiterate my view that the court’s abortion jurisprudence, including Casey and Roe v. Wade, has no basis in the Constitution,” wrote Justice Thomas. Those words are sweet music to Christian ears!

Several state legislatures are working on abortion prohibitions that eventually could result in a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, which in 1973 was brought on behalf of “Jane Roe,” Norma McCorvey. McCorvey has since joined the multitude of Americans who ardently oppose abortion.

Bible believers have good reason to anticipate an end to the culture of death that has fostered permissive attitudes toward killing innocent unborn babies.

Click here to thank President Bush for his unwavering support for the right to life.


Posted in Abortion, Anti-Abortion, babies, bible, Center for Moral Clarity, Christianity, CMC, Family Matters, Recent News & Events, Rod Parsley, supreme court, unborn babies | Leave a Comment »