Hope everyone had a nice weekend. Today is Chick Day. Hopefully the shipment of hatchlings gets over to Bomgaars on time, as the kids’ chick-mania has reached fever-pitch. Tell your peeps to call my peeps.
And now for a little pro-life round-up.
Newly appointed RNC chairman Michael Steele might just have to go. Thus far, most have been vastly underwhelmed, as he seems to be following the footsteps of the Democrat-lite predecessors who go the road of moderation–which means that they don’t take a stand on anything. Steele sounded downright vaporish recently regarding a number of key issues, including abortion, and that has me and many others saying, “You’re outta here!” The Republican party has a prime opportunity to re-group here and stand on principle against the disastrous Obama decisions being made during his first 100 days. And we’re busy arguing about Steele. People are already questioning the rash and imprudent decisions of our newly elected POTUS; just imagine how it would be if the leaders of the opposition pulled their heads out of their nether-regions. Really.
On to the stem cell research front: With Obama’s latest anti-life action comes the need for a little action of our own. We all need to contact the NE regents and tell them to stand upon principle and not accept funding for a dead-end practice that is an ethical nightmare. Just because science can do it does not mean that science should do it. Encourage them to focus on the areas of stem cell research that are proven and has shown great promise, such as cord blood stem cells and adult stem cells. It is these areas that don’t need to be federally-funded because private entities are excited to get on board with something that has had successful outcomes. Of course, Obama has rescinded the funding of these ethical sources for stem cells. And he has the audacity to call this “scientifically responsible.” (You know, just like the recovery plan was packaged, Obama-like, as the advent of the “new era of responsibility.”)
Here is the website to determine the identity of your regent:
This is where the rubber meets the road. Like I’ve said before, it’s simply not enough to talk about this or email about it or to blog about it; we’re called to action. Yesterday’s Gospel reading featured Jesus chasing the money-changers out of the temple, and now more than ever, we need to emulate Jesus. (In love, of course.)
Make sure to ask for feedback, as well.
And a Nebraska Senator, Beau McCoy of Elkhorn, has made Bill 675 his priority bill, which means that it will be debated and voted upon during this Unicameral session. Bill 675 is known as the Mother’s Right to See Her Unborn Child/Ultrasound. It would give the mother the opportunity to see an ultrasound of her child an hour before the abortion is to take place. It is a big step in the right direction, especially as far as “informed consent” goes. It is similar to the bills in other states that requires the abortionist to tell the mother that the abortion procedure will take the life of a human being completely separate from herself, and will cause that person great pain.
Eighty percent of abortion-minded women who are shown ultrasounds of their babies go on to choose alternatives to abortion. Now, I ask, what person in their right mind would be opposed to such a bill? If, as they say, abortion supporters desire abortions to be “safe, legal, and rare,” wouldn’t this be a big step in the right direction in doing that? Well, wouldn’t it? (Yes, of course. But the root of the problem lies much deeper: Abortion means consequence-free sex. Therefore, it must always be available. But that’s something I can’t go into now.) No, abortion supporters will oppose this bill fanatically. To allow a mother to see her unborn child would be to give that unborn child humanity, something that abortion proponents cannot do–ever–or they’re done for. Hence, you’ll never hear an abortion supporter call an unborn child anything but a “fetus,” a “mass of tissue,” or a “product of conception.” Talk about the subversive power of language, huh?
And how’s this for a pro-abortion record?
I’ll leave you with this:
“President Obama’s new executive order on embryonic stem cell research is a sad victory of politics over science and ethics. This action is morally wrong because it encourages the destruction of innocent human life, treating vulnerable human beings as mere products to be harvested. It also disregards the values of millions of American taxpayers who oppose research that requires taking human life. Finally, it ignores the fact that ethically sound means for advancing stem cell science and medical treatments are readily available and in need of increased support … If the government wants to invest in hope for cures and promote ethically sound science, it should use our tax monies for research that everyone, at every stage of human development, can live with.”
– Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman, U.S. Bishops’ Pro Life Committee
UPDATE: PJ O’Rourke, who is struggling with cancer, BLASTS Obama’s reasoning for the reversal on funding for ESCR. (via Hot Air). A must-read. The awesome thing is that science and morality are being found to be consistently on the SAME PAGE.
Here is the full piece. Obama has made the mistake of setting up a false choice. And he makes the excellent point that science has never needed the government’s involvement in order to make life-changing discoveries before, and it shouldn’t be involved now.