I was listening to Mike Pence guest host “The Washington Watch Weekly” radio show recently, which is normally hosted by the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins. And he introduced me to a real pro-life Congressman named Trent Franks. He had Franks on the show and he really seemed to like him. So, I checked up on Franks and added him to my blogroll.
Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona has introduced the “Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act.” If passed, the bill would ban race- or gender-selection abortions.
Attorney Steven Aden of the Alliance Defense Fund tells OneNewsNow his organization helped write the bill that is being referred to as “PreNDA.”
“Sex-selection and racially-motivated abortion is an immense problem in America and internationally,” the attorney explains, “and Congressman Franks’ bill would prohibit the performance of such abortions, the funding of them, or promoting them.”
That’s good news.
And remember how the Heritage Foundation was worried that the porkulus-1 spending bill would nationalize health care? Well, check out this proposed amendment by Senator Jim Demint.
Excerpt:
Senator DeMint is offering an amendment to the budget resolution that would prevent any legislation from being passed with less than 60 votes that would eliminate the ability of Americans to have freedom in their health care choices. If passed, the amendment would reinforce President Obama’s campaign promise to protect the ability of Americans to keep their health care plan and choice of doctor, regardless of changes made to the health care system.
So, we’re seeing some advocacy on two fronts: social issues and fiscal issues.
UPDATE: Welcome, visitors from Free Canuckistan! Did you know that Binks is a web elf? It’s true!
UPDATE: Welcome visitors from 4Simpsons blog! Thanks for the link, Neil!
Story here, at Gateway Pundit. One of my favorite senators, Tom Coburn, proposed the amendment to protect the conscience rights of health care providers.
Here’s the purpose of the amendment:
To protect the freedom of conscience for patients and the right of health care providers to serve patients without violating their moral and religious convictions.
And here’s the roll call.
Senate Democrats voted down the Coburn Amendment #828 tonight.
The vote was 41 to 56 against the amendment.
Senators Snowe, Collins and Specter voted with democrats on the amendment.
The description of the amendment is up at Coburn’s blog.
Excerpt:
This amendment ensures that the funds made available through the budget’s health care reserve fund will not be used to violate the conscience of health care providers or to allow government bureaucrats to make health care choices for patients, including which doctors they may see.
But the Democrats are not the only ones who disagree with the right to conscience. Commenter ECM sent me this story from the Anchoress on abortion. Rev. Ragsdale, the new Dean of Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts has a peculiar belief about the place of abortion in Christianity. The Anchoress cites a sermon on her blog in which she states her views plainly.
Here is Rev. Ragsdale on abortion:
…when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.
These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.
I want to thank all of you who protect this blessing – who do this work every day: the health care providers, doctors, nurses, technicians, receptionists, who put your lives on the line to care for others (you are heroes — in my eyes, you are saints); the escorts and the activists; the lobbyists and the clinic defenders; all of you. You’re engaged in holy work.
And in a different place, Rev. Ragsdale writes about medical personnel who refuse to perform abortions due to conscience:
Let me say a bit more about that, because the religious community has long been an advocate of taking principled stands of conscience – even when such stands require civil disobedience. We’ve supported conscientious objectors, the Underground Railroad, freedom riders, sanctuary seekers, and anti-apartheid protestors. We support people who put their freedom and safety at risk for principles they believe in.
But let’s be clear, there’s a world of difference between those who engage in such civil disobedience, and pay the price, and doctors and pharmacists who insist that the rest of the world reorder itself to protect their consciences – that others pay the price for their principles.
This isn’t particularly complicated. If your conscience forbids you to carry arms, don’t join the military or become a police officer. If you have qualms about animal experimentation, think hard before choosing to go into medical research. And, if you’re not prepared to provide the full range of reproductive health care (or prescriptions) to any woman who needs it then don’t go into obstetrics and gynecology, or internal or emergency medicine, or pharmacology. Choose another field! We’ll respect your consciences when you begin to take responsibility for them.”
Laura at Pursuing Holiness explains how to get the sermon here since it was quickly deleted by Rev. Ragsdale:
… Ms. Ragsdale deleted the sermon, but on the intarweb things have a zombie-like way of coming back to get you. Cached copy is here. And for posterity, here’s a PDF of the cached page with Our Work Is Not Done.
Laura goes on to make these admirable comments:
Yes. I am so sick of this postmodern “what’s true for you” mindset that prevents people from calling out evil in the name of tolerance. Aside from “Katie Rags” blessed sacrament of abortion, though, obviously the American church continues to weaken. We’re so seeker-sensitive, tolerant and multi-culti we scarcely bother to defend it. Success is too often defined by butts in the seats – an easy metric to quantify – not true discipleship, which is less metric and more “I know it when I see it.”
The Anchoress has an inspiring pro-life story posted here. I recommend you take a look. It is very important for people to take her point, that on the Christian view, God has a purpose for allowing us the opportunity to to love those who need love. The purpose of life is not to shove away the demands of others so that you can maximize your own happiness.
The first part of her post is a story about a mother who chooses to deliver a baby whom, she was told, would die shortly after birth. She goes on to have the baby, who is doing (mostly) fine. I recommend you check out the story. But there is another point that needs to be made about this story. Ask yourself – why was this woman allowed to choose to have her baby?
The answer is – because the government did not control her health-care decisions, as would be the case in a single-payer system. And in a single-payer system, your health care depends on radical secular-leftist social engineers. The same ones who fund useless embryonic stem cell research, because it is a sop to the pro-abortion lobby.
The Anchoress continues:
People who clamor for government-run health care should consider that once the taxpayers have given that power over the government, they – like AIG and all of the “evil banks” currently being talked down – will place themselves and their loved ones into the power of the government and their accounting sheets. The grandmother you think of as gold, may be so much tin, if she costs the government too much to keep alive. The husband you call your diamond becomes only coal to the bureaucrat.
And abortion…if you discover that the child in your womb is “defective” and decide you want to love it, anyway, that you want to allow your daughter a few precious minutes of life and love, give your son the chance to grow in the life he will have, you will be told you are unrealistic and selfish to burden the state and your fellow taxpayers with your absurd love.
One of the purposes of my blog is for Christians to realize the connection between public policies and their ability to execute their own Christian lives without interference from the secular state. The point that Anchoress makes above is something that we should all think through carefully. How many “social justice” policies do Christians vote for that will come back to bite us?
WINTERY KNIGHT 