A pro-life win in Washington; a setback in OKC
Usually it's the other way around. Since Republicans gained control of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, several significant bills have been passed and signed into law which advance the cause of the sanctity of human life. In 2006, a bill providing for informed consent passed both houses by a wide margin and was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Brad Henry, who was then looking ahead to his re-election campaign.
This year, veto-proof majorities in both chambers approved a bill (SB 714) that would have restricted abortion in state-owned facilities. This time Henry, now term-limited and a lame duck, vetoed the bill. I'll take that to mean he isn't running for U. S. Senate or any other office in this pro-life state, and that his retirement plans depend on making nice with a key national Democratic constituency, namely the abortion industry.
Brandon Dutcher sums it up nicely:
We know that Brad Henry doesn't want to go down in history as the lottery governor. Well, perhaps he'll be able to shed that moniker after all. Perhaps he'll be remembered as the abortion governor.Would that the governor would remember: These blobs of tissue are only four years away from being revenue units for Oklahoma's vaunted pre-K program!
Please contact the State Reps and State Senators who voted for SB 714 and encourage them to vote to override the veto. You'll find the list of State Senators voting yes, with their e-mail addresses, in Oklahomans for Life's latest legislative alert (PDF).
Meanwhile, the U. S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, upheld a federal law banning partial birth abortions. For all the other problems with the Bush administration, his court appointments made this decision possible. Ruben at ProLifeBlogs noticed an interesting remark in Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion -- she doesn't think the doctrine of stare decisis ought to apply to this ruling.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: A pro-life win in Washington; a setback in OKC.
TrackBack URL for this entry: https://www.batesline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2844
Subscribe to this blog's feed:
I want the right to have the final say about my female body - not Bush's court appointments, who by the way are Catholic. Remember separation of church and state. And Brad Henry and his family have done a great job. Just because you are quoted daily for the ridiculous remarks and controversies the previous governor was involved in doesn't make you a successful governor. And of course the poor guy was a Republican and doing the same thing in Washington now. Some people have trouble controlling their mouth.
Can someone else have the right to have the final say about your male body?
I don't recall seeing any reference to the Bible, the Catechism, or Humanae Vitae in the Court's opinion, just references to the Constitution and previous court decisions. What does where they go to church have to do with anything?
supreme court appointees are up to the president and very political - wouldn't you agree? and they are life long. bush knew exactly what he was doing to appoint the catholic appointees - they will be against any thing to do with ending life - whether it be a choice or a neccesity. this is what bush intended in appointing them. where you go to church, how you handle being "a christian", and how you wear your religion on your sleeve is always important in politics and the public eye. there are motives with many and they always come out eventually. i have little respect for anyone in washington and especially for bush. i am not for abortion being an easy alternative but there are circumstances where aborting is necessary. it is a sad day when our politicians are getting away with what they are doing. if edwards is paying back his fund $800 for 2 haircuts and he already took this money - what are we to think he would do as president? if obama admits he did cocaine to the public and he thinks this is ok to reveal, like it will redeem himself, he is a loser without having to vote. if thompson has been married 3 times, now to someone that looks like his daughter, what values could this man possibly have. if guilliani has forgotten his children for the sake of another wife, what values could he possibly have. brad henry and his wife will leave the governors mansion intact, all furniture and artifacts accounted for. he hasn't been in the news as running his mouth and taking advantage of his position and costing oklahomans more tax dollars. he nor his family haven't shamed us as our previous governor did. instead of being critical, praise the man for honoring public service, respecting our state, and he hasn't become a millionaire in the process. our president on the other hand has shamed us throughout the world. our children will pay in a variety of ways for the next 50 years for what this man has done.
if the legal right is taken away
Illegal and dangerous abortions will once again take the lives of many
mothers, sisters & daughters.
hopefully we'll be better at performing them without a legal system backing us up and allowing for doctors who do not have to hide...in any case, it wont stop abortion.
It wont stop males and females from having sex.
it may be the cause of more bi-sexual orientations.
Can't get pregnant with same sex
Another faction in the Republican party are we pragmatists and moderately libertarian leaning folk. I'll agree there is no constitutional right to an abortion. However, given that the percentage of children born out of wedlock is now somewhere around 40%, I would very much prefer that percentage not go any higher; I'd like to see it a lot lower.
In the good old days, there was less premarital sex (so I hear); and if a pregnancy did occur, there was strong societal pressure for the male to marry and support the woman child. These days there is lots of premarital sex (so I hear), and the abstinence "movement" would be more properly called a "crawlment" or a "near-dead-stopment". It is socially acceptable -- in some sub-cultures essentially expected -- for the male to abandon the female and child.
So, rather than "pro-choice", I think I'd call myself a: Don't want to support a bunch of illegitimate kids and their moms; and don't want to live with an increase in the social problems and crime resulting from illegitimate kids born into a lousy environment.
Consequently, I'm all in favor of abortion, even state sponsored abortion. Additionally, I say give them a thorough education on reproduction and birth control. I'm happy to have my taxes go to give them free birth control ... and Prozac, if necessary. Better (and cheaper) to do that than pay to raise their kids, then support a significant percentage of them in jail.
And I'm not entirely convinced that the destruction of a fertilized egg results in a soul entering some level of eternity.