Skip to comments.Judie Brown, "National Right to Life Committee: The Wayward Weigh In"
Posted on 11/11/2009 3:15:15 PM PST by EternalVigilance
|Posted: Wednesday November 11, 2009 at 2:01 pm EST by Judie Brown
The problematic nature of pandering to politicians with half-measures while announcing to pro-life troops that a victory has been achieved is not a new malady. It has been a relatively consistent pattern woven into National Right to Life Committee politics for many years now. Having said that, the problem with what is currently being said about the Stupak Amendment to the Pelosicare bill is the most egregious I have seen in my 40 years of pro-life activism.
“As NRLC’s congressional scorecard for the 111th Congress will clearly explain, a vote against the Stupak-Pitts Amendment only be construed as a position-defining vote in favor of establishing a federal government program that will directly fund abortion on demand, with federal funds, and a second federal program that will provide government subsidies to private insurance plans that cover abortion on demand. NRLC regards this as the most important House roll call on federal funding of abortion since the House last voted directly on the Hyde Amendment in 1997. If you do not wish to go on record in support of creating major new federal programs that will both fund abortions directly and subsidize private abortion coverage, please vote for the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. NRLC will regard a “present” vote as equivalent to a negative vote on the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.”
While it could appear that NRLC is threatening members of Congress with a bad score if they vote against the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, the fact is that the amendment itself is halfhearted and fraught with problems. And if one examines the actual text of H. R. 3962, the Pelosicare bill, one finds the following:
This should make it obvious to anyone with a heart for the principles upon which the pro-life movement was founded to see right through the smoke and mirrors that NRLC is now using to deflect criticism from its political misjudgment.
The aftermath of the Stupak amendment vote hasn’t been pretty. I’ve read countless comments on Twitter and Facebook from pro-life people who are livid at one side or the other.
Ertelt’s description of the pro-abortion forces is, of course, correct. NARAL Pro-Choice America has described the Stupak Amendment as “extreme anti-choice politics.” Of course it’s riled; not a single baby should be protected by law, according to its strategic plan. And it’s united with its fellow pro-deathers, including Planned Parenthood, which claims the Stupak Amendment is an “unacceptable addition to the health care reform bill that, if enacted, would result in women losing health benefits they have today.”
Respect for human personhood, respect for human personhood and respect for human personhood.
If this single principle were the cornerstone of reasonable health care reform—a reform based on justice for all—there would be no anti-life provisions in at all. As of this writing and regardless of which bill we read, none measure up to this standard, and thus all should be opposed.
This doesn’t tell the whole story. Anybody who reads NRLC’s newspaper knows they are very consistent on exposing any loopholes or omissions in various bills. NRLC is simply making the point that only pro-abortion politicians voted against the Stupak Amendment, and they are right on that.
Nothing new. This has been their pattern for a very long time.
They would do well to begin to take the words of George Washington to heart:
"Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the rest is in the hands of God."
Really? Why did their main mouthpieces ignore or play down the horrible pro-abortion aspects of this bill throughout the process?
American Life League, Judie Brown, ping...
That was my early reaction when Stupak passed. NRLC is totally clueless and has a long record of doing the wrong thing. For all I know, they mean well. But there are plenty of other organizations out there much worthier of pro-life support.
My belief is that if NRTL had not bludgeoned the Republicans, and if they would have voted against Stupak en masse, PelosiCare very well may have foundered.
But, whether it would have or not, you simply have to do the right thing, and let God deal with the results.
Shadegg was the only one who got it--but he should have left the little baby out the discussion...
What exactly are you saying they said or didn’t say?
Can you name some? I already donate to PDHC.
Well, they pretty much neglected to tell pro-lifers (the folks who send them millions of dollars annually) that the amendment they were threatening Republicans into supporting wasn’t pro-life.
Though the amendment was not comprehensive enough to strip the underlying bill of all its problems, the amendment itself was 100% pro-life. Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Michelle Bachmann, Steve King...all supported this amendment.
Judie Brown's original problem with the amendment was that it left rape and incest exceptions intact. These are the same exceptions allowed under the Hyde Amendment.
Good luck getting Americans to eliminate rape and incest exceptions before they give up other abortions of convenience.
Not sure why Judie has changed her tune now that the amendment has passed (no risk of Judie being blamed for its failure), and now that the FI$CAL-minded folks have gotten so upset with NRTL. Really, I have no idea.
Until Christians quit compromising with evil, the abortion holocaust in this country will never end.
This was a wicked amendment. Those who supported it should be ashamed of themselves.
Or are you saying NRTL gave too much support for the amendment and not enough opposition to the rest of the bill? I can understand that objection, which at least doesn't slander those who voted for the pro-life amendment.
A vote against Stupak was a vote for murder.
Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are pro-choice for states, so I’m not surprised. Michele Bachmann and Steve King need to quit playing the game. It’s rigged.
I'll say it quite clearly. Any vote for a rape and incest exception is a vote for the destruction of the core American principle of the equal protection of the laws for ALL, and of the very purpose of American government: the defense of the God-given unalienable rights of every single innocent human persons.
Really? I guess you missed this:
The Stupak Amendment was a complete scam. All it did was provide political cover for Republicans and "blue dog" Democrats, and for the passage of the overall bill. It provided NO cover for the children, or for the principle of the protection of the unalienable rights of all. None.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.