We live in the sight and sound generation where information is gathered through the 'moving talking picture.' Here's how ProLife is changing the culture and the law.
Abortionist reveals, 'Am I killing? Yes, I am'
Who wants to be a millionaire? This abortionist did. Carol Everett did it for the money. Read more
Originally published in 1899, By Elbert Hubbard, this classic deserves a wide audience even in these more modern times. This is a timeless case study on management delegation and staffer initiative.
A Message to Garcia
By Elbert Hubbard
In all this Cuban business there is one man stands out on the horizon Read more
“Judge Sotomayor represents the future of the Supreme Court,” says Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, which would like to win reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that made abortion legal nationwide. Yoest testified against Sotomayor, who would be President Obama’s first appointment and the first Hispanic justice.
As a lower court judge, Sotomayor never ruled on abortion rights and, like nominees before her, she declined to tell senators her position on the issue.
Yoest said activists against abortion are mobilizing tens of thousands of people to urge members of Congress to ensure that any new health care law excludes the abortion procedure, so insurance companies would not be required to pay for it and no government funds would go toward it. (Law dating to the 1970s prohibits the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortion except in cases of rape, incest or when the woman’s life is endangered.)
Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s stance on abortion has remained unclear through her confirmation hearings because of what may be called an “indirect” connection. There apparently are no judicial opinions she authored on the constitutionality of abortion.
Yesterday, Dr. Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life, countered this “indirect” connection by highlighting the hostility of Sotomayor’s PRLDEF platform towards restrictions on abortion in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Dr. Yoest held that Sotomayor’s stance, as a member of the board of the PRLDEF, is a direct indication of her stance on abortion. Dr. Yoest stated “Part of being a board member is to have oversight, to have accountability, and to have responsibility [for the activities of your organization]” It is not by accident that Sotomayor was a member of the PLDF, it was a decision she made, and one she chose to be held accountable to.
Supreme Court Justices should exercise restraint by applying our laws, not directing policy. When judges fail to respect their limited role under our Constitution, their decisions merely reflect their personal preferences regarding public policy.
In 1973, the Supreme Court did exactly that when it purported to find a right to abortion in the Constitution in Roe v. Wade, and virtually eliminated the ability of states to regulate this new “fundamental right” with the notoriously broad definition of health in Doe v. Bolton.2 Since that day, the Supreme Court has permitted some regulation of abortion,3 but far less than before Roe.
Elected legislative bodies are constantly struggling to determine what language will pass whatever is the current “test”4 used by the Supreme Court in abortion jurisprudence.5
This confusion is the direct result of judicial interference in a matter that should be handled by the legislative process.
If the Court continues to interfere in abortion-related law, a simple ideological shift in the Court will completely undermine abortion regulations across the country – even those regulations that have the most widespread support among Americans, like parental notification statutes, informed consent laws, and partial birth abortion bans.
Recent polling data confirms that Americans want judges who follow the law. Majorities of self-identified Republicans, Independents, and Democrats agreed that “[w]hen considering a new Justice for the United States Supreme Court, I would prefer that my United States Senators look for a man or woman who will interpret the law as it is written and not take into account his or her personal viewpoints and experiences.” (Agreement: 87% Total, 84% of Democrats, 86% of Independents, 92% of Republicans, 80% of liberals, 85% of moderates, 91% of conservatives).6 Also, Americans strongly opposed a nominee who “believes that the Courts, and not the voters or elected officials, should make policies on abortion in the United States.” (70% Total, 69% of Democrats, 65% of Independents, 78% of Republicans, 65% of liberals, 71% of moderates, 75% of conservatives).
Join Fight FOCA
Thank you (foot)notes:
Left and right let down by hearings, July 18th, 2009, By: Politico,
“Sonia Sotomayor’s measured confirmation performance may have served her well, but it left the bases of both parties feeling that they’ve missed an opportunity…
While some conservatives say that GOP senators effectively laid out inconsistencies in her testimony, activists want the slow-news month of August – when Congress is on recess – to build a campaign opposing her nomination.
Charmaine Yoest, head of the anti-abortion group Americans United for Life who testified against Sotomayor, said that an extra month would be helpful to her cause.
“The more time we have to educate people, the more we would continue to emphasize to people that a vote for her is a vote for abortion on demand without any restrictions whatsoever,” Yoest said.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) pointed to her statement that she agrees with conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia’s position on using foreign law to interpret domestic law as an example of how Republicans were able to use her testimony to mark a clear delineation between the legal philosophies of the two parties.”
Deliberate Engagement, Deliberately Engaging the Culture to defend the dignity and intrinsic value of each person beginning at conception. Helping ProLife people understand, answer, rebut and refute the Culture of Death’s false argument, AUL testimony at Sotomayer hearing
Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, the nation’s oldest pro-life legal organization, told the committee Sotomayor’s judicial philosophy is “far outside of the mainstream” and that her confirmation will radically shift the dynamics of the Supreme Court.
Yoest said the role of a Supreme Court justice is to exercise
restraint by applying the law and not direct policy.
“When judges fail to respect their limited role under our Constitution, their decisions merely reflect their personal preferences regarding public policy,” she said.
Investor’s Business Daily reports that half of the American public believes that a government take-over of health care would reduce health care quality.
Why should we let Obama do this? How do we stop it?
There will be a web-cast Thursday to Educate and Mobilize Pro-Life Americans Against Great Dangers of Obama Health Care Bill; Coalition of leaders alarmed that pro-lifers unaware of what is at stake with Obamacare.
Charmaine will be joining Mike Huckabee, Chris Smith (R) NJ, Tony Perkins and other pro-life leaders. Go Register and watch.
A small army helps Charmaine prepare with her presentations. Here’s a few of the staff that helped her get ready for her testimony at the Supreme Court Nomination hearing of Sotomayor on Thursday.
Top Row L to R:Bill Saunders, Bob Heckman
Bottom Row, L to R: Heather Smith, Courtney Lillie, Charmaine Yoest, Mary Harned
Not pictured are Dawn Eden who was live blogging the Sotomayor hearings, Clarke Forsythe by phone in Chicago and Denise Burke in San Antonio.
WASHINGTON, D.C., July 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A coalition of prominent pro-life leaders has arranged a giant, Stop The Abortion Mandate live webcast for the public this coming Thursday, July 23, to alert Americans about the great dangers of the Democrat-proposed health care bill.
David Bereit, a coalition member and leader of 40 Days for Life, told LifeSiteNews that he is temporarily de-emphasizing his current 40 Days for Life tasks to concentrate on this issue because of its extreme importance. He is concerned that pro-lifers are not aware of what is at stake with the health care bill.
Connie Marshner, a well-known Washington pro-life political organizer, warned today that “this is the biggest issue since Roe v Wade.
This is not just about funding. Everyone will be forced to have abortion coverage.” Further, [Marshner] warned, the effect of successful passage of the Health Care bill will dramatically change the pro-life movement as we know it “because every doctor and health care worker will be forced to be involved in abortion.”
The pro-life webcast’s promotional material states that “Powerful abortion industry lobbyists and Washington, D.C. bureaucrats have just launched a massive effort to mandate taxpayer-funded abortions as part of their proposed trillion-dollar healthcare takeover.”
They list four main results of what they call “this abortion industry power-grab”:
Impose one of the cornerstones of the “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA) by stealth.
Force taxpayers to fund a huge abortion industry bailout – something the majority of Americans oppose, and certainly cannot afford in these tough economic times.
Mandate that virtually every American be forced into a health plan that includes abortion coverage.
Require honorable medical providers to violate their consciences and perform abortions — or risk losing their jobs.
The one-time-only LIVE webcast event will take place this Thursday, July 23, at 9 PM Eastern (6 PM Pacific, 7 PM Mountain, 8 PM Central.)
The live webcast, for which there is no charge, will be approximately 70 minutes long and will be accessible even to Internet users with only a dial-up connection.
Participants who register for the event will be able to listen in on the live audio and submit questions.
During the event, the following nationally known leaders will be heard:
MIKE HUCKABEE, Former Governor and Presidential Candidate
DR. CHARMAINE YOEST, Americans United for Life
TONY PERKINS, Family Research Council
FR. FRANK PAVONE, Priests for Life
MARJORIE DANNENFELSER, Susan B. Anthony List
DOUGLAS JOHNSON, National Right to Life Committee
TOM MINNERY, Focus on the Family
CONGRESSMAN CHRIS SMITH, U.S. House of Representatives
KRISTIN HAWKINS, Students for Life of America
CONGRESSMAN JOE PITTS, U.S. House of Representatives
DR. RICHARD LAND, Southern Baptist Convention
CARMEN PATE, Point of View Radio Show
DAVID BEREIT, 40 Days for Life
The Webcast organizers state that those who join the webcast will discover:
The shocking facts about the sweeping legislation that the political power brokers are trying to ram through before Congress goes on summer recess…
The devastating implications of the proposed mandates — facts the abortion industry doesn’t want Americans to hear…
Why respected leaders, national organizations, and pro-life people are joining together in record numbers to challenge this attempted power-grab…
The exact action steps YOU can take to make a difference at this crucial moment…
Charmaine provided written and oral testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on the qualifications of Judge Sotomayor.
Her testimony was given in the late afternoon today. Your Business Blogger(R) was in the hearing room (it was freezing) and sat with the Americans United for Life team – behind the parents of Fireman Ricci. They so pleased with their boy – they teared up.
We sat in front of a motley crew from Planned Parenthood who snorted through Charmaine’s testimony. I saw no children. (The by-product of a business who service is abortion and the end result is — no children.)
Join Fight FOCA
Thank you (foot)notes:
Charmaine also appeared on The Ed Shultz show on MSNBC and the Jim Bohannon radio program tonight.
What Makes An Expert Witness?: The 5 C’s; Charmaine Giving Testimony At The Sotomayor Hearings.
It was most interesting that the Judiciary Committee and even Ed used Charmaine’s “Dr.” honorific. Conservatives with Ph.D.’s are seldom addressed with this respect.