Roundup: Hecklers and Helpers


Sometimes, it’s hard to know who your friends are. That seems especially true if you are a politician, and your "friends" are anti-abortion activists.

Sen. Bob Casey (D – PA) was heckled by anti-abortion protestors as he attempted to speak at an event to raise awareness for hunger issues. Casey, a pro-life Democrat, is still under fire from his likewise anti-choice supporters for appearing "too pro-choice" during the great health care debate.

He had just thanked his wife, Terese, for introducing him to an
audience in the Capitol’s crowded Rotunda when three women and a man
stood up, one after another, to shout that he "voted to fund abortion."

During the five-minute disruption, Casey stood and listened as one of the protesters shouted, "You say you’re pro-life."

"I am," the senator said.

Capitol police escorted the protesters out of the building. A spokesman
for the police said the four were not arrested but were asked to
refrain from interrupting Casey. They did not go back into the building
afterward.

The protesters said they were affiliated with Insurrecta Nex, the
Washington antiabortion group formerly known as Operation Rescue.
Outside the Capitol, the four accused Casey of selling out his
constituents and his Roman Catholic faith for supporting the
health-care bill and appropriations bills that they contend fund
abortions overseas.

"He votes the proabortion agenda," said one of the four, Suzanne Doller of Carlisle. "He’s a disgrace to his church."

Despite helping to craft the compromise that brought Sen. Ben Nelson (D – NE) into the fold on health care, it seems poor Sen. Casey still gets no love from his supporters.

Perhaps their inflexibility should tell him something about their real agenda.

GOP candidate Scott Brown, vying for Ted Kennedy’s empty seat in MA, seems to have the loyal support of anti-abortion activists, despite claiming to be pro-choice:

"The pro-life movement is really excited," says John Rowe of
Massachusetts Citizens for Life. Yet Brown declares on his website that
abortion is a decision that should be made by a "woman in consultation
with her doctor, "i.e., he’s (moderately) pro-choice.

The anti-choice factions seem to have no issue here with supporting a candidate who hasn’t embraced their issues (at least, not publicly), but not everyone is that lucky. Should former Congressman Ron Paul decide to run for the Republican party nomination for president again, it looks like he’ll have some anti-abortion folks nipping at his heels.

If Paul runs for the presidency in 2012, "pro-lifers will
be alerted in advance to his pro-choice record," said Darrell Birkey,
ARTL research director. "In the last election voters thought Ron Paul
was pro-life. We want folks to know the truth."

"Ron Paul is pro-choice, state by state," says the
report. Paul claims that a state has the right to decide if abortion
will be legal, and his "pro-life profile" compares that unfavorably to
other pro-choice positions. Birkey asks, “Should a state have the right
to allow slavery? Pro-lifers will be shocked to see Paul’s actual
record."

Looks like not all pro-life support is created equal.

Luckily, pro-choice advocates don’t have to worry about ambiguity when it comes to leaders like Sen. Al Franken (D- MN). In just a short time, my senator from Minnesota has made it clear that women’s health is a firm priority. And now, with yet another bill to support women serving our country, Franken has reminded us again what it truly means to be an advocate for women.

The bill would require that all military pharmacies stock emergency
contraception and offer it to servicewomen without a prescription, as
the Food and Drug Administration currently allows civilian woman to
obtain it. Currently, servicewomen face spotty access to emergency contraception coverage, particularly in facilities abroad, even as they were recently threatened with court martials
if their primary contraception failed, if they were sexually assaulted
or if they simply failed to use contraception and then became pregnant.
Military facilities are not allowed to provide abortion services under
federal laws covering Medicaid and Medicare recipients, soldiers and
federal employees.

In 2002, the Bush Administration interfered
in a Pentagon effort to add emergency contraception to its Basic
Formulary, which would have required that all military medical
facilities keep it in stock. Plan B was initially approved for sale in
1999 with a prescription, and its manufacturer fought for nearly the
entire Bush Administration to get approval to sell it over-the-counter.
The Bush Administration’s foot- and knuckle-dragging over the issue was spurred on by religious conservatives that oppose all birth control–and Plan B in particular– as "abortifacients" and a federal judge ruled last year that the Administration’s decisions on Plan B were strictly political and not based on sound science.

Mini Roundup: Allegedly many women are rethinking their relationship with hormonal birth control. Wisconsin is testing some new attempts at birth control using fertility awareness methods. Or, maybe it’s time for that breakthrough on the man pill.

 

January 12, 2010

Guest
post: Sharia laws have become a weapon

Baltimore Sun

Catholics
Should be Upset CCHD Still Funding Pro-Abortion Organization
LifeNews.com

LETTER:
Emergency birth control not abortion

Wausau Daily Herald

Abortion
opponents disrupt Casey remarks
Philadelphia
Inquirer

US
bishops launch massive effort to keep
abortion out of health legislation
Catholic Culture

Adoption
laws challenges fathers rights to child
Northern Star Online

January 11, 2010

New
advice about Pap smears
Baltimore Sun

New
Sex Hormone Found—May Lead to Male
Birth Control?
National Geographic

Many
women rethinking pill
The Province

Proposed
legislation would offer more women care while saving taxpayer dollars
Iowa Independent

Obama
Administration Supports Cairo Conference Goals, Clinton Says
Kaiser Family Foundation

Obama
plan funds nurse visits to new moms

Washington Times

Teenagers
should be able to get
contraception from GPs
Irish Medical Times

Franken
Pushes Military To Offer Plan B To Soldiers
Air America (press release)

Abortion is
not the only fight
The
Guardian

Reaching
Agreement On
Abortion
Language Will Be Difficult For Dems, Washington
Medical News Today

Jury
Selection Delayed in Kansas
Abortion Doctor Murder
FOXNews

Trial in Kansas abortion doctor’s slaying begins Reuters

Trial
Delayed in Killing of
Abortion Doctor
New York Times

Some
fear Kan. ruling may spur
abortion violence
Atlanta Journal Constitution

Abortion
Language May Kill Obama’s Health Reform
U.S. News & World Report

Notre
Dame anti-
abortion
protesters to get new judge
South Bend Tribune

The
Man Who’ll Kill "Obamacare?
CBS News

Abortion
shouldn’t be a dirty word
Socialist Worker Online

American
RTL Questions Ron Paul’s
Pro-life Credentials
Christian News Wire

Pro-life
Catholic congressman advocates for ‘left-behind parents’
The Catholic Review

March
for Life and White House Protest Part of
Pro-Life Events Marking Roe
LifeNews.com

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Robin Marty on twitter: @robinmarty

  • sailingaway

    That one hack job said ” “Ron Paul is pro-choice, state by state,” says the report. Paul claims that a state has the right to decide if abortion will be legal, and his “pro-life profile” compares that unfavorably to other pro-choice positions. Birkey asks, “Should a state have the right to allow slavery? Pro-lifers will be shocked to see Paul’s actual record.”

    This is nonsense. Ron Paul vividly remembers, and describes in his book Revolution — a Manifesto, walking into a room as an intern when an abortion was just performed. As he put it (paraphrasing) “this was before they were ‘sophisticated’ enough to make sure the child didn’t survive the process.” He talks about the room full of people pretending they didn’t hear a baby gasping his or her life out in a bucket.

    He considers Roe v. Wade, striking down state abortion laws to be unConstitutional, as criminal law is in the province of the states in nearly all instances, under the 10th amendment. However, instead of trying to keep pro-lifers continually in ‘movement’ that can be channeled to empower others who need their support, he wants to actually do something about this. He has introduced legislation attacking the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction, which would return this back to the states.

    If the organization writing the hack job against Dr. Paul wants everyone to march to their orders but not get anything done so frustrated people can continue to be ‘organized’ (rather than successful), they are going about it the right way. However, it would take a Constitutional amendment to give the federal government power to stop this at the state level, and amongst other things, that would take a 3/4 state ratification. I am sure Dr. Paul would vote for it. However, I am also sure it will never be successful. Dr. Paul’s approach, on the other hand, could actually save real babies. I guess it depends on what is important to you, which you prefer.