As We Face 40th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade Justin Bieber’s Mom Hopes to ‘Encourage Young Women All Over the World’ Wi New Anti-Abortion Film

On 40 years of Roe v. Wade

TPN: Today is the 40^th Anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in all 50 states. As we remember that decision today, a dispute rages in the conservative movement. Some conservatives say we should abandon social issues all together and some say we should embrace them.

What does Roe v. Wade mean to the conservative movement?

Roe v. Wade is marked as the beginning of legalized abortion in this nation.

That is not true.

Abortion was legal in some states and illegal in others. If you have ever read the Roe decision, and I had to in law school, you can only come away with the conclusion that Harry Blackmun was either senile or had his own private stash of LSD in his chambers. Roe has got to be one of the most delusional pieces of writing ever to escape the Supreme Court.

What has the result of Roe been?

It has created the multi-billion dollar Planned Parenthood racket. It has solidified the Democrats as the Party of Corruption.

Most experts say since Roe there have been 55 million abortions in the United States. Regardless of whether you think abortion should be legal or not, think about that for a second. We are a nation of 300 million and since 1973 there have been 55 million abortions.

Does anyone think this has been a good thing?

55 million children have been aborted (murdered) since Roe v. Wade was passed.

Among those who have been aborted were some who would have been star athletes, military heroes, business leaders and who were never born.

55 Million abortions is simply appalling.

In this day and age, abortions should be almost non-existent. We have effective birth control today. If you can’t figure out how to use to birth control, you definitely have no business having sex, unless you want children.

The real result of Roe has been the creation of a cash cow for the Democrats and another massive special interest group.

In 2011, Planned Parenthood received $542 million dollars from the taxpayer. Their primary and virtually only service is abortion.

Why are American taxpayers paying this money to Planned Parenthood?

Congressman Marsha Blackburn has introduced a bill in Congress H.R. 61, which would defund Planned Parenthood.

Regardless of whether you believe abortion should be legal or not, the government has no business funding it. We have no business funding an entity that simply turns around and contributes money to Democrats who will then vote for more funding for Planned Parenthood.

Roe v. Wade has been a disaster for America. Planned Parenthood has been a disaster for America. One of the best things we can do for America is to defund Planned Parenthood.

Call your Congressman and ask them to support Congressman Marsha Blackburn and co-sponsor H.R. 61.

Justin Bieber’s Mom Hopes to ‘Encourage Young Women All Over the World’ With New Anti-Abortion Movie

Justin Bieber, right, and Pattie Mallette arrive at the 40th Anniversary American Music Awards on Sunday, Nov. 18, 2012, in Los Angeles. (Photo: AP)

(TheBlaze/AP) — Justin Bieber’s mother, Pattie Mallette, is an executive producer on an upcoming anti-abortion short film.

The makers of “Crescendo” hope to raise $10 million for pregnancy centers at screenings worldwide starting Feb. 28. Mallette herself will appear at some of these, said production company Movie to Movement on Friday.

The pop star’s mother has written and spoken extensively about the addiction and abuse that led to her teenage pregnancy.

“I knew that I had to do what it took,” the 37-year-old mother wrote in her book Nowhere but Up. “I just couldn’t abort him.”

Mallette said in a statement she hopes her involvement with “Crescendo” will “encourage young women all over the world, just like me, to let them know that there is a place to go, people who will take care of you and a safe home to live in if you are pregnant and think you have nowhere else to turn.”

Here’s what Gawker had to say on the matter:

Poor Justin Bieber. When he’s not the subject of a murder/castration plot or, worse, being mocked by James Franco, he’s getting embarrassed by his mom, Pattie Mallette, who executive produced a pro-life film coming out soon…

Of course, Bieber probably isn’t completely embarrassed by the move; after all, two years ago he went on the record as being pro-life (“I really don’t believe in abortion. It’s like killing a baby?”). Then again, in that same interview Bieber said “Whatever they have in Korea, that’s bad” when asked about political parties, so we probably shouldn’t put too much stock in his opinions on anything, not that any of us necessarily were.

Check out this related video at @5minMedia  http://aol.it/XNnQN1

Related:

What do Beethoven, Justin Bieber and Tim Tebow Have in Common? 

America passes 55 million abortion mark

After the attack on 9/11 many were asking why God had let this happen… why God had abandoned us, the U.S.  Anne Graham Lotz, Billy Graham’s daughter, said it was us that moved away from God through our tolerance of Progressive Secularism and Atheism, our tolerance of the murder of innocents… 55 million through abortion, our tolerance of bestiality and our movement, as a country, away from God as we abandon the Judeo-Christian principles we were founded on.

Technorati Tags: abortion,pro-life,life,Justin Bieber,ABC News,choice,Choices,anti-abortion,Life is a Gift,Roe v. Wade,TPN,bestiality,religion,Judeo-Christian principles

Finally a Fair and Tough Interview by Univision… Obama is Scorched!

Univision does job American MSM won’t do, asks tough questions

Most of the media is content to follow along whatever story line the Obama campaign leads them down. War on women. Romney is a bully. Romney might be a felon etc. In a horrible economy and unstable world Obama has amazingly been questioned very little. It took a foreign media outlet, Univision, to finally ask him some tough questions – and he failed badly.

“We have to go to a foreign entity to be able to get an interview that even asks a hard question of this president. We have to go to Univision,” Glenn lamented on radio this morning.

The Blaze describes: 

President Obama was skewered by Univision reporters on Thursday for breaking his promise to enact lasting immigration reform during his first term in the White House.

“But it was a promise, Mr. President,” Univision reporter Jorge Ramos said. “This is very important, I don’t want it to get lost in translation. You promised that, and a promise is a promise and with all due respect, you didn’t keep that promise.”

Obama’s only response was that he does not have the power as president to accomplish everything he wants to, saying it requires cooperation within the other branches of government.

“I am happy to take responsibility for the fact that we didn’t get it done but I did not make a promise that I would get everything done, 100 percent when I was elected as president.”

Video: Beck’s Radio Show Discussion of Univision Obama Interview

Check out some highlights from the interview below:

Video -  Jorge Ramos: I Don’t Want This To Get Lost In T…

Video - Jorge Ramos Grills Obama On His Promise to Pass…

Video -  Maria Salina:  You Offered Many Excuses F…

Obama can’t answer why America’s embassies weren’t more secure  -  Univision was the network to finally ask the President about the security at our embassies. Why wasn’t it better? Glenn Beck plays Obama's answer, which painfully shows why he has been avoiding real reporters and going on Letterman, The Pimp with a Limp radio show, and People Magazine - he has no answers.

Mitt Romney gains traction among Latino voters… They are not fooled by DNC political games

Video: New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez addresses the 2012 Republican National Convention

Real Clear Politics: MITT ROMNEY: I am pleased to represent the party of Governor Susana Martinez (R-NM), Governor Brian Sandoval (R-NV), Governor Luis Fortuno (R-Puerto Rico), Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and the Texas Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Ted Cruz. These leaders are Republicans for the same reasons as millions of other Hispanics. They see that ours is the party of opportunity, the party that will restore America's prosperity. Now at our convention, Governor Martinez describe an experience that some of you may find familiar.

At the beginning of her political career she was a Democrat, and her star began to rise and as it did so she and her husband got an invitation to go to lunch with a couple of Republicans. The words Democrat and Republican never not come up. Instead, they talked about issues, not about party, such as how to keep welfare from become a bear to work and how much government is needed before it becomes burdensome to families and small businesses. When the lunch was over she turned to her husband and she said this, ' I'll be darned, we're Republicans.' I love hearing stories like that, I like to hear it much more often and I'm convinced the Republican party is the rifle home of Hispanic Americans.  See Video Here.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, right, appears with Univision news anchors Maria Elena Salinas and Jorge Ramos at a forum in Coral Gables, Fla. (Charles Dharapak, Associated Press / September 19, 2012)

Romney tells Latino audience he would fix immigration system

Mitt Romney says at a Univision forum that he would find a bipartisan solution to illegal immigration, and accuses Obama of breaking his promises to Latinos.

Technorati Tags: Univision,fair media,responisble media,Latinos,Hispanics,politics,Hispanics for Romney,Latinos for Romney,Hispanic values are Republican values,traditional values,pro-life,Catholics,Governor Susana Martinez,Governor Luis Fortuno,Senatorial Candidate Ted Cruz,Senator Marco Rubio,conservative Hispanic values,bias American media,liberal bias American media,bias MSM,terror attack on American Embassies,Obama stumbles,foreign press,tough questions

Obama and Crimes Against Humanity

by Ken Blackwell - Editor’s Note: Mr. Blackwell served as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission from 1991 - 1993.

This is a tale of two worldviews. It begins not unlike the opening paragraph of Dickens’ immortal work, A Tale of Two Cities. Schoolchildren once memorized these famous opening lines, back when schoolchildren memorized anything.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair…

President Obama at his Hundred Day White House séance proclaimed waterboarding to be torture. His was a clear, unambiguous, declarative statement. In making that statement, he opened up former President Bush and former Vice President Cheney to criminal prosecutions, here and before an international criminal court. And not just these men, but possibly hundreds of others, including members of Congress from his own party.

Cliff May, of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, takes a different approach to the question of whether waterboarding is torture or not. May was badgered by The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart. May’s answer is not as yes/no, as on/off as President Obama’s. May said it depends. May’s answer was morenuanced. Liberals used to like nuance, but that was when John Kerry was nuancing. Here’s how it went:

Jon Stewart: But answer my question: Is waterboarding torture? Yes or no?
Cliff May: Defining torture is not easy. A simple legal definition is that it “shocks the conscience.” Cutting off Daniel Pearl’s head on videotape — that shocks my conscience. Sending a child out as a suicide bomber — that shocks my conscience. People jumping off the World Trade Towers because they’d rather die that way than by burning — that shocks my conscience. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 atrocities, gagging for a few minutes and, as a result, providing information that saves lives, then going back to his cell for dinner and a movie — no, my conscience is not shocked by that.

Are our consciences shocked by subjecting KSM to waterboarding? Apparently, this  enhanced interrogation technique didn’t shock the consciences of members of Congress who were briefed on its planned use. Some of us need to re-play those tapes of cell phone calls by people trapped in the World Trade Towers.

The question keeps coming back to whether we extend all the rights of American citizens to captured terrorists. And the question also comes back to whether the terrorists are to be accorded all the protections of the Geneva Conventions.

Increasingly, our courts are saying terrorists are to be given constitutional protections, here, in Afghanistan, and at Gitmo. Geneva is another matter. This treaty binds nations to humane treatment of prisoners of war. In order to be counted as a prisoner of war, you must be in uniform (John McCain was, Nathan Hale was not), you must be subject to military discipline, and you must be taking part in a war conducted by competent authority.

The Geneva Convention also governs respect for medical treatment of prisoners and wounded soldiers. Take Al Qaeda in Iraq, for example. When one of their IEDs went off in 2003 near Baghdad and killed and wounded a number of American soldiers, a U.S. Army medical HUMVEE raced to the scene. Waiting for the medics to arrive, the terrorists set off a second IED. It had been planted there specifically to target the medical help. Inside the HUMVEE, an American female nurse was burned beyond recognition.

The purpose of the Geneva Convention was to give warring nations a strong, positive incentive to behave according to international norms and not to engage in conduct that “shocks the conscience.” When we give Al Qaeda or Taliban terrorists prisoner of war status and Geneva Convention coverage—without demanding anything of them in return—we abandon one of the great achievements of the Geneva Convention.

Of course, some humans are not accorded human rights. Our courts have seen to that. President Obama named Justice Stephen Breyer as his ideal jurist. In 2000, Justice Breyer wrote the majority opinion inCarhart v. Stenberg. That was the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional Nebraska’s law against partial-birth abortion. Justice Breyer’s opinion is worth quoting at length. He described various techniques of late-term abortion that do not shock his conscience. Nor do these techniques--unlike waterboarding, unlike slapping, unlike sleep deprivation--shock President Obama’s conscience, or the consciences of our liberal rulers.

During a pregnancy’s second trimester (12 to 24 weeks), the most common abortion procedure is “dilation and evacuation” (D&E), which involves dilation of the cervix, removal of at least some fetal tissue using nonvacuum surgical instruments, and (after the 15th week) the potential need for instrumental dismemberment of the fetus or the collapse of fetal parts to facilitate evacuation from the uterus. When such dismemberment is necessary, it typically occurs as the doctor pulls a portion of the fetus through the cervix into the birth canal. The risks of mortality and complication that accompany D&E are significantly lower than those accompanying induced labor procedures (the next safest mid-second-trimester procedures). A variation of D&E, known as “intact D&E,” is used after 16 weeks. It involves removing the fetus from the uterus through the cervix “intact,” i.e., in one pass rather than several passes. The intact D&E proceeds in one of two ways, depending on whether the fetus presents head first or feet first. The feet-first method is known as “dilation and extraction” (D&X). D&X is ordinarily associated with the term “partial birth abortion.”

A little translation may be required: “at least some fetal tissue” translates to the unborn child’s arm, a leg, or maybe her head. “Dismemberment of the fetus with nonvaccuum surgical instruments” means cutting off her arms or legs with razor-sharp implements while the child, still alive, is capable of feeling excruciating pain.

Rest assured, this is not torture. It doesn’t meet the legal definition of torture because under the rule of Roe v. Wade, the unborn child does not meet the legal definition of a person.

Terrorists were once defined—like pirates and slave traders—as hostis humani generis, enemies of all mankind. As such, they received no due process rights. They had no right to counsel. They received no protections under international agreements. When seized on the high seas by the Royal Navy, they could be promptly hanged upon determination that they were engaged in the proscribed activities.

It would have shocked the consciences of our ancestors, however, to dismember even such low characters as pirates, to cut off their arms and legs, and to let them bleed profusely to death. The most inhuman of humans in the nineteenth century could not have been treated as the least of humans are treated in our enlightened United States, by order of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Our new president abhors torture, unless it is the torture of the unborn. In that case, it is not torture at all, but simply inducing fetal demise. This great international uproar over what is and is not torture has been generated because of the treatment of three known mass murderers. The slaughter of innocents in their thousands elicits no international outrage. This is part of what Justice Breyer sees as evolving international standards of decency.

In my opinion, the Obama Administration’s abortion agenda is indeed a crime against humanity.

This weekend, President Obama will receive an honorary Doctor of Laws from the University of Notre Dame. There, he will be honored, among other things, for his brave stand against torture. He has appointed Kathleen Sebelius to head our nation’s health system. She is a disciple of the most notorious late-term abortionist in the county, a dismemberer, by his own count, of 60,000 fetuses. The President and Secretary Sebelius want to force us all to pay for abortion-on-demand. They want to force doctors and nurses to take part in killing unborn children. They will doubtless tell us our consciences should not be shocked. They’re only inducing fetal demise. Heaven help us all. And Heaven help Notre Dame.

(In Sweden they now say it's okay to have an abortion if you don't get the gender baby you desire.  Does this scare you?  If it doesn’t it should!!)

Posted:  Marion’s Place

Related Resources:

• Obama, Notre Dame and Pro-Life
• Official Stop Obama at Notre Dame Site
• Keyes, priest arrested at Notre Dame protest
• Obama on Abortion and the Right to Life
• The Candidates
• The West Coast Plot: An "Inconvenient Truth"
• Cheney Says: Obama Endangers the Nation

Obama, Notre Dame and Pro-Life

Gallup Poll: Obama Collides with Public Opinion on Abortion

05/15/09

Conservatives are buzzing about the new latest Gallup poll being reported on Drudge today. It offers a fresh angle on the Obama/Notre Dame controversy, and it may turn out to be a watershed moment for the pro-life movement. For the first time since 1995, a majority of Americans are pro-life. Gallup Poll 51% pro-life to 42% pro-choice, even better than the Fox News Poll of of 49% pro-life to 43% pro-choice.

And not only is this the first time that pro-life beats out pro-choice but also that the pro-life  are the highest ever for young people, a huge shift.  Young women are becoming over-whelming anti-abortion.

Of special interest to me is that Gallup attributes it to the President's overreach on abortion policy.

With the first pro-choice president in eight years already making changes to the nation's policies on funding abortion overseas, expressing his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, and moving toward rescinding federal job protections for medical workers who refuse to participate in abortion procedures, Americans -- and, in particular, Republicans -- seem to be taking a step back from the pro-choice position. However, the retreat is evident among political moderates as well as conservatives.

It is possible that, through his abortion policies, Obama has pushed the public's understanding of what it means to be "pro-choice" slightly to the left, politically. While Democrats may support that, as they generally support everything Obama is doing as president, it may be driving others in the opposite direction.

Conservatives are seizing on this as proof that it would be not just wrong, but also imprudent, for the GOP to abandon its conservative message:

GOP leaders across the nation should take note of both this week's poll and last week's Pew research that show the pro-life position is strengthening the Republican Party," said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. "It's time to abandon the 'blame pro-lifers first' approach when the GOP loses. If Republicans want to improve their electoral performance, standing on the side of Life is one of the best decisions they can make."

The Gallup poll confirms another national survey by the Pew Research Center, which found that overall support for abortion is down and that the largest numbers of converts to the pro-life cause have been self-identified independents and liberal-to-moderate Republicans.

These poll results come at the same time that there is controversy over President Obama speaking at Notre Dame and receiving an honorary degree.  Obama is arguably the most liberal pro-choice president the United States has ever had.  He believes and has voted in favor of late term abortions; even procedures apposed to by most pro-life proponents.

Official Stop Obama at Notre Dame Site

Keyes, priest arrested at Notre Dame protest

 

Protesters Arrested at Notre Dame

Protesters opposed to President Obama's address to the graduating class of Notre Dame were arrested Friday after they disobeyed rules about staging their demonstration and walked onto the university campus.

Protesters opposed to President Obama's address to the graduating class of Notre Dame were arrested Friday after they disobeyed rules about staging their demonstration and walked onto the university campus.

Obama is also receiving an honorary law degree on Sunday, a decision that has upset abortion opponents who say the Catholic university is violating its own beliefs by honoring the president.

Protesters were told they could protest all they want in the town of South Bend, Ind., but once they stepped onto Notre Dame property, they would be arrested.

Former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes, and a Roman Catholic priest were among the 21 arrested.

"Notre Dame is arresting a priest," the Rev. Norman Weslin, founder of the Lambs of Christ abortion protest group, said as Notre Dame security personnel put plastic restraints on his wrists. "Why are you arresting a priest for trying to stop the killing of a baby? You've got it all backward."

Weslin, 78, who has been arrested dozens of times at abortion clinic blockades, was carried off on a stretcher. He and two others were charged with resisting law enforcement.

All 21 arrested were charged with trespassing. Keyes and five others were ordered held in the St. Joseph County Jail until Monday because it was their second time being arrested on a charge of trespassing at Notre Dame, said Sgt. Bill Redman, St. Joseph County Police Department spokesman. Bond was set at $250 for the others.

None of those arrested were students.

The arrests marked the third straight Friday people were arrested as they protested the school's decision to give Obama, who supports abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research, an honorary degree and have him speak at commencement.

On May 1, anti-abortion activist Randall Terry and another man were arrested on campus while pushing strollers containing dolls covered in fake blood. On May 8, Keyes and 21 others, many of them pushing strollers containing dolls covered in fake blood, were arrested.

On Friday, there were no strollers or bloody dolls, but some of the protesters carried signs that read: "Defend her honor, rise and strike for the unborn."

About 35 people, many of them carrying anti-abortion signs, were standing on the four corners outside the school's front gate shortly before noon when a group of about 40 people led by Keyes and Terry marched up. They stopped briefly to say some prayers and to listen to Keyes, who lost to Obama in the Illinois Senate election in 2004.

"It is not consistent with God's love to honor those who have rejected that great gift of love in principle," Keyes said.

After speaking, Keyes then led a smaller group onto campus. They made it about 100 yards on campus before they were stopped by campus security. Keyes was taken into custody immediately, and the others were told to leave or they would be arrested.

Terry did not go onto campus, saying did not want to get arrested because he needs to remain free to lead more protests Saturday and Sunday.

"The reality is that if I get hung up in jail, I'm the only guy on the outside who knows how to keep this thing moving. It's strictly a leadership issue," he said.

St. Joseph Superior Court Judge Michael Scopelitis issued an order Thursday changing how bond is set for a person charged with a crime while already out on bond on a pending charge. Previously, such a person could have been released under a presumptive bond schedule. Now they must await a probable cause hearing, Scopelitis said.

The judge said county judges already were considering the change because of people being arrested multiple times and being released without appearing before a judge. He said the fact there could be numerous arrests this weekend surrounding Notre Dame's commencement brought the issue "into focus."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related Resources:

• Obama on Abortion and the Right to Life
  
• The Candidates