So-called States' Rights and Abortion

Tragically, America elected Donald Trump, a pro-abortion child killer for president,
who began spending taxpayer dollars by fully funding Planned Parenthood
and who says he'd be happy for states to kill unborn children.
See prolifeprofiles.com/trump

Some God-fearing pro-lifers claim that abortion is a "states' rights" matter. The claim is that the very principles of justice (i.e., God Himself) would have federal governments tolerate a state's decriminalization of murder generally, or decriminalization of murder for any particular group of victims. (Whether the victims would be Jews, Christians, or children, the principles remain the same.) But the abortion states' rights position is as immoral as Roe v. Wade itself. The federal government has no authority to decriminalize child killing and neither do the states.

In America, as with slavery, so too with abortion, it was the states themselves and not the U.S. Supreme Court that launched our abortion holocaust. The historical revisionism of Ron Paul and others aside,  in the seven years before Roe v. Wade, 19 states were striking down their own laws banning abortion or otherwise explicitly permitting child killing to varying degrees. The state-sanctioned slaughter began in Mississippi in 1966. Prior to 1973, the states permitting abortion for various reasons were MS, CO, CA, OR, NC, NY, AK, HI, WA, FL, AL, AR, DE, GA, KS, MD, NM, SC, VA, and New York which allowed "elective" abortion on demand through six months.
The Bible can help pro-lifers think through all of this. Adhering to the principles of justice presented in Scripture would benefit not only America but of course any nation at any time in history. Israel's 12 tribes are sufficiently similar to America's original 13 states to draw some lessons regarding "states' rights." For the Bible is not silent on the question of whether subdivisions of a national (federal) government have the authority to refrain from prosecuting the murder of the innocent. The Bible approves of local law enforcement, even local prosecution for murder (Deut. 21:1-9). But Scripture indicates that there is no local right to refrain from the prosecution of murder.

- Negative Evidence: No Scripture says the king should tolerate tribes that permit murder.

- Positive Evidence: The Book of Judges chapter 20 teaches that God does not recognize a local right to decide whether or not to prosecute murder. Rather, when one of the twelve tribes of Israel refused to prosecute the murder of a concubine, for that lawlessness, the rest of the nation was justly outraged and moved to action, and with God's endorsement, they lawfully used force to punish Benjamin including of course any local authorities and magistrates who "would not listen..."

So all the men of Israel were gathered... united together as one man. Then the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, "What is this wickedness that has occurred among you? Now therefore, deliver up the men... that we may put them to death and remove the evil from Israel!" But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the children of Israel. ... [So] The LORD defeated Benjamin before Israel. And the children of Israel destroyed that day twenty-five thousand one hundred Benjamites; all these drew the sword. Judges 20:11-13, 35

Republican Party: We Don't Need No Social Issues

DENVER, Election Day, Nov. 6, 2012 -- Republican "moderates" like Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney lose elections, while candidates that have at least appealed to the party's pro-life core, like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, win by energizing the base.

So, disdaining their pro-family base, the Republican Party has bragged that it is moving away from what they call the "social" issues, the sanctity of life and of marriage. Of course however, the very foundation of human civilization is the non-negotiable God-given right to life and the sanctity of marriage.

Republican power brokers hostile to biblical values surrender presidential election after election to big-spending socialist Democrats because they actually would rather risk that outcome than nominate a candidate who will invigorate the base by fighting for the life of the unborn child and for the sanctity of marriage. And predictably, such RINO Republicans will argue the exact opposite, that if Republicans want to win, they need to become increasingly liberal, that is, pro-homosexuality, pro-abortion, pro-socialist, anti-marriage, etc. However, if the country is offered a candidate like Mitt Romney, who is a government health care reformist, implementer of homosexual marriage, pro-abortion, socialist, well then, why not just stick with the openly liberal party, because it's hard to out-Democrat a Democrat. The party leaders have moved so far to the left, that they're competing with the Democrats on the liberal agenda.

Please Give Now! Those who know that the battle is not R vs D, but good versus evil, and right vs wrong, and that the innocent child's life must not be relegated to a second-tier negotiable issue, please donate to ARTL. For of course, even Ronald Reagan let down the pro-lifers who trusted in his leadership by funding some abortion (as in the Mexico City Policy, etc.) and by nominating known pro-abortion judges including Sandra Day O'Connor. And George W. Bush, while he would claim to oppose abortion, increased funding to Planned Parenthood by hundreds of millions of dollars more than even Bill Clinton was able to give them, and Bush ended up killing, by his own policies and approval, more than three million children during his term in office. So this is no longer your grandma's pro-life movement. To get the support of the personhood movement, any alleged conservative candidate is going to have to be willing to sacrifice his own career in defense of the unborn child, or he's as worthless as a soldier unwilling to face the battle.

ARTL Unfurls World's Largest Protest Sign

Size of world's largest protest sign by ARTL compared to the Statue of Liberty
Size of world's largest protest sign by ARTL compared to the Statue of Liberty

DENVER /PRNewswire/ -- An official Guinness Book of World RecordsTM attempt to display the largest ever protest sign has succeeded. The 530-foot tall and 666-foot wide message is being shouted from the mountaintops overlooking the Democratic National Convention with the leading 2008 protest message.

Depending on their location, thousands of DNC delegates and journalists can look out their hotel windows to the west to see the sign. Sponsored by American RTL Action, the message initially appeared with three enormous 160-foot tall, bright yellow letters, D-N-C.


Photo from 7 miles away shows enormity of ARTL sign

See also the time lapse video of the unfurling; the follow-up expert verification report as requested by Guinness; TV news coverage of the Sheets of Shame; media reports of pro-lifers running circles around liberal activists who "had no coherent message" whereas the pro-lifers "were seemingly everywhere… and then there was the little matter of that giant message that showed up on North Table Mountain;" and a great downloadable .pdf file with amazing photos including of some of the scores of backpacks used by ARTL's "letter carriers." more...

Breast Cancer Link Suspected as Reason Komen Pulls Abortion Chain Funding

For Immediate Release:

American Right To Life Suspects the Breast Cancer Link
Is the Real Reason Komen Pulled Abortion Chain's Funding

UPDATES: See this on Times Square in NYC. Also Fox News ran two reports based on this press release: Groups cite alleged cancer-abortion link to explain Komen's split with Planned Parenthood and Does science support abortion-cancer link? And Rush Limbaugh cited the ABC Link.

Denver, CO 2-1-2012 – "Now that the lead National Cancer Institute researcher on the abortion/cancer link has reversed herself and warned of abortion as a significant risk factor for breast cancer," says Lolita Hanks, nurse practitioner and president of American Right To Life, "the pro-life pressure on Planned Parenthood and Susan G. Komen is increasing."
Komen/Planned Parenthood logo
"
Louise A. Brinton was largely responsible for getting the government-funded NCI to deny the abortion-breast cancer link," said Darrell Birkey, research director for ARTL, "and she has now reversed herself and co-authored a study which includes 'induced abortion' as a significant breast cancer risk factor."

Brinton and her co-authors wrote in the peer-reviewed Cancer Epidemiology journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, "Specifically, older age, family history of breast cancer, earlier menarche age, induced abortion, and oral contraceptive use were associated with an increased risk for breast cancer."

See this message on Times Square in NYC (not photoshopped)Endocrinologist Joel Brind, Ph.D. of Baruch College in New York City, dissented at the NCI's conference that rejected the abortion link to breast cancer, a conference organized by Brinton. Professor Brind says, "The 2003 conference of the National Cancer Institute which denied abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer refused to allow attending scientists to present the opposing position of the scientific research establishing the link, showing that abortion was declassified as a cancer risk for political and not scientific reasons."

"Following that political correctness," says Hanks, "Komen is claiming they have halted funding to Planned Parenthood because a Republican chairman of a House sub-committee has inquired into their financial practices. We suspect the real reason is the growing evidence that abortion significantly increases the incidence of breast cancer."

"The NCI's own statistics show that breast cancer has increased, and only in women who were of child-bearing age when abortion was legalized in 1973," said Brind, "so much so that nationally, cancer would have steadily declined, except it has held steady at the expense of women getting breast cancer." And Prof. Brind suggests that Komen now correct a factual error on their website which claims that, "the breast is mature after puberty." Actually, "third trimester pregnancy hormones begin the final maturation process and the differentiation of mammary gland cells," said Brind, a recognized expert in the field. "Abortion prevents this, leaving the woman with more undifferentiated cells vulnerable to carcinogens, increasing her risk of breast cancer."