A recent article in Crisis Magazine suggested it was time to change pro-life tactics.  Not sure how useful the article is; of the 3.3 points (out of 4) that he got correct, most of it has been well-known to pro-life activists for a long time.  The best part about the article was the appended comment by John J. Jakubczyk of Arizona.  [Question: How do you say “Jakubczyk”?  Answer: With your mouth.]

Anyway, I’m extracting part of his comment here:

It is true that most people do not enjoy hearing about abortion, be they pro-life or “pro-choice.”  There is a simple reason for this and it applies to the average church goer all the way to presidential candidates: Once you seriously realize that we are allowing the killing of children every day in this country AND that despite this knowledge we are going about our lives as if nothing is wrong, we are all culpable unless we do something to stop it. And once we realize that, there is no going back. You can NEVER walk away.  So we close our eyes and cover our ears and pretend … pretend that those pro-lifers are extremists, pretend that it is just another “ministry,” pretend that their tactics won’t work and therefore I do not need to get involved. We get mad when someone “guilts” us into doing something and we resent them, so we call them zealots or other names.  We tell ourselves that we are not like them. And we justify our inaction.

Fortunately many of our children, now grown, abortion survivors, reject this complacency. They want to end the killing. They see the urgency and demand action now. Fortunately there are new leaders who are not willing to go slow, but want to end the killing NOW. They have great drive. It is my prayer that their intensity,  their sense of urgency, combined with the wisdom of their elders will forge a new and stronger pro-life movement where their will be no compromise on the principles of protecting all life, that there will be a better use of media to reach the public and SELL the pro-life message, and that there will be a new collaboration among pro-life organizations to defeat the abortion industry on their own turf … by offering women REAL  health care for them and their babies, and by exposing the abortion industry’s dark and deviant side to the American public.

Gregg Cunningham

CBR Executive Director Gregg Cunningham was interviewed on a BBC Radio 4 news broadcast earlier today.  The interviewer was obviously an arrogant, hard-core leftist idealogue.  To hear the interview, click here.

Gregg and CBR UK Director Andy Stephenson had been scheduled to appear on a BBC Radio 5 Live broadcast 2 hours later to debate British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) abortion providers.  Regarding the second interview, Gregg wrote supporters

… they (BPAS) apparently cancelled after listening to our first interview and the BBC pulled the plug on our second appearance.  Cowards.  This is exactly why we must make our case in the public square.  The press and our opponents are determined to suppress our message.  The newspapers write about us only when they can quote the abortion industry telling scurrilous lies about us and the radio broadcasters interview us only until they discover that they can’t embarrass us on the air.

Got a note from Lynn Dyer, a sidewalk and crisis pregnancy counselor who explains how she uses CBR’s Choice Blues video to save children and moms from abortion in Arizona.  She wrote:

I’ve been involved in pro-life activities for the past 30 years. I”m always interested in finding new ways to touch a woman’s heart so that she will not abort her baby.

When counseling a woman and/or young girl and she agrees to go to our clinic (Life Choices Woman’s Clinic) with me, she will be given an ultrasound so that she can see her baby. After that, she is shown the DVD Choice Blues. In many instances, seeing this DVD has solidified her decision not to abort.

To give an example: I brought a young girl into our clinic recently whom I had counseled on the sidewalk at the abortion clinic. She had had a previous abortion and was to get a second one on this particular day. She reluctantly agreed to come to our clinic with me, but was still abortion minded. She saw her baby on the ultrasound and afterward made the comment to me, “Well, the aborted babies go back to heaven, right?”  [Note from FAB:  We hear the same thing from “pro-life” Christian pastors who try to justify doing nothing to stop abortion, even within their own churches.]

I know then that she had not had a change of heart yet. Then I sat with her while we watched Choice Blues. This is when I saw the real transformation in this young girl. She explained to me that with her first abortion, she had been heavily sedated and they (Planned Parenthood) had not told her or showed her what would actually take place during her abortion.

She was shocked at what she saw on this video and asked numerous questions about possible physical injuries and complications that might occur as a result of this obviously dangerous and brutal procedure. I truly feel that this girl did not go through with her plans to abort her baby because of what she saw on this DVD.

[In Arizona, there is a 24-hour waiting period, which means that 2 visits to the abortion clinic are required. The sidewalk] is a perfect opportunity for me to give her the Choice Blues DVD to take home with her to watch before she comes back on the second visit to abort. So far, I have never seen a woman whom I have given the DVD to return for her abortion. Choice Blues is an invaluable tool for me in my counseling … a real lifesaver.

Thank you CBR for making this valuable DVD available.

Order your own copies of Choice Blues to hand out. There is a special version of Choice Blues for use in crisis pregnancy counseling that is not suitable for general audiences. For the crisis pregnancy version, click here.  We have letters from CPC counselors who have documented literally hundreds of babies saved by CBR videos.  Those are just the ones who bothered to write.

For the standard version of Choice Blues, suitable for use with general audiences (normally teenagers and older), click here.

The pro-life world is abuzz this week about the great news that the Susan G. Komen Foundation (SGK) has cut off funding to Planned Parenthood (PP), the nation’s largest chain of abortion facilities. This is great news, no matter how you look at it.

SGK had planned no public announcement; they were content to allow their existing commitments to PP expire quietly and say nothing about it. It was PP who made it all public. Jill Stanek has the story.

After PP forced their hand, SGK didn’t just stick PP with the proverbial knife; they twisted it a couple of times. They stated publicly that PP would no longer receive grants because they are under investigation by local, state, or federal authorities. Ouch!

This is a huge blow to PP. The loss of half a million dollars will hardly affect the number of children PP is able to kill, but the loss of prestige is huge. This public and very dramatic rebuke will further stigmatize PP in the eyes of school systems, governmental agencies, and corporate donors across the country.

More good news: SGK is cutting all funding to embryonic stem cell research. Story here.

The left is in a rage, because abortion matters more to them than fighting breast cancer. Howard Dean and other leftists are encouraging corporate sponsors to punish SGK. Several links here.

Please send an e-mail to news@komen.org with the subject line: “Thank You for Defunding Planned Parenthood!” Last we heard, pro-life responses are outnumbering pro-abortion complaints by 2 to 1, at last count. We need to improve that response.

Also, please register your approval at www.istandwithkomen.com.

My wife and I are making a personal donation to both SGK and their local affiliate. Some pro-lifers are concerned that we can’t support SGK until it stops working against its own mission, i.e. misrepresenting the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) studies and downplaying the pill-breast cancer link. But this is a disagreement over science, not principle. Now that it is decoupled from PP’s abortion agenda, perhaps SGK will be in a better position to evaluate the ABC data more objectively.

Of course we are convinced that the ABC connection is real, but that’s really beside the point. It’s bad strategy to punish people who did exactly what we asked them to do, just because they haven’t done something else. It tells other potential allies and converts that you are petty and unreasonable.

In general, we must reject the all-or-nothing mentality that seems to prevail among some pro-lifers. If we demand 100% fidelity to everything we believe, we’ll have few allies and accomplish very little. We can and should set aside differences to form alliances and friendships based on mutual goals. Like my Aunt Jane used to say, “Don’t major in the minors.”

What SGK has done is quite remarkable and they are taking a vicious hit for it from their former allies. They have de-funded the abortion giant. We must thank them for this.

Withholding our support because of smaller disagreements will not make SGK listen to us, it will make us look petty and small. SGK needs to realize they have good friends in pro-lifers, allies in the battle for women’s health. Furthermore, we must also send a strong message to other corporations that if they sever ties with PP, we will welcome them with open arms.

We convert more students at the March for Life than at any other event.

Do pro-lifers need to see abortion photos?  We got a message just today from a 16-year-old student who lives in Washington DC.  He came to the
AbortionNo.org website and wrote:

I saw these pictures at the March for Life in 2010.  I saw the graphic pictures on the “Abortion No” posters, and my friends and I just stopped and stared, aghast.  Later I came onto the website and watched the videos, and I have never been more passionate for change.  I am only 16, but I hope I can do something to make this injustice known.  I went back to the March for Life in 2011 and I am returning again this year in 2012.  I resolve to go every year for the rest of my life until this injustice is eradicated, until this holocaust is over.

Pictures

• neutralize the opposition,
• convert the neutral,
• activate the converted, and
• energize the active.

Strategic pro-life activism means being at the right place, at the right time, with the right message.  That’s what we do at CBR.

A decisive blow for ObamaCare and other pro-abortion legislation in the US Senate was delivered in the state of Virginia, way back in 2006.  In November of that year, the pro-abortion candidate won a seat in the US Senate by fewer than 10,000 votes.  Had just 5,000 voters switched from pro-abortion to pro-life (just over 2 voters/precinct), then the pro-life candidate would have won in 2006 and ObamaCare would have been rejected in 2009.  Remember the midnight vote in the US Senate two years ago?

Just as Virginia was key to the pro-abort victories of 2009-2010, it is also key to undoing the damage in 2013-2014.  Don’t take our word for it.  Listen to the pro-life former Senator from Virginia, George Allen:

Virginia’s key.  Our U.S. Senate race here in Virginia is one that objective observers say is crucial.  If we win Virginia, the Republicans, the conservatives, take over the majority in the U.S. Senate and everyone recognizes that whoever wins the presidency, they need to win Virginia.

That’s why CBR is focused like a laser on expanding pro-life activism in Virginia and other key states.  CBR can’t endorse any particular candidate or party, of course, but we can put abortion on the election-year agenda by forcing people to see what abortion is and does.

Abortion advocates and their allies in the media portray pro-life candidates as “extreme,” “arch-conservative,” “right-wing,” etc., but they portray pro-abortion candidates as “moderate.”  By helping us take abortion pictures to Virginia, we can show young people that killing babies is an extremist act of terror, whereas saving babies is a rational act of compassion.

In 2011, we took GAP to 3 major universities in Virginia.  We started 2 new pro-life clubs on campus.  These students will constantly remind their classmates that abortion is an act of violence that kills a baby.  We have invitations to take our GAP project to George Mason U and Virginia Commonwealth U in the Spring.  But we can’t do it without your help.  Please help us show voters in Virginia that voting for abortion is absolute evil.  Click here to join us!  No gift is too small; no gift is too large!

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEcFozPm3KM

Great article in the Weekly Standard by Fred Barnes on the progress of the pro-life movement in recent years.  He said

That the pro-life movement is bigger is a given. It’s also younger, increasingly entrepreneurial, more strategic in its thinking, better organized, tougher in dealing with allies and enemies alike, almost wildly ambitious, and more relentless than ever.

***

They’ve begun piling up successes. In 2011 alone, 24 states have enacted 52 new restrictions on abortion. Five now require an ultrasound before an abortion, two insisting that the screen be viewable by the mother. Four bar abortions after the baby is able to feel pain (at approximately 20 weeks). Eight have opted out of Obamacare. Five ban abortions by webcam (in which a doctor, not in person but videoconferencing with the mother, prescribes pills to induce abortion). Six trimmed or eliminated funds for Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. Texas led with a $64 million cut.

Although he didn’t mention CBR by name, he quoted from a piece by abortion industry leaders Frances Kissling and Kate Michelman, who lamented the effictiveness on our work when they noted that “Advocates of choice have had a hard time dealing with the increased visibility of the fetus.”  Kissling and Michelman were very specific about how our movement is making the fetus visible:

“… in recent years, the anti-abortion movement [meaning CBR and others] successfully put the nitty-gritty details [meaning pictures] of abortion procedures on public display [meaning university campus exhibits], increasing the belief that abortion is serious business and that some societal involvement is appropriate.”

These pictures are precisely why our successes continue to build.  (For more on this, see previous FAB post here.)

Barnes went on to highlight the work of two good friends, Lila Rose of Live Action and Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America (SFLA). Live Action’s under-cover investigations have exposed Planned Parenthood covering up for child abusers and sex traffickers at numerous abortion facilities all over the country. Lila was a recent guest on my show (audio here).

SFLA has established pro-life groups at hundreds of universities and colleges around the country. At CBR Southeast, we work closely with SFLA to start pro-life groups in our region and train student leaders how to be more effective at leading pro-life activism.

FAB is coming to you today from Macon, Georgia, where CBR is co-sponsoring a state-wide conference of the Students for Life of Georgia.  Pro-life students have come from all over Georgia for a day of leadership training and networking.  In fact, a few interlopers from South Carolina may have snuck in as well.  All-told, there are about 50 students in the crowd.

As one of the speakers for this conference, your humble correspondent addressed the students on the history of social reform, and how that history can guide us as pro-lifers.  We are not the first social reform movement, and we can learn a great deal from successful reformers like William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, the abolitionists in America, Lewis Hine, and Dr. Martin Luther King.

Interesting project by the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC).  They actually endorse CBR’s strategy of using horrifying photographs to expose and eradicate injustice.

For All the World to See is organized by the Center for Art, Design and Visual Culture at UMBC.  In introducing the project, Project Director Maurice Berger describes activists who are  “exceptionally skillful image-makers, adept at capitalizing on the authority of pictures to edify, educate, and persuade.”

Pay particular attention to Section 3, Let the World See What I Have Seen: Evidence and Persuasion.  Check out this quote:

Positive images could not by themselves resolve the problem of segregation or racism. While some white Americans supported the movement, many knew little about it, were apolitical, or rejected its goals.  As the civil rights movement evolved, its leaders faced a daunting challenge:  How best to spur black activism and inspire white people to support the cause of racial equality?  Although there was no single answer, it was clear to many that visual images could be decisive in convincing the nation of the severity of the problem of racism and the extent to which it threatened American democracy.

In this regard, photographs and motion pictures were employed to report, document, or offer proof: imagery helped underscore the reality of racism in America, and bring to light little-known events. Leaders of the movement understood the power of visual culture, far more than words alone, to influence public opinion by exposing the ugly, violent, or deadly side of racism and segregation.

Sound familiar?

Hear the anguish of Mamie Till Bradley as she describes her decision to publicize the photos of her son’s mutilated body:

I couldn’t bear the thought of people being horrified by the sight of my son. But on the other hand, I felt the alternative was even worse. After all, we had averted our eyes for far too long, turning away from the ugly reality facing us as a nation. Let the world see what I’ve seen.  (Mamie Till Bradley, mother of Emmett Till)

Clearly, civil rights leaders understood the power of pictures.  So do the folks at UMBC.  Perhaps that explains why pro-life students at UMBC were forced to sue the University to protect their own First Amendment rights to display pictures of abortion.  Stories here and here.

OK, UMBC doesn’t endorse CBR; but they certainly endorse our strategy in their presentation.  If pro-aborts understand the power of pictures to reform society, why are some pro-lifers still reluctant to use them?

Michele Bachmann and me

I’m in Washington, DC today a meeting of pro-life leaders from across the USA.  I’m here with CBR Executive Director Gregg Cunningham representing the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR).

First up was Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.  She’s just as feisty in person as she is on TV!

Later this  morning, Gregg and I will be talking about our latest initiative, the Corporate Accountability Project.  More about that later!

For many months, we have celebrated the conversion of Abby Johnson from abortion clinic director to pro-life activist.  Her conversion is highlighted in her new book, UnPlanned.  We’ve noted here that her conversion was based on seeing pictures of ultrasound.

Despite her support for using graphic image displays (like GAP and the JFA exhibit)  to educate college students about abortion, she has spoken against their use outside abortion clinics.  She reasons that the photos had no effect on her, nor on the women who saw the photos and had abortions anyway.  Of course, this reasoning fails to account for the women who saw the photos and never came into the clinic at all.

We were intrigued by this statement that she made on her Facebook page:

It wasn’t the graphic nature of the ultrasound that turned me away from abortion.  I had seen graphic images before. … I had worked in the lab where the body parts of babies were reassembled.  It was the humanity.  Seeing a child suffer and die, a child who should have been protected.  Humanity is present from the moment of conception.  We must fight to protect it!

This reminds us of something that Joel Belz (World Magazine) wrote a few years ago that we all thought was quite strange at the time:

… when I take issue with Mr. Cunningham’s gruesome pictures, it’s not because they are overly repugnant.  I take issue because they aren’t repugnant enough.  But gripping the heart of the viewer is a subtle matter.  (Not dramatic enough, Joel Belz, World Magazine, January 11, 2003)

Nobody but Belz had ever suggested that our abortion photos were not dramatic enough.  But he was hoping for an image that would capture the precise moment between life and death, the kind of image that Johnson saw on that ultrasound screen.  He went on:

Real emotional involvement comes not with an overly explicit portrayal of death—but with a nuanced portrayal of the delicate balance between death and life.  That’s why the candid photo of a young Vietnamese girl running naked down the highway to escape the horrors of napalm probably had as much influence in the late 1960s as any other single factor in turning American public opinion against the war in southeast Asia.  When the photographer snapped that picture, there were almost certainly plenty of dead bodies lying around.  But what memorably captured the hearts of onlookers around the world was the reality of a young woman teetering between life and death.  And that subtlety changed the course of a war.

Such subtlety has generally eluded us in the war against abortion.  We came close, perhaps, in that wonderful and widely circulated operating room photo a year ago showing a tiny baby’s hand reaching up through the incision in his mother’s abdomen.  But that very pro-life picture, breathtaking as it was, said nothing of the terror of abortion.

There were two other images from Vietnam that he could have mentioned (source):

1. The “Burning Monk” photo, taken June 11, 1963, when Thich Quang Duc sat down in a busy Saigon intersection and set fire to himself to protest the South Vietnamese government.
2. The “Tet Execution” photo, taken February 1, 1968,  captured the precise moment that a Viet Cong prisoner was executed at point-blank range by the chief of the South Vietnamese National Police.

Both of these photos also capture that moment between life and death that Belz was talking about.  We’re guessing that’s why these three photos were perhaps the three most influential photos of the Vietnam era.  Belz hoped that our movement would capture a similar image of abortion.

But until somebody takes that photo, we’ll keep showing the ones we have!  And to be fair, it would be wrong to assume that most people who see our pictures are operating at anywhere near the level of denial that Abby Johnson exhibited when she was running that clinic.  Her case is very atypical and not at all like most people we encounter.  Most people who see the photos, particularly young people, have not yet had one abortion, let alone run a clinic where thousands were performed.  They cannot sustain, at least not for very long, the level of denial that Johnson conjured up each of the many times she looked at abortion pictures outside, and dead bodies inside, that clinic.

Further, we’re convinced that Johnson’s seeing the abortion photos could have had a subconscious effect that actually did contribute to her eventual conversion.  That’s conjecture on our part, but it is quite possible that the photos played a role at the subconscious level that even Johnson doesn’t fully appreciate.

Abortion Warning Label

You may have heard about the new regulations on tobacco packaging that have been promulgated by the US Department of Health & Human Services.  They are saying what we have said all along.  Pictures work!

Here are some points and counterpoints.  Please comment.

Frequency.  21% of Americans smoke.

• 43% of women have abortions.

Deaths.  Smoking and other tobacco use is the “number one cause of preventable death” in America, claiming more than 440,000 lives a year, according to HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius.

• Actually, abortion is the number one cause of preventable death in America, claiming more than 1.2 million lives every year.

Verbal warnings not effective.  HHS believes current verbal warning labels are not as effective as they need to be, because they are ignored.

• Debates and speeches will not end abortion, because they are ignored.

Knowledge.  “With these warnings, every person who picks up a pack of cigarettes is going to know exactly what risk they’re taking.” (HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius)

• When people see abortion photos, they will know exactly what they are doing.

Gross factor.  “They are [really gross].  We want kids to understand smoking is gross, not cool.” (HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius)

• We want kids to understand killing preborn children is gross, not cool.

Immunity.  People have become immune to the old labels and really didn’t see them anymore. (Thomas Glynn, American Cancer Soc.)

• People don’t think about abortion in any kind of analytical way. Even “pro-life” Christians have become complacent about abortion and really don’t pay any attention to it.

Reminder that smoking kills.  “For smokers, it’s a new and very visible reminder that smoking can harm them, harm people around them, including children.” (Thomas Glynn, American Cancer Soc.)

• For abortion-vulnerable parents, abortion images are a very visible reminder that abortion kills their children.

Images are for everyone.  “For nonsmokers, it’s a reminder that smokers need their help and concern as far as quitting. The labels are not just for smokers, the labels are for anyone interested in public health.” (Thomas Glynn, American Cancer Soc.)

• For people not personally at risk of abortion, graphic images are a reminder that women and families need their help in choosing life. The images aren’t just for mothers, the images are for everyone interested in any mother’s wellbeing and that of her children.

People responding.  The American Lung Association says that calls to their stop-smoking hotline have spiked since the publicity over the new images.

• The first time abortion images appeared at the University of Tennessee, 9 women chose life (that we know about).

Staring them in the face.  “For decades, Big Tobacco got away with slick marketing campaigns that fooled the public into thinking smoking was glamorous – and now we’re turning the tables on them. Each time a smoker reaches for a pack of cigarettes, the deadly truth will be staring them in the face.” (US Sen. Frank Lautenberg)

• For decades, Big Abortion got away with slick marketing campaigns that fooled the public into thinking that abortion was not a horrific act of violence, and now we’re turning the tables on them. Each time an abortion-vulnerable person sees one of our signs, the deadly truth will be staring them in the face.

As Tennessee Right to Life and pro-lifers in Tennessee (including myself) were celebrating the victories won in the most recent Legislature, some in our movement were saying, “Wait a minute; not so fast!”

Many people, notably those involved in a number of Personhood campaigns all over the country, believe that laws restricting abortion actually help to enshrine abortion in the law.  Or that it has the effect of legitimizing abortion by implying it is acceptable as long as it is properly regulated.

J.D. Ellis, Tennessee Vice-Chairman of the America’s Independent Party (AIP) articulated the views of many:

… according to Lt. Governor Ron Ramsey, the purpose behind SJR 127 is to, “restore common sense restrictions” on abortion, such as a 48-hour waiting period, parental consent, and a requirement that abortions be performed in a hospital after the second trimester. In other words, our “pro-life” leaders want to use this amendment to enact laws defining the conditions under which the murder of unborn children will be accepted. Is this a truly pro-life position? Does this really acknowledge the personhood, and equality under the law, of the unborn? What other group of living human beings would we treat this way?

After World War II, should America have demanded that Germany “restore common sense restrictions” on the murder of Jews? Would we permit the killing of, say, high school teachers, as long as the murderer first waited 48 hours? Or how about the murder of blondes, provided the murder was committed at a hospital? Or the slaughter of 5-year-olds, so long as we first notified the victims’ grandparents? “Common sense restrictions”? On murder? No, when we really view the unborn as persons, and abortion as murder, then such regulations are not “common sense”, but complete nonsense!

Aside from all this, the supporters of SJR 127 also seem to lack the foresight to perceive what would happen next time the Democrats regain control under a Constitution that gives them the power to “enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion”. This amendment would give a Democrat-controlled General Assembly the power to make abortion on demand completely legal in Tennessee, with absolutely no restrictions. Some “pro-life” amendment this is!

What do you think?  Is Mr. Ellis right or wrong to oppose these measures?

For more information on Personhood, click here and/or here.  One of our favorite people in the whole pro-life movement is Dan Becker, President of Georgia Right to Life and a leader in the Personhood movement.  Order his new book Personhood here or here.

Here’s the FAB view.  We will never change public policy unless and until we change public opinion.  And we will never change public opinion until we show people pictures of abortion, because only pictures will make people see that (1) the preborn child is really a baby, even in the first trimester of pregnancy, and (2) abortion is a horrifying act of violence.

Unless and until we show large numbers of voters the truth, then we will never win the legislative battle to change the laws, neither by the Legislature nor by passing Personhood amendments at the state level.

Having said that, we believe there is value in both protective legislation and in Personhood, and we pledge to do whatever we can to support both.

Legislation now saves babies now.  We rejoice over each life saved.  If a building is burning and 100 people are trapped inside, shouldn’t we save 10, 20, or 50, even if that’s all we can do?  And didn’t the abolition of slavery begin with restrictions on the practice?  To win those legislative battles, we must display abortion pictures so that voters can know what abortion is and does.  Even small changes in voting behavior will have a huge impact on the makeup of our legislative bodies.

Speaking of education, many in the Personhood movement believe that ballot initiatives are an excellent teaching tool for educating people about the evil of abortion.  Absolutely!  And to accomplish the education that is necessary to win this nationally, we must include abortion pictures in our voter education efforts.  Otherwise, the public will not apply the kind of pressure necessary to first overturn Roe v Wade and then outlaw abortion nationally.

At FAB, we are much like Billy Martin in some of those Miller Lite commercials from the 1980s.  We feel strongly both ways.  What do you think?  Please comment!

Tennessee Right to Life (TRL) is announcing major legislative victories in the most recent Legislature.  From TRL (edited by FAB for space):

Unprecedented Pro-Life Victories:  SJR 127 Wins Place on 2014 Ballot, Public Gets Vote on Radical Pro-Abortion Ruling

More than a decade after the Tennessee Supreme Court issued a wrong and radical ruling claiming a ‘fundamental’ right to abortion in the Tennessee Constitution, bi-partisan super majorities in the General Assembly have sent the matter for Tennesseans to decide in a public vote during the next governor’s election in 2014.  “At long last the people of Tennessee will have their say in this matter of life and death,” said Brian Harris, president of Tennessee Right to Life.  “Should a handful of activist judges make Tennessee’s laws on abortion or should it be the people acting through their elected representatives in the state Legislature?  We are confident that when it’s all said and done, the power for deciding such questions will be returned to the people,” Harris said.

As required for every proposed amendment to the state Constitution, SJR 127 passed for the first time in 2009 by votes of 77-21 in the state House and 23-9 in the state Senate.  Requirement for super-majority during second passage was achieved in 2011 by votes of 76-18 in the state House and 24-8 in the state Senate.

SJR 127 calls for a public voters to approve inclusion of the following language in the Tennessee Constitution:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.

As written the proposed amendment does not criminalize abortion but overturns the Court’s pro-abortion ruling, returns the Tennessee Constitution to a position of neutrality on abortion and allows the people of the state and their elected legislators to again enact meaningful protections for women and unborn children in our state.

While the Court’s 2000 ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Sundquist makes it impossible to enforceprotections that violate the state’s newly discovered ‘right to abortion,’ Tennessee Right to Life has encouraged passage of policies which do not directly challenge the Court’s holding. Several such pro-life protections were passed by overwhelming bi-partisan majorities in the final days of the legislative session including:

• State Budget Amendment to Bar Funding for Planned Parenthood.  Further tightens 2009 effort by requiring that federal Title X family planning funds shall be used fully by local, county or municipal health departments and that no funds shall be disbursed to private non-profit organizations or agencies.  Diverts $1.2 million tax dollars from Planned Parenthood affiliates in Nashville and Memphis. Passed unanimously as part of final budget approval.
• Expansion of Tennessee’s Unborn Victims of Violence Act.  Extends current state law to include unborn children prior to viability as victims of assault or homicide.  Previous statute was only enforceable following establishment of child’s viability.  Passed House 80-0 and Senate 26-0.

[Note: if you wish to read the remainder of the TRL announcement, click here.]

Hats off to TRL for their tireless work on behalf of these legislative victories.  And hats off to pro-life people all over Tennessee who worked to elect pro-life candidates.

But some in the pro-life movement are not convinced that victories such as these are really a good thing.  More about that later!

Fr. Frank Pavone and Tom Monaghan

I’m in Ave Maria, Florida today representing CBR at the 2nd annual pro-life leader’s summit, spearheaded by Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life.

Jill Stanek is also blogging from the table.  Her blog has been ranked among the top 100 conservative websites in the nation.  That’s impressive, but FletcherArmstrongBlog is the #1 pro-life blog in all of Karns.

From here, it’s on to Richmond, Kentucky, for our Pro Life Training Academy tomorrow morning.