[chance33_98]

National Right to Life Joins Pro-Abortion Groups to Kill SD Abortion Bill

So when they want to stop a Bill it is killing it, when they want to stop a baby from being born they call it 'abortion'. Hmmmm.

[DameAutour]

This can't be right. I don't understand why National Right to Life would do such a thing. Of course if this law had been passed it would have been immediately challenged and some federal judge would have ordered an injunction, but what's the harm in trying? Everyone is hoping Bush will appoint a conservative Supreme Court justice or two and perhaps Roe can be overturned. Well someone has to start the process now, it can take years for a case to reach the Supreme Court.

For NRLC to work in hand in hand with Planned Parenthood to keep abortions legal for political reasons is horrible. I just can't believe this. Why didn't they just stay out of it if they didn't like it?

[Sweet Land]

They should change their name to National Right To Life But Not Today.

[findingtruth]

National Right to Life can't afford to have abortion made illegal. What would happen to their fund raising, their jobs, their pension plans?

[findingtruth]

"Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was 'well timed' in view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word 'Wait!' It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This 'Wait' has always meant Never.

Darned good quotation.

[k2blader]

I'd like to see further confirmation of this story before believing it.

[Dajjal]

so-called NRLC ping

[NYer]

Still, according to National Right To Life -- the time is not right.

Tell that to the babies being aborted in the mills! Not another dime to the Right To Life movement.

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

[NYer]

Unbelievable! Ping!

[F.J. Mitchell]

"The National Right to Life Prior to Being Aborted Committee."

"The National Right to Life Except for at the Improper Time Committee."

[nickcarraway]

National Right To Life is taking a tremendous risk.

[Coleus]

I was once told years ago that some, not all, republican politicians and pro-life organizations want to proceed slowly and not really make abortion illegal because if it is, many Reagan Democrats will have no reason to cross over to vote for a republican (causing them to lose) and that these NGO's and non-profits will lose funding and not be in the limelight anymore and close.

I would like to see the NRTL's official explanation and rationale for what they did in SD and wonder if they will apologize for the damage they caused.

[reflecting]

I thought this had already passed....did I not read articles saying so here on FR? This is very disturbing....NRtL has some explaining to do....NOW!

[Prolifeconservative]

This is absolutely infuriating. This is indeed a sellout by the National Right to Life.

I just spoke with a representative from the Thomas More Law Center and he as much said the reason for the National Right to Life's "sell-out" on this issue is because they feel the political environment is not yet conducive, at least to their liking, for pressing forward in such a big way.

So the bottom line from the National Right to Life's perspective is they'd rather sacrifice a few more unborn until the political landscape is ripe for the picking.

Yeah, I don't get it either. This is a travesty.

[ninenot]

There's a REAL REASON that Judie Brown founded the American Life League--and the REAL REASON is the quisling compromisers at NRTL.

[Antoninus]

Let these scum-sucking cowards know how you feel. If they won't lead, then they'll be forced out of the way.

CONTACT INFORMATION

National Right to Life Committee
512 10th St. NW
Washington, DC 20004
(202) 626-8800
NRLC@nrlc.org

Make sure you mention that you'll be sending your donations to organizations that *actually* fight for the unborn, like:

Priests for Life

St. Thomas More Law Center

[Mr. Silverback]

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[k2blader]

Bump

[Coleus]

Thu, Apr 1, 2004

	Law Center Issues Report Exposing Disturbing Details of National Right to Life’s Efforts to Kill South Dakota’s Abortion Ban ANN ARBOR, MI — One week after accusing the National Right to Life Committee of betraying the pro-life movement, the Thomas More Law Center has released a seven page report detailing the role of the National Right to Life Committee and is its state affiliate, South Dakota Right to Life, in opposing and ultimately defeating a South Dakota law that would have banned virtually all abortions and challenged Roe v. Wade. The Law Center report makes clear that both NRLC national and local officials opposed the legislation from its very beginning because they felt that even after 31 years and 40,000,000 unborn babies killed, the time is not right to confront Roe v. Wade. The report issued Wednesday was released in response to a two-page form letter from NRLC defending their opposition to the South Dakota legislation. The Law Center report explains, “…pro-life Americans are entitled to know that NRLC’s lobbying efforts aligned with those of Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups, and resulted in the defeat of this anti-abortion legislation. In our view, such conduct raises important questions about NRLC’s claim to represent the interests of the unborn.” Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented on the release of the report. “Of course National Right to Life has a right to its opinions, but they don’t have a right to be wrong on the facts. This report has been released in response to NRLC’s misstatement of facts in their form letter response.” The report counters NRLC’s claim that the “health” exception” was the reason they opposed the bill. The language they complained of did not exist until after NRLC representatives lobbied legislators to abandon the “no exceptions” bill. The resulting “exception” was narrowly crafted, and did not contain the traditional broad “health” language as defined in Doe v. Bolton. The resulting abortion ban, even with the exception would have outlawed virtually all abortions. Accordingly, the report cites statements made by NRLC officials in multiple national news stories, revealing that the NRLC opposed the abortion ban when the legislation did not contain any exceptions, and criticizes the actions of South Dakota state senator Jay Duenwald, a board member of National Right to Life who lobbied against the bill and even voted with pro-abortion Senators against a no exceptions version of the abortion ban. The report takes on NRLC and the argument that the time is not right to pass an abortion ban, and that pro-lifers must wait for changes in the Supreme Court. “What if changes in the Court are for the worse? What if a certain pro-life majority on the Supreme Court does not come about for another 31 years? Can we afford to wait?” The report continues, “Nobody can know with any real certainty the ideal time to challenge any given decision. Under those circumstances, NRLC should demonstrate humility and respect for the efforts of those who differ with their judgment concerning the right time to ban abortion and challenge the Roe v. Wade decision.” The full report can be found on the Thomas More Law Center website at www.thomasmore.org Report Regarding NRLC Role in Defeat of South Dakota Legislative Effort to Ban Abortion and Challenge Roe v. Wade Wed, Mar 31, 2004 Law Center Issues Report Exposing Disturbing Details of National Right to Life’s Efforts to Kill South Dakota’s Abortion Ban Wed, Mar 31, 2004 National Right To Life Joins Pro-Abortion Groups To Kill South Dakota Bill Criminalizing Abortions; Law Center Accuses Them Of Betraying Unborn Mon, Mar 22, 2004 National Right To Life Joins Pro-Abortion Groups To Kill South Dakota Bill Criminalizing Abortions; Law Center Accuses Them Of Betraying Unborn ANN ARBOR, MI —Shock waves are still reverberating one week after South Dakota’s bill criminalizing abortion was defeated by a single vote over National Right To Life’s complicity with pro-abortion groups to kill the legislation that pro-abortion lobbyists called the most restrictive anti-abortion measure since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. The Bill was sponsored by... more >>

[madprof98]

Suppose the bill had passed. The pro-abortion zealots, led by John Kerry, would have lashed out against the Religious Right for trying to take away even those "abortion rights" favored by most Americans--and would have demanded that President Bush repudiate the South Dakota bill. Bush most likely would not have done that, and the pro-abort forces would be much more likely to (a) win the upcoming election and (b) appoint the next Supreme Court justices, who would keep abortion legal forever. I imagine that was the thinking behind the opposition.

[Mr. Silverback]

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.