Pages

Friday, July 30, 2010

Quick News Roundup 07/30/10

Happy Friday. Here's your weekly news roundup.

Domestic News: A State Senator in Texas is looking to defund Planned Parenthood. How? According to State Senator Robert Deuell, it's unconstitutional. In a letter he drafted earlier this week to the Texas Attorney General's office, he outlined his case. You can read his letter here. Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey has proposed the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act." What does it do? Exactly what it says - it would establish a government-wide policy prohibiting any funding of abortion. It may not see the light of day under current Speaker Pelosi, but after the mid-term elections, hopefully Congress will be a little more friendly to pro-life legislation. As I reported last week, Nebraska's new abortion regulations requiring pre-abortion mental health screening was blocked by a judge. Nebraska's Attorney General is not prepared to defend it. AG Jon Bruning said that he was unsure if it was worth the taxpayer's dime to defend this law as he was unsure if he could win. He said, "Despite the fact I'm very pro-life, I need to be realistic in utilizing the legal resources of the state." He felt it may be more beneficial to redraft the legislation to alleviate the court's issues.

International News: For those interested, I found a recent article which I didn't read in full - BUT, it provides us with an interesting image - the legality of abortion across the globe. Here's a copy of that map:


Discussion Topic: Roe v. Wade sparked into existence the pro-life movement. Have you ever read the court's decision? Or the dissenting opinion? This site has a lot of that information, I specifically linked to Rehnquist's dissent, which I find to be the most compelling. How about you?

5 comments:

Nulono said...

I find it very interesting that the dissent does not reference the right to life of the unborn.

secularprolife.org said...

I don't think the statement that "Roe v. Wade sparked into existence the pro-life movement" is accurate. Things certainly got much more serious at that point. But we were around, fighting pro-abortion legislation at the state level and running the charities which were precursors to modern-day pregnancy clinics.

As a law student, I've had to read Roe, and Blackmun's talk about "THEORIES of when life begins" always makes my head come close to exploding. This must be how evolutionary biologists feel when evolution is criticized as "just a theory."

Nulono said...

So "legal on request" is denoted by gray, "varies by region" is denoted by gray, and "illegal with no exceptions" is denoted by gray. Very helpful!

Nulono said...

"Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey has proposed the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act." What does it do? Exactly what it says - it would establish a government-wide policy prohibiting any funding of abortion."

This is not accurate; it provides no protection against being forced to fund incest and rape abortions.

Matthew Newman said...

secularprolife: As a massive, national powerhouse movement - I'd say the Roe decision really kick started the pro-life movement. Pre-Roe, the pro-life movement was mostly locally run or, if it was coordinated, it was through primarily religious outlets. Now, the pro-life movement exists en masse on a national level (ex. the NRLC was founded post-Roe).

So, you're right - it didn't spark it into existence - but it definitely kick started things and made it into a more coordinated, national movement.

Nulono: I didn't know that it paid for rape / incest abortions. I assumed the "life of the mother" exemption, but that one I was not sure about.