Steve Wohlberg, director and speaker of White Horse Media, has announced the completion of a 13-part series entitled, The Abortion Controversy, featuring Dianne Wagner and Antoinette Duck of Mafgia ministry.
Introduced on February 12, 2015, H.R. 940 would add a conscience clause to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) which would prohibit states that receive federal funding from discriminating against those who decline to participate in abortion or abortion coverage.
“The right and duty to preserve life cannot co-exist with a right or duty to destroy it. The right and duty to preserve and protect the cherished relationship between mother and child cannot co-exist with a right and duty to destroy it.”
– South Dakota House Concurrent Resolution, HCR 1004, passed 2/5/15
The legal status of the unborn child is not as clear as most people think. There are glaring inconsistencies in the way that the law is practiced, even in states with liberal abortion policies. For instance, if a person kills a fetus in California without the consent of the pregnant woman or for medical necessity it is considered murder under Penal Code section 187. This is why Scott Peterson was convicted for double-homicide when he killed his pregnant wife, Laci, in 2002. This January in Florida, John Andrew Weldon was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison when he tricked his pregnant girlfriend into taking abortion-causing drugs, leading to the miscarriage of her 6-week-old fetus.
A campaign against the state of California mandating abortion coverage in insurance plans is intensifying. Several complaints have been filed with the federal government to keep it from violating what Christian legal groups consider American’s fundamental rights and go against their religiously held beliefs and conscience.
By Jason Hines – Today the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that Hobby Lobby and other closely held corporations can refuse to cover certain forms of contraception in the insurance plans they provide to employees because of their “religious beliefs.” Now I put religious beliefs in quotes because despite the Court’s decision, I refuse to admit that corporations, created in order to separate themselves from the people who create them, can have religious beliefs.
By Sarah Terzo – In focusing on religious opposition to abortion, the pro-life movement has cemented into popular culture the generalization that being pro-life is the Christian thing to be. And being pro-choice is the nonreligious thing to be. So many atheists have never considered the pro-life position because they see it as a facet of Christian dogma. They wouldn’t consider going to a pro-life rally or reading a pro-life book in the way they wouldn’t consider going to church or giving their money to Pat Robertson. It simply isn’t for them.
By Sarah Terzo – This is where Texas pro-lifers need to step up to the plate. There are women who will be having their babies who are no longer able to abort. This is a good thing. But we as pro-lifers need to be there for these women and children.
By George B. Gainer – This coming November 15, will make 25 years since I was asked to present “The Wisdom of Solomon? or The Politics of Pragmatism? The General Conference Abortion Decision 1970-71” to the gathered attendees at the Loma Linda University Conference on Abortion. The great majority of those present were shocked to learn that the General Conference of SDA’s was operating with 2 different sets of guidelines on abortion. The 1970 Abortion Guidelines, which were more restrictive, were the set made available to our own Adventist clergy and laity, as well as the general public. The 1971 Interruption of Pregnancy Guidelines superceded the 1970 Guidelines and opened the door to abortion on demand for any reason in our hospitals (16 months before Roe v. Wade). The liberalized 1971 Guidelines were sent exclusively to our SDA Medical Institutions and never made known to our clergy and laity or the public.