fundamental-things

A Pro-Life Bill, or a Pro-Lawyer Bill?

2012-01-25T10:22:00.001-05:00

It appears that some of our professed pro-life friends in Richmond are selling out. They are ready to forfeit crucial, long-term goals of the pro-life movement in the interest of avoiding criticism from abortion supporters. This in the form of supporting Senator Stanley's ill-conceived SB674. Here's what you need to know:

Stanley Bill -SB674 (A Pro-Lawyer Bill)

• Establishes wrongful death cause of action for unborn child after 12 weeks by amending Virginia's existing wrongful death statute to include "a fetus."

• Limited to creating wrongful death cause of action; carries no potential to create foundation for future efforts to limit abortion.

• Does not establish life at conception or recognize the basic humanity of the unborn.

Marshall Bill - HB1 (A Pro-Life Bill)

• Establishes wrongful death cause of action for unborn child at all stages by recognizing that life begins at conception and that unborn children are human beings.

• Creates a general rule of construction that applies to all of Virginia law, thereby laying a strong foundation for every future pro-life effort, including efforts to limit abortion.

So what can we possibly do to confront this back-door effort to undermine our goals? PLENTY!

Please call or e-mail Senator Bill Stanley TODAY and say something like this: "Please withdraw SB 674 and support HB1 instead at crossover. SB 674 will interfere with important, long-term goals of the pro-life movement."

A phone call to (804) 698-7520 is best, and an e-mail to district20@senate.virginia.gov is second-best.

Thank you so much. If we get his phone ringing off the hook, it could absolutely save HB1.

A Problem

2012-01-24T06:10:00.002-05:00

I recently learned that Senator Bill Stanley, on the last possible day, filed Senate Bill 674. If it goes forward, SB 674 has the potential to doom our chances of getting HB1 passed.

Stanley's bill creates a civil cause of action for the wrongful death of a "fetus" by simply adding this term to the existing wrongful death law. Recall that the only immediate, practical effect of House Bill 1 is to allow parents to sue for the wrongful death of their unborn baby--but House Bill 1 creates this cause of action by explicitly recognizing that life begins at conception and that unborn children are human beings generally under Virginia law. With this critical language, House Bill 1 creates a strong foundation for future pro-life efforts that go far beyond creating a civil lawsuit. That language, of course, is the real philosophical impetus behind House Bill 1, the reason it is being attacked by the abortion lobby, and the reason it enjoys such galvanized support from the entire pro-life community in Virginia.

Last night I e-mailed Stanley and explained to him that his bill threatens to completely undermine our well-planned, hard-fought efforts at laying this important pro-life foundation in Virginia law. Many moderate Republican legislators who would otherwise support House Bill 1 are likely to choose SB 674 as a more “moderate” alternative. I asked Stanley to withdraw SB 674.

Senator Stanley professes to be a pro-life conservative, so I am hopeful that he will quickly understand that his new bill is BAD for the pro-life cause and agree to withdraw it. If so, we can join forces to effect the wrongful death cause of action AND a strongly pro-life Virginia Code that recognizes the basic humanity of the unborn generally.

And if he refuses? Please stand by, because in that case I will be calling upon each of you to contact Stanley's office and repeat my request that he withdraw the bill. It's time to move beyond "moderate" legislation and recognize, without flinching, the humanity of children in the womb.

Step Onto the Stage

2012-01-19T09:12:00.002-05:00

"There was some dignity and much safety in the self-selected role of spectator, but, faced with some abominations, a man had no option but to step onto the stage."

--P.D. James, The Children of Men

In the name of "privacy," our laws permit strong human beings to kill weaker human beings. I ask you: is this the type of abomination that warrants "stepping onto the stage?"

I know that many of you will answer, "yes!" If you are one of these, please just stay tuned. Once HB1 is called up for committee hearings, we may need you to act in a very short timeframe--and all you have to do is make a call or send an e-mail. Thank you for caring, and for paying attention!

"It's All A Big Game."

2012-01-18T09:03:00.003-05:00

I've been told, countless times, that I should understand that the world of politics is nothing more than "a big game." At times, I am tempted to believe this. There are many in positions of power in our Commonwealth who make their decisions not based solely on what is right, good, and just, but also based on how the decisions will be perceived by the public.

Of course, we can all understand and relate to this. Who, among us, is immune from the desire to be liked and admired? And for a public official, the continuation of his or her position is determined by how many voters "like" him or her.

But isn't it possible that a certain proportion of voters--particularly in this day and age--is just yearning for representatives with integrity? That we might be able to overlook a decision we may not agree with in the interest of standing behind one who follows the dictates of his or her conscience, or of faith?

I have been told that in this election year, some of the leaders of our Commonwealth may be reluctant to get behind HB1 because it may be perceived by others to suffer from the shortcomings of "personhood" initiatives in other states. This is a valid concern, but only until I offer the evidence of how HB1 differs from those other measures, and how the allegations of opponents are legally unfounded. At that point, it becomes an issue of integrity--of choosing to do what is right, good, and just, and standing against false accusations.

For now, the question is open: will Virginia's highest officials take a stand for Truth by throwing their weight in support of HB1? Or will they, instead, cower to their interests in self-preservation?

Is it all just a "big game?" I don't know, but I do know the one who declares the victor in the end. And self-preservation doesn't score well in his book.

And So It Begins...

2012-01-09T08:50:00.002-05:00

The 2012 session of the General Assembly hasn't even started yet, and already House Bill 1 (yes! We are House Bill 1 this year!) is under attack. In fact, ours was the only bill specifically mentioned in a recent op-ed called "Planned Parenthood's Wish List." Their wish, of course, is that House Bill 1 not be considered.

To read my response to the attacks already being leveled, follow this link to my own op-ed, which was published in Sunday's edition of the Richmond Times Dispatch.

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/oped/2012/jan/08/tdopin02-dunaway-controversial-bill-wont-affect-ab-ar-1593400/

A Proposal to Raise the Bar

2011-04-07T09:20:00.009-04:00

I think our standards are way too low. Many are claiming "victory" after the passage of a Virginia pro-life amendment that opts out of funding Obamacare insurance coverage for abortions EXCEPT where the mother's life is in danger or where the child was conceived through an "alleged" rape or incest. I would call it a partial victory. Is a human being created in the image of God any less of a human being because of the mother's medical condition or the circumstances of its conception? With regard to the "life of the mother" exception, keep in mind that we are talking about taxpayer funding for the intentional killing of the child. Medical procedures intended to merely save the mother's life (but not performed for the purpose of killing the child) would not be considered "abortion" even if the child died as a result of the procedure. They would still be covered even without this exception. I've been digging around a little bit, trying to figure out if there is any legal reason behind the exception to the abortion opt-out. The exception tracks the language of the federal Hyde Amendment, but why aren't the states at least trying for a complete opt-out that does not include the exceptions? The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require the government to fund the exercise of a woman's "right to choose." Here is the language from Harris v. McRae: "Although the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause affords protection against unwarranted government interference with freedom of choice in the context of certain personal decisions, it does not confer an entitlement to such funds as may be necessary to realize all the advantages of that freedom. To hold otherwise would mark a drastic change in our understanding of the Constitution. It cannot be that because government may not prohibit the use of contraceptives, ... or prevent parents from sending their child to a private school, ... government, therefore, has an affirmative constitutional obligation to ensure that all persons have the financial resources to obtain contraceptives or send their children to private schools. To translate the limitation on governmental power implicit in the Due Process Clause into an affirmative funding obligation would require Congress to subsidize the medically necessary abortion of an indigent woman even if Congress had not enacted a Medicaid program to subsidize other medically necessary services. Nothing in the Due Process Clause supports such an extraordinary result. Whether freedom of choice that is constitutionally protected warrants federal subsidization is a question for Congress to answer, not a matter of constitutional entitlement." By this logic, the Constitution does not require state governments to fund abortion even where the mother's life is in danger or the child was conceived through rape or incest. We're not even talking about outlawing abortions under these circumstances--we're only talking about not forcing taxpayers to fund them. If the decision to include the exceptions in Virginia's opt-out was politically based, I would like to know if anyone even tried to push for a stronger opt-out, or did we just assume that it wasn't feasible? Who is steering this ship? I know that the "best" can sometimes by the enemy of the "good," but there are other times when the "good" is just plain old "settling." Let's raise the bar, Virginia.

Defeated? Yes...and No!

2011-02-17T19:42:00.002-05:00

By a straight, party-line vote (10-5), the Senate Education and Health Committee voted to "pass by indefinitely" House Bill 1440. That means that the bill will go no further this year, and will not be called for a vote by the full Senate.

This was completely expected. In fact, today was just another "Black Thursday," so named because every single year in recent history, this Committee kills all of the pro-life legislation that managed to make it through the House of Delegates.

Today, for instance, the Senate Education and Health Committee killed not only this bill on which I have been working, but also the much-needed abortion clinic safety bill, the bill that would prevent insurance plans in Virginia's health insurance exchange from providing abortion coverage, and the bill that would keep HPV vaccines for young girls from being considered "mandatory."

I was proud of Delegate Bob Marshall, the chief patron of my bill, as he introduced the legislation by making it absolutely clear that it should not have even been heard in the Ed & Health Committee, but rather in the Courts Committee! But this assignment was no mere oversight--it is part of a plan.

Despite Senate Rules requirements that each standing committee reflect the overall composition of the entire Senate (22 Democrats, 18 Republicans), this Committee is comprised of 10 Democrats and 5 Republicans. I'm no mathemetician, but those ratios don't pan out as far as I'm concerned.

Moreover, the 10 Democrats on the Committee are not just any Democrats; a review of their voting records reveals them as the most hardened pro-abortion legislators in the Senate.

My experience this year has convinced me that Virginians need to know that these games are being played by their government.

Am I discouraged? No. It has been an honor to do this work. I am inspired by William Wilberforce, who didn't just take a stab at ending slavery once or twice, but who devoted his career to it. Isn't this cause just as important?

Finally, the Weltys (always my encouragers in this endeavor), reminded me this morning of a passage from Ephesians:

Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm. (Ephesians 6:11-13)

Friends, we stood firm today.

If you want to know the truth about what I'm feeling tonight, it's simply this: relief for a break in the battle, satisfaction that we have done all we could do, gratitude for the privilege of carrying His banner, comfort in your prayers and support, hope in His sovereign plan, and confidence in His ultimate victory.

Thank you again for all of your prayers and encouragement.

Virginia House of Delegates Passes The Inalienable Right to Life Bill

2011-02-09T07:19:00.002-05:00

Praise God! The bill passed the House yesterday by a vote of 62-36!

On the floor of the House, the legislation faced fierce opposition from three delegates who were on the Subcommittee and Committee where the bill was debated for the past two years. What was telling about their arguments was that they largely centered on the language of the bill that states that "life begins at conception." They objected to the fact that pregnant women and their doctors would have to "consider" the unborn child as a living human being as they make "health care decisions." (!)

In short, their fundamental objection is to the bill's simple statement of Biblical and scientific Truth! But in the end, Truth prevailed in the House of Delegates. To quote a line from Amazing Grace, the story of William Wilberforce's battle against slavery, "There's nothing so lofty about simple humanity."

Friends, the fiercest of battles awaits us in the Senate Committee(s) where the bill will now be heard again. Please continue to stand with us in prayer.

I have no idea whether it will be the pleasure of the King to work a miracle there, but let us stand firm and persist in taking the Truth into darkness.

Finally, if you have not already thanked the legislators of the House Committee on Courts of Justice, please do so (scroll down for the page for the list). But if you only have time to thank two people, please thank Delegate Bob Marshall (DelRMarshall@house.virginia.gov), who has been the pro-life champion in the House of Delegates for years, and Delegate David Albo (DelDAlbo@house.virginia.gov), the Committee Chairman who had a lot of impact this year on getting the bill through the House.

Thank you all!

VICTORY!!!

2011-02-05T08:49:00.004-05:00

After failing miserably in the Senate Ed & Health Committee on Thursday, The Inalienable Right to Life Bill passed through the House Committee on Courts of Justice last night by a vote of 14-7. Please join me in giving thanks to God for this incredible victory!

Things didn't unfold at all the way I had expected them to. (Isn't that just like our God?) The bill didn't come before the Committee until about 5:00 p.m., and the Chairman had already made it quite clear that he was ready to finish up business and head home for the weekend.

When our bill was called, he announced to the almost-full Committee Room that extensive debate on the constitutionality of the bill had taken place last year, and that the amendments made to the language since then were sufficient to satisfy the Subcommittee's concerns. He therefore was not going to entertain a lengthy debate this time around.

After Delegate Bob Marshall introduced our bill, Chairman Albo asked me to explain to the Committee the purpose of the legislation. I gave my testimony, which, in part, urged the Committee not to accept the unfounded arguments of the bill's opponents. I offered to respond to those arguments in painstaking detail, if necessary.

A few liberal Committee members made half-hearted statements objecting to the bill as a measure that would chip away at women's freedom to "make healthcare decisions," but none of them actually asked me any questions. One of them said, "since no one is going to change their mind, why don't we just vote?" The Committee then voted to report the bill to the full House. The Chairman did not even allow the lobbyists from Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the ACLU to speak!

As we left, I felt oddly let down. After all that happened last year, I was ready for a real fight! On the way home, the Weltys reminded me that this hearing was the culmination of many months of building relationships, reminding legislators of their commitments, researching the answers to their questions and responding to objections.

But what we all realized was that the way things unfolded made it perfectly clear that this battle was truly the Lord's. I didn't win anyone over last night with my well-prepared arguments! God won them--over the course of time--through means that we cannot imagine. But I believe that He may well have used you and me as part of that process, and that is an honor.

Finally, I was impressed that the events of last night bore similarities to the battle of Gideon and the account of Daniel in the lion's den. Gideon and Daniel, respectively, were prepared to engage in battle and, if necessary, to be devoured in service to the Lord's cause. But God did the work. He shut the lions' mouths and sent the enemies away in defeat.

Praise be to Him! He is the same God as He was in the days of Gideon and Daniel! (Don't we forget that sometimes?) Thank you for your faithful prayers. Next up, a vote on the floor of the House and then the Senate Ed & Health Committee, Round 2. Please stay tuned!

Oh, and one more thing--please join me in e-mailing your appreciation to the Delegates listed in my earlier post (scroll down for their e-mail addresses). EVERY ONE OF THEM voted for the bill, perhaps because of your request! You can just say, "Thank you for voting for HB1440."

Rita

Prayers for Thursday

2011-02-02T20:07:00.004-05:00

I will be headed off to Richmond at an unseemly hour tomorrow morning, along with my faithful advisors/companions, Dean and Janet Welty. 8:30 a.m. will find us in the Senate Education and Health Committee room. This is the Committee many refer to as the "Committee of Death," based on its history of systematically killing any piece of legislation that is even remotely "pro-life."

Senator Mark Obenshain is slated to present his Senate version of The Inalienable Right to Life Bill, and I will be on hand to make a statement in favor of the bill on behalf of The Rutherford Institute and then to answer "questions" from the Committee.

Please pray that I would be wide awake--body, spirit, and mind, and able to articulate the answers to the questions posed, whether posed in good faith or bad. Pray that I would be gracious to the adversaries (who are SURE to be there in full force) and yet that I, and the others there to testify in support of the bill, would be able to boldly stand for Truth and Justice. Please pray that God would grant us wisdom, and that whatever the outcome in this particular Committee, that He would be glorified and His kingdom advanced.

Hearing This Week--Your Assistance Needed!

2011-01-30T14:32:00.004-05:00

I have been informed by Delegate Dave Albo, Chairman of the House Courts of Justice Committee, that HB1440--our bill--will likely be heard by the full Committee this coming Friday. This is good news, because it means that the bill will not have to survive a subcommittee hearing before being voted on by the full committee.

That said, there are 22 members of this Committee, and we need to be sure that we will have the votes to get the bill through to the floor of the House. If this happens, it will mean a MAJOR victory for the pro-life cause in Virginia.

Would you please take 5-10 minutes of your time to contact the committee members whose votes on this are uncertain? Of course, it's most helpful to contact your own representative, so if you only have a moment to spare, please do that. But I believe that even if you don't live in a legislator's district, it is helpful for you to contact him or her.

Please DO NOT make the mistake of believing that everyone on this list who has labeled himself "pro-life" and/or is a Republican will vote for the bill. As I learned the hard way last year, THIS IS NOT THE WAY IT WORKS! If we want the vote, they must know that people care about the bill and that people are watching to hold them accountable.

Here is the list of committee members who need to be contacted, a description of their districts and their contact info. Below the list is a sample message you could send. It's best to use your own words, but if your time is limited, please feel free to use the sample. Thank you in advance for your commitment to this cause. We must not grow weary in doing good.

Delegate Dave Albo (R) - Part of Fairfax County - DelDAlbo@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1042
Delegate Terry Kilgore (R) - Lee and Scott, Part of Washington and Wise - DelTKilgore@house.virginia.gov - 804 - 698-1001
Delegate Bill Janis (R) - Goochland and Louisa, Part of Henrico - DelBJanis@house.virginia.gov - 804 - 698 - 1056
Delegate Rob Bell (R) - Greene, Part of Albemarle, Fluvanna and Orange - DelRBell@house.virginia.gov - 804 - 698-1058
Delegate Sal Iaquinto (R) - Part of Virginia Beach - DelSIaquinto@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1084
Delegate Chris Peace (R) - New Kent, Part of Caroline, Hanover, Henrico, King and Queen, King William and Spotsylvania - DelCPeace@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1097
Delegate G. M. Loupassi (R) - Part of Chesterfield and Richmond City - DelMLoupassi@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1068
Delegate Ron Villanueva (R) - Part of Virginia Beach - DelRVillanueva@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1021
Delegate Bill Cleaveland (R) - Part of Botetourt, Roanoke County and Roanoke City - DelWCleaveland@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1017
Delegate Gregory Habeeb (R) - DelGHabeeb@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1008
Delegate Joe Johnson (D) - Bristol City, Part of Smyth and Washington - DelJJohnson@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1004
Delegate Ward Armstrong (D) - Patrick, Part of Carroll, Henry and Martinsville - DelWArmstrong@house.virginia.gov - 804-698-1010
Delegate William Barlow (D) - Surry and Williamsburg, Part of Isle of Wight, James City, Southampton, and Franklin City - DelWBarlow@house.virginia.gov - 804-698 - 1064

Here's what you might say: "I understand that House Bill 1440 is coming before the Courts of Justice Committee later this week. Please vote for this bill. It creates a cause of action for the wrongful death of an unborn child and expresses the important principle that human life begins at conception."

Thank you, friends. YOUR voice can make all the difference.

A Spiritual Battle

2011-01-27T07:21:00.002-05:00

I recently discovered this hymn, written by Isaac Watts. On the days when I need a bit of conviction for my complacency and love of comfort, these lyrics provide plenty...

Am I a soldier of the cross, a follower of the Lamb?
And shall I fear to own His cause, or blush to speak His name?

Must I be carried to the skies on flowery beds of ease,
While others fought to win the prize and sailed through bloody seas?

Are there no foes for me to face? Must I not stem the flood?
Is this vile world a friend of grace, to help me on to God?

Sure I must fight if I would reign. Increase my courage, Lord.
I'll bear the toil, endure the pain, supported by Thy Word.

--Isaac Watts

A Tale of Two Marches

2011-01-24T19:27:00.002-05:00

This post is the text of a beautiful Viewpoint written by Dean Welty (Director of the Valley Family Forum) and Deb Medlin, an African American woman. Read on...and be inspired.

A BRUTAL MARCH from Selma. The “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.” A massive march on Washington, climaxed by the “I Have a Dream” speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

These are just some of the images that came to mind as we honored the life of Martin Luther King Jr. last weekend, and mourned his tragic death. Over four decades later, we continue to be inspired by his courage and his leadership in the long series of marches that led to a dramatic expansion of civil rights in America for so many who had been so long oppressed.

While time has healed some of the pain and blurred some of the harsh realities of that difficult period, it is good for us to remember that the gains for which he and others fought did not come easily in the face of often deadly opposition from the Ku Klux Klan and lynching mobs.

Nor can we overlook the soft resistance that King faced from a silent and even critical church, some of whose leaders accused him of being “extreme.” They urged him to stop the marches, calling them unwise, untimely, and too confrontational — charges that prompted him to write the letter from a Birmingham jail on April 16, 1963.

In that response, King cited the examples of Biblical heroes like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego and American heroes like the Boston Tea Party patriots who engaged in “civil disobedience” against unjust laws. He also referred to other “extreme” examples like Jesus, the Apostle Paul, Martin Luther, and Abraham Lincoln who spoke out against injustice and oppression.

Finally, he expressed disappointment in the outright opposition of some churches and their leaders who “have remained silent behind the anesthetizing security of stained glass windows.” King said he “wept over the laxity of the church” in this struggle.

At the same time, however, he expressed appreciation for other church leaders who were able to break loose “from the paralyzing chains of conformity” and who were able to stand up “for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values of our Judeo-Christian heritage.”

Beyond the issue of slavery, King’s legacy is also a reminder of a second battle that is similar in many ways to the one that he fought. That is the battle for life which, like liberty, is based on a principle that is enshrined in our Declaration of Independence, for “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It is a battle to which King’s niece, Alveda King, lends her support and her voice today.

The parallels between the two battles are striking. They both spring from misguided Supreme Court decisions, Dred Scott in 1857 and Roe v. Wade in 1973, that refused to acknowledge the “personhood” of black people in the first instance and unborn babies in the second.

In addition, they both face(d) the same tired arguments that “You can’t legislate morality and should not impose your morality on others,” and “If you don’t want one (a slave or an abortion), don’t have one.” And in like manner, they face(d) similar attempts to silence their voices and to censor reports of the bloody atrocities taking place in both instances as being in “poor taste.”

The final parallel lies in the fact that both slavery and abortion were determined to be “legal” by the Supreme Court. Moreover, in the case of abortion, the Court mandated that all states make it legal as well, despite the fact that many of them had passed laws making it illegal. This was seen to be “an exercise in raw judicial power”, as dissenting Justice Byron White described it.

That brings us to the second series of marches, following in the footsteps of those led by Martin Luther King, Jr. Every year, for the past 37 years, tens of thousands of Americans gather on the Capitol Mall in Washington to mark the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, calling on the President, the Congress, and the Supreme Court to overturn this tragic decision that has led to an estimated 50 million abortions since 1973.

These marchers believe that we too must say today, as King said in his “I Have a Dream” speech, that “We have come here to dramatize a shameful condition, (and like the prophet Amos), we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."

by Deb Medlin and Dean Welty

A Productive Day

2011-01-22T06:28:00.002-05:00

It was time well spent at the Capitol in Richmond yesterday....I think. Senator Steve Martin has agreed to move for the bill to be referred to the Courts of Justice Committee IF I will be there in person at 8:30 next Thursday morning (just before the meeting) to remind him.

In addition to meeting with Senator Martin, Dean Welty and I were able to make appearances at the offices of 17 other legislators who will be hearing the bill. Yes-SEVENTEEN! That was a lot of interpersonal communication for this introvert!

But it was good that we did it, because our conversations with some of the legislators and the legislative aides of others revealed that many of them had misconceptions about the bill. By clearing up misconceptions and answering their questions in advance of the committee hearing, we are paving the way for smoother passage.

That said, please stay tuned! I will definitely be calling upon you to send e-mails or make phone calls to some of them who may need a little encouragement in the near future!

Another Day in Richmond--It's Worth The Effort

2011-01-20T13:04:00.002-05:00

I am planning to travel to Richmond tomorrow to make what some consider a futile attempt to persuade a few more legislators to either support the bill or refer it to another committee.

Here's some important background:

The Senate Education and Health Committee is commonly referred to as "The Committee of Death." Why? Because this Committee systematically defeats every single piece of pro-life legislation before it can even get to the floor for a vote. It is comprised in such a way that it is almost a foregone conclusion that any pro-life bill assigned to it is dead on arrival. And under the Senate rules, any bill that relates to abortion is assigned to this Committee.

But the thing is, our bill really doesn't belong in the Senate Education & Health Committee to begin with, because it is not an "abortion" bill. The word "abortion" is not even in the bill. Instead, this bill is, in legal terminology, a "rule of construction." It informs the interpretation of other Virginia laws. For instance, it requires the word "person" in Virginia's wrongful death statute (and elsewhere) to include unborn children. This way (in contexts other than abortion), if the negligence of a third party (a drunk driver, for instance) causes an unborn child to die, the parent can sue that person for "wrongful death" just as if a newborn had been killed.

So the bill really has nothing to do with "education" or with "health." It belongs in the Senate Committee for Courts of Justice or for General Laws because it involves the interpretation of other laws and the creation of a type of lawsuit. This is why, on the House of Delegates side, the bill is being heard in the Courts of Justice Committee.

My trip to Richmond tomorrow is for the purpose of urging key members of the Senate Ed & Health Committee to move to refer the bill to another committee, where it would likely receive a more favorable hearing.

Please pray that (1) I am able to meet with these key players tomorrow, and that (2) their hearts would be moved to do what is right.

Remarks at Virginia Rally for Life

2011-01-19T10:59:00.003-05:00

Some friends have asked if I could share my remarks from last week's rally at the Capitol in Richmond. This is what I said:

In 1973, the Supreme Court declined to resolve the "difficult" issue of when life begins. Well we need to help them out, Virginia! We know when life begins! Life begins at conception, and Delegate Bob Marshall's House Bill 1440 will spell that out in black and white in Virginia's Code.

We don't want judges deciding for us who is a person and who isn't--who has rights and who doesn't. We simply want laws that recognize the unique dignity of every human life.

The focus of House Bill 1440 isn't on tearing down an ill-conceived "right" created by judges. Instead, it builds up a right given by the Creator--the inalienable right to life.

What legislator can't vote for that?

In Roe v. Wade, the Court said that unborn children had no right to life under the federal Constitution. Well they missed the point! The Constitution doesn't give anyone the right to life--GOD DOES!

It is an inalienable right, and no legitimate government power can sanction its destruction in the womb. If the Supreme Court won't recognize this, the states must.

This is what House Bill 1440 does. And by recognizing the inalienable right to life of the unborn, states can create a counterweight to the mother's rights.

My hope is that we will see justice.

Slavery could not stand in the face of the truth that slaves were persons rather than property.
Friends, legalized abortion will not stand if we insist on laws that reflect the truth and on government that respects its boundaries.

It is time for Virginia law to recognize the inalienable rights of the unborn.

Onward and Upward!

2011-01-18T19:40:00.004-05:00

The General Assembly is back in session again. This year we have both a House version (HB1440) and a Senate version (SB1207) of the bill that would establish the humanity of unborn children under Virginia law and create a civil cause of action for the wrongful death of an unborn child. In other words, if a drunk driver hits a vehicle carrying a pregnant woman and causes the death of her unborn child, the parents could sue the driver for "wrongful death." Most states already recognize this cause of action.

I am encouraged about the progress we have made since last session. Simply by making slight adjustments to the wording of the bill and educating key people about its effects, we have gained the support of:

The Rutherford Institute;
Americans United for Life;
Focus on the Family;
The Family Foundation of Virginia;
The Virginia Catholic Conference;
Concerned Women for America;
Virginia Society for Human Life; and
Virginia Christian Alliance.

In addition, we have amassed an incredible degree of support among the legislators who will actually debate and vote for the bill. These include:

Speaker of the House Bill Howell;
Del. Bob Marshall;
Sen. Mark Obenshain;
Sen. Jill Vogel;
Del. Dave Albo;
Del. Clay Athey;
Del. Ben Cline;
Del. Jackson Miller;
Del. Dickie Bell; and
Del. Todd Gilbert.

Chances for passage in the House of Delegates look good. Of course, the Senate is another story.

The Fear of the Lord

2010-04-26T15:05:00.002-04:00

It is one of the top three things I hope to impart to my children. Our God is absolutely kind, absolutely loving, absolutely concerned about them and the smallest details of their little lives. And yet, He is no mere doting Grandpa. This God that we have the privilege of knowing is the Great Jehovah.

As J. I. Packer aptly stated, "We are modern people, and modern people, though they cherish great thoughts of themselves, have as a rule small thoughts of God. ... Today, vast stress is laid on the thought that God is personal, but this truth is so stated as to leave the impression that God is a person of the same sort as we are--weak, inadequate, ineffective, a little pathetic. Our personal life is a finite thing: it is limited in every direction, in space, in time, in knowledge, in power. But God is not so limited. He is eternal, infinite and almighty. He has us in his hands; we never have him in ours. Like us, he is personal; but unlike us, he is great. In all its constant stress on the reality of God's personal concern for his people, and on the gentleness, tenderness, sympathy, patience and yearning compassion that he shows toward them, the Bible never lets us lose sight of his majesty and his unlimited dominion over all his creatures."

I have been reading through the Old Testament, where the power, majesty and holiness of God occupy the forefront. What a convicting thing it is to be reminded and to really reflect upon the fact that the God we serve today is the very same God who stood the waters up like a wall, that His people might walk out of slavery--and then let the same waters swallow up the mighty armies of Pharaoh! He is the same God who is so aggrieved by human sin that Moses--dear, humble Moses who is the very model of patience as far as I am concerned--was not permitted to enter the promised land because he struck the rock (thus doing it his own way) rather than speaking to the rock as God had commanded.

What does this have to do with Virginia's pro-life movement? Everything. J. I. Packer points out that "Those who know God have great thoughts of God. ... [They know that] God . . . rules history and shows his sovereignty in acts of judgment and mercy toward individuals and nations according to his own good pleasure." When we know the God of the Bible well, giving full weight to His attributes of omnipotence, holiness and justice as well as His other attributes, I submit that we will not plot our courses based on deference to the powers of this world (think "political realities," "Supreme Court make-up," "polling data," etc.) , but rather by the conviction that we must follow our Lord and take up the battles to which He points us.

Of course, God gives us wisdom and the ability to reason so that we might use them for His purposes. The line between prudently choosing and planning your battles and shrinking back because of the fear of man and his institutions is a fine line, indeed. But it is a line that we must walk in order to be faithful to a mighty, awesome God.

From Assent to Action

2010-04-18T19:59:00.002-04:00

Some time ago, Scott and I were discussing my "activist" inclinations. He knew, of course, that I have believed that abortion should be illegal for as long as I can remember. He was surprised, though, to see me becoming so actively involved in the pro-life effort.

What happened to move me from passive pro-lifer to pro-life activist? I went from believing the situation was beyond hope to seeing a way that I could work toward fundamental change. Having assumed, for years, that there was simply nothing to be done to stop abortion so long as Roe v. Wade stood, I saw little point in participating in the chorus of impotent gripes against the Supreme Court.

Thanks to my friend, Daniel Woodard, who enlightened me on the personhood movement, three years ago I took several months to research Supreme Court abortion precedent and this idea of "personhood"--that a void remained in the law where states might define "persons" for purposes of state law to include those whom the Supreme Court had found excluded under the federal Constitution.

Now, I don't subscribe to all of the legal arguments propounded by some advocates of "personhood." But I do see real opportunity, through a series of legislative actions beginning with an inclusive definiton of "persons," for states to take back abortion law. And it is this glimpse of opportunity that has changed my position from passive assent to action.

Friends, where there is a good work set before us, let us not grow weary in doing good. Let us never be content to decry the muck in our culture with our megaphones while a shovel lies before us.

The Rubber Meets the Road

2010-04-06T08:01:00.002-04:00

Last night I attended a "Mass Meeting" for the selection of persons to fill certain positions in Rockingham County's Republican Party. I also had the opportunity to hear speeches from four gentlemen who are vying for Matt Lohr's seat in the House of Delegates. It got me to thinking...

I've heard it said that when considering our choices for elected representatives, we should not be "single-issue" voters. The abortion issue is only one of many important issues facing our nation, and there is much at stake on all of these issues. I agree with that assessment. And yet, knowing what I know now, I don't think I can ever bring myself to actively support any candidate who is only nominally "pro-life."

It is true that our nation faces a multitude of important issues, many of them economic ones. But no matter how many great economic ideas a candidate may have, if he or she is willing to turn a deaf ear and a cold shoulder to the crime being perpetrated against an entire class of human beings created in the image of God--a crime being sanctioned and even funded by our government--then how can I wholeheartedly support that person's candidacy?

Hitler had great economic ideas for Germany, and he rose to power on a wave of nationalism and desire to return Germany to a place of prosperity. But I submit that most of us would condemn, in the strongest terms, those who continued to support his regime after his intentions with regard to the Jews were known. Likewise, I submit we would condemn those who held no personal animosity toward the Jews but simply allowed the slaughter to continue--no matter what their excuses may have been.

I'm certainly not trying to compare any particular person to Hitler, but the point is this: if we, as citizens, believe--if we REALLY believe--that unborn children are human beings created in the image of God, then how can we actively support any candidate who doesn't pledge to actively work to end legalized abortion? This is where the rubber meets the road. Do we believe what we say we believe? If so, I see no place for lukewarmness.

The other issues are important, too. An active opposition to legalized abortion is a necessary but not sufficient qualification, in my view. It's time to raise the bar.

To Be "All In"

2010-03-28T12:32:00.002-04:00

I sit in a beautiful, comfortable home. I'm healthy and have a wonderful husband who provides for me. I have two precious, healthy children, full of life and vitality. I have everything I need, and, truthfully, even everything I really want.

Today at church, Pastor Joe Slater admonished us to be "all in" for the Gospel. He quoted the following among the evidence that we are called to do exactly that:

"If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me." Matthew 16:24
"...unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains by itself alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit." John 12:24
"Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship." Romans 12:1

To quote German pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer (whose life is worth studying if you're interested in this topic and want to be inspired), "When Christ calls a man, He bids him come and die."

Almost every day I have at least one moment when I am consciously struck by how incredibly blessed I am. I see clearly (although perhaps less clearly than I will one day) how utterly this charmed life I lead is a gift. I have not earned what I have through my "talent," "hard work" or a history of making wise decisions. Neither is it the result of happy luck. Like my salvation, these breathtaking blessings I enjoy are a product of God's lavish grace.

How I strive to be one of unfaltering devotion to my Savior even were all that I had to be taken from me. (I haven't yet reached the point where I can be confident of that.) But in light of my present reality, at least, how could I do anything less than to go "all in" for whatever work God should choose to put on my desk?

Of those to whom much is given, much is required. And yet how often does my own laziness, my own love of comfort and pleasure, stand in the way of my being "all in?" I do believe that God wants His children to enjoy the blessings He bestows. But may my enjoyment of these gifts never become an opiate. Where there is a good work before me to do, may I never choose lounging on the couch watching a beloved, but mindless, t.v. show instead.

One of my deepest desires is to be "spent" for the good of the Kingdom of Christ. Of course I desire for myself and my family to be blessed with many long years of good health in which to love and enjoy one another. But I do pray that when I finally breathe my last, I will be as a zero balance, having spent all of the time, talent and treasure lavished upon me--everything He made and invested in me--in His service and for His glory.

Thanks for the reminder, Joe.

Peace

2010-03-22T21:07:00.002-04:00

I know that many of you are shocked, outraged and discouraged about the headlines today. But remember, friends--the God of the universe is sovereign over nations and men.

Loving Them Both

2010-03-12T08:08:00.002-05:00

Pro-lifers who devote time and energy to gaining passage of laws that restrict abortion are often accused of turning a cold shoulder to the plight of the woman facing an unwanted pregnancy. This is an unfair generalization.

I care deeply about the plight of these women, and I also see their predicaments as a unique opportunity for the Body of Christ to reach out to them with the love of a compassionate Savior. I am a huge fan of organizations like the Harrisonburg Pregnancy Center, where those trained and gifted in the art of counseling and the science of medicine provide practical help to women who suddenly find their lives in crisis.

I also care deeply about the other human being involved in the "decision." The other human being who was created by The Great Creator and in His image.

So with regard to unwanted pregnancies, I submit that the Body of Christ is confronted with two obligations: to love, counsel and assist the pregnant woman, and to work toward passage of laws that prohibit the killing of the unborn child she carries. We must love them both. God, in His great wisdom, has equipped some of us for one work and some for the other, but our work toward one goal does not imply lack of concern, conviction or support for the other goal.

I challenge those who argue that we should focus our attentions solely on the woman facing the unplanned pregnancy. How can we justify caring for one and not the other?

"Deliver those who are being taken away to death, and those who are staggering to slaughter, oh hold them back. If you say, 'See, we did not know this,' does He not consider it who weighs the hearts? And does He not know it who keeps your soul? And will He not render to man according to his work?" Proverbs 24:11-12

A Struggle

2010-03-09T19:33:00.002-05:00

I have recently been confronted by someone who would call herself "pro-life" and yet opposes efforts to limit or ban abortion. Surprisingly, there are many in this camp. They would say that while they believe abortion is wrong and would never choose to have one, they still believe that each woman should retain freedom to make the decision for herself. They are found among those in our society who argue that it is wrong to "legislate morality."

This viewpoint puzzles me, and I struggle with how to respond. If legislators aren't legislating morality, what are they legislating? Surely all of the most fundamental laws of a civilized society concern morality. So it seems that the real objection is perhaps not so much to the passage of laws that impose some sort of moral order upon society, but to the basis that these laws have in religion. And yet, unless we are to prohibit Christian individuals from holding public office, how can we possibly demand that laws not be rooted in religious faith? For the true follower of Christ (and perhaps followers of other faiths as well), the Word of God informs every aspect of his or her life--including vocation--and is the basis for every moral belief.

The response to this is generally something like, "Well, Christians shouldn't impose their beliefs upon others." But the question remains, at what point do Christians become disqualified to participate in our government because of the basis of their moral beliefs? Is it when they become a majority?

Of course, legislation should never purport to regulate matters of conscience, which cannot in any event be compelled and should not be constrained. However, I submit that our government can--and indeed must--"legislate morality" where behavior is concerned. It is certainly a sense of "morality" that produces laws that protect the weakest among us from physical aggression by the strongest. Would anyone truly suggest that such laws are illegitimate?

Amazing Grace

2010-03-07T07:45:00.002-05:00

I recently began reading Amazing Grace, the biography of William Wilberforce written by Eric Metaxas. Wilberforce dedicated his career in Parliament to ending slavery. I'm not usually drawn to biographies, but this one has had me riveted since the first page of the Foreward. It's impossible to miss the parallels between the campaign to end slavery and the campaign to recognize the human rights of unborn children.

This paragraph spoke volumes to me:

"At the time of the [historically black college's] establishment, there was polite conversation in America's parlors and colleges about the basic humanity of African Americans. Even more unrealistic for many in that conversation was the ability of African Americans to learn, contribute to society, and exist beyond the pale of forced servitude."

Then the author's Introduction states, "The opposition that [Wilberforce] and his small band faced was incomparable to anything we can think of in modern affairs. It was certainly unprecedented that anyone should endeavor, as if by their own strength and a bit of leverage, to tip over something about as large and substantial and deeply rooted as a mountain range. From where we stand today--and because of Wilberforce--the end of slavery seems inevitable, and it's impossible for us not to take it largely for granted. But that's the wild miracle of his achievement, that what to the people of his day seemed impossible and unthinkable seems to us, in our day, inevitable."

It is my hope and prayer that one day, this will be said of legalized abortion. Today it seems ingrained in our society and nearly impossible to reverse. May it one day be unimaginable to us that our laws ever sanctioned the destruction of human life as a matter of personal "choice."

A Letter from Mother Teresa to the United States Supreme Court

2010-02-28T19:20:00.002-05:00

This letter was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court as an amicus brief in the 1994 cases of Loce v. New Jersey and Krail et al. v. New Jersey:

I hope you will count it no presumption that I seek your leave to address you on behalf of the unborn child. Like that child I can be considered an outsider. I am not an American citizen.

My parents were Albanian. I was born before the First World War in a part of what was not yet, and is no longer, Yugoslavia.
In many senses I know what it is like to be without a country.
I also know what is like to feel an adopted citizen of other lands. When I was still a young girl I traveled to India.
I found my work among the poor and the sick of that nation, and I have lived there ever since.

Since 1950 I have worked with my many sisters from around the world as one of the Missionaries of Charity. Our congregation now has over four hundred foundations in more that one hundred countries, including the United States of America.
We have almost five thousand sisters.

We care for those who are often treated as outsiders in their own communities by their own neighbors—the starving, the crippled, the impoverished, and the diseased, from the old woman with a brain tumor in Calcutta to the young man with AIDS in New York City.
A special focus of our care are mothers and their children.

This includes mothers who feel pressured to sacrifice their unborn children by want, neglect, despair, and philosophies and government policies that promote the dehumanization of inconvenient human life. And it includes the children themselves, innocent and utterly defenseless, who are at the mercy of those who would deny their humanity.

So, in a sense, my sisters and those we serve are all outsiders together. At the same time, we are supremely conscious of the common bonds of humanity that unite us and transcend national boundaries.

In another sense, no one in the world who prizes liberty and human rights can feel anything but a strong kinship with America. Yours is the one great nation in all of history that was founded on the precept of equal rights and respect for all humankind, for the poorest and weakest of us as well as the richest and strongest.

As your Declaration of Independence put it, in words that have never lost their power to stir the heart: “We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…” A nation founded on these principles holds a sacred trust: to stand as an example to the rest of the world, to climb ever higher in its practical realization of the ideals of human dignity, brotherhood, and mutual respect. Your constant efforts in fulfillment of that mission, far more that your size or your wealth or your military might, have made America an inspiration to all mankind.

It must be recognized that your model was never one of realized perfection, but of ceaseless aspiration. From the outset, for example, America denied the African slave his freedom and human dignity. But in time you righted that wrong, albeit at an incalculable cost in human suffering and loss of life.

Your impetus has almost always been toward a fuller, more all embracing conception and assurance of the rights that your founding fathers recognized as inherent and God-given.
Yours has ever been an inclusive, not an exclusive, society. And your steps, though they may have paused or faltered now and then, have been pointed in the right direction and have trod the right path. The task has not always been an easy one, and each new generation has faced its own challenges and temptations. But in a uniquely courageous and inspiring way, America has
kept faith.

Yet there has been one infinitely tragic and destructive departure from those American ideals in recent memory. It was this Court's own decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) to exclude the unborn child from the human family. You ruled that a mother, in consultation with her doctor, has broad discretion, guaranteed against infringement by the United States Constitution, to choose to destroy her unborn child.

Your opinion stated that you did not need to “resolve the difficult question of when life begins.” That question is inescapable. If the right to life in an inherent and inalienable right, it must surely exist wherever life exists. No one can deny that the unborn child is a distinct being, that it is human, and that it is alive. It is unjust, therefore, to deprive the unborn child of its fundamental right to life on the basis of its age, size, or condition of dependency.

It was a sad infidelity to America's highest ideals when this Court said that it did not matter, or could not be determined, when the inalienable right to life began for a child in its mother's womb.

America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships.

It has aggravated the derogation of the father's role in an increasingly fatherless society.
It has portrayed the greatest of gifts—a child—as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered domination over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters.

And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners.

Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign.

The Constitutional Court of the Federal Republic of Germany recently ruled that “the unborn child is entitled to its rights to life independently of acceptance by its mother; this is an elementary and inalienable right that emanates from the dignity of the human being.” Americans may feel justly proud that Germany in 1993 was able to recognize the sanctity of human life. You must weep that your own government, at present, seems blind to this truth.

I have no new teaching for America. I seek only to recall you to faithfulness to what you once taught the world. Your nation was founded on the proposition—very old as a moral precept, but startling and innovative as a political insight—that human life is a gift of immeasurable worth, and that it deserves, always and everywhere, to be treated with the utmost dignity and respect.

I urge the Court to take the opportunity presented by the petitions in these cases to consider the fundamental question of when human life begins and to declare without equivocation the inalienable rights which it possesses.

The Truth About Delegate Marshall

2010-02-25T09:52:00.001-05:00

It looks like many in our community have fallen for one of the oldest tricks in the book: the use of one ill-conceived sound bite to demonize a politician. In the case of Delegate Bob Marshall, this is more than unfortunate.

First of all, to read or hear what Marshall really said, go to www.delegatebob.com. The media reports of Marshall’s statement conveniently omitted the fact that it was made in reference to a 2008 study by Virginia Commonwealth University published in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. This study pointed to higher risks of premature birth and low birth weight in children born to women who have had an abortion.

Second, I propose that a responsible alternative to crucifying the man based on one misconstrued statement is to judge him by his record. This record includes bills to provide healthcare for autistic children, to ban partial-birth abortion, and to authorize courts to require counseling about the effects of divorce on children.

I wonder how many of those who are quick to attack have ever thanked Bob Marshall for championing these just causes.

A Shout Out to the Legislators

2010-02-23T05:47:00.002-05:00

"It's not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."

Theodore Roosevelt

If you have 5 or 10 minutes today or tomorrow, please take the time to thank the legislators who were "actually in the arena" for us on H.B.112. You don't need to say anything extraordinary--a simple thank you will show them that you care about the bill and appreciate their support of it. You could just say, "Thank you for supporting H.B.112." E-mail addresses for those who supported the effort are as follows:

DelBMarshall@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Bob Marshall - chief patron

DelBCline@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Ben Cline - co-patron

DelTGilbert@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Todd Gilbert - co-patron

DelCAthey@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Clay Athey - co-patron; voted for the bill in subcommittee

DelJMiller@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Jackson Miller - voted for the bill in subcommittee

DelCCarrico@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Charles Carrico - co-patron

DelJMorefield@house.virginia.gov - Delegate James Morefield - co-patron

DelBPogge@house.virginia.gov - Delegate Brenda Pogge - co-patron

Virginia Catholic Conference

2010-02-22T11:22:00.003-05:00

I just spoke with Jeff Caruso at The Virginia Catholic Conference. It was so encouraging to me to have a reasonable conversation with a reasonable man who shares my passion for protecting the lives of the unborn. Of course, details will need to be hammered out, but I am excited about the prospect of working together with this organization to achieve our mutual goals.

Is Believing In the Sanctity of Life Enough?

2010-02-21T17:09:00.002-05:00

I had the privilege to attend a Sunday School class taught in the style of a "Last Lecture" today by doctor, author and missionary Harry Krauss. He quoted a "really smart guy" (name not given) who said, "I don't care what you believe. I care what you believe enough to do."

If followers of Christ really believe, based on God's infallible Word, that life begins at conception, shouldn't we be doing all we can to protect that life? I submit that it is our duty to do so. I believe that we must continue to work for laws that chip away at the practice of abortion. Some of these include laws that mandate stricter regulation of abortion clinics, the provision of better information to women seeking abortions, parental and spousal notifications, etc.

I also believe that it is time for us to raise our voices and demand laws that define unborn children as "persons" who are possessed of fundamental, unalienable rights. Let it be clear that when an abortion happens, it happens not to a meaningless blob of tissue, but to a human being who was knit together and "known" by the Creator of all.

While we must continue to fight this battle on the abortionists' turf by placing piecemeal limitations on the "right" to destroy unborn children, it's time to claim some turf of our own by recognizing the humanity of those silent victims. Let's require that the arguments about fundamental rights be played out in the framework of the Truth.

I hope you're wondering how you can show that you believe in the sanctity of life enough to do something about it. Stay tuned!

The Questions

2010-02-19T16:09:00.002-05:00

Truly, one of the most exasperating things to me throughout this process has been the way "questions" have been used, at best, as excuses for not supporting this bill and, at worst, as weapons against it. Don't get me wrong--it's good and appropriate to ask questions, but only if you're willing to stick around and hear the answers. So many questions have been raised about the bill's potential to have "unintended consequences." Some of the questions are asked in good faith, and some are not. [Would you believe that it has been seriously suggested that treating unborn children as persons possessed of fundamental rights would give embryos the right to vote?]

But the point is this: every question I've been asked so far has an answer. If you have questions about this bill, please click on the link (near the top of the page) called, "Questions and Answers." It covers everything from oral contraception to census data. If you don't find the answer to your question, please let me know, and I'll get back to work to get it for you.

What Happened to H.B. 112 - My Take

2010-02-17T15:06:00.001-05:00

The members of the Constitutional Law Special Subcommittee voted not to report the bill, with a vote of 5 opposed and 2 in favor. Going into the hearing, we were pretty sure we would not pick up any of the 3 Democrats on the Subcommittee, but we were hopeful that the Committee Chairman (Del. Dave Albo) and Del. Kilgore would vote for the bill, as they are both Republicans and both pro-life.

I knew that Chairman Albo had questions about possible unintended consequences of the bill (effects on oral contraception and in vitro fertilization), so I provided him with a full brief on those topics well before the hearing. While it is true that this bill may have moral implications that lead future sessions of the General Assembly to consider further regulation of the discarding of unused embryos by IVF clinics, my brief explained why, as a legal matter, HB112 would not affect any of those practices. It is simply a rule of construction that would construe the word "person," for purposes of Virginia law, to include all human beings.

During the hearing, I pointed out that none of the horrible results feared by some members of the subcommittee have occurred in Missouri, where the statute after which HB112 is modeled has been on the books for over 20 years! Illinois and Louisiana also currently recognize unborn children as legal "persons" from conception.

Many of the questions were fierce, but I honestly cannot think of a question that was left unanswered. Even the Solicitor General of Virginia testified in support of the constitutionality of the bill. Representatives of Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the ACLU gave their predictable statements in opposition.

At the close of the testimony, renowned attorney Pat McSweeney rose and gave an incredibly moving, eloquent statement in support of the bill. I could never do it justice, but his point was this: the General Assembly has a responsibility to define who is a "person" for purposes of Virginia law. That is the issue. If other laws must be altered to fit with the fact that all human beings have human rights, so be it.

Nonetheless, the vote was 5-2, and so the bill failed. However, Chairman Albo and Del. Kilgore stated during the hearing that they both would have voted for the bill if it had been identical to the Missouri statute. Which is good information to have on hand for next session....

What Happened to H.B. 112?

2010-02-17T06:42:00.000-05:00

I'll give my own take on that soon, but in the meantime, check out this post from American Life League's Judie Brown: www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog.php.

Why I'm blogging

2010-02-16T14:08:00.000-05:00

Thomas Jefferson wrote, in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men."

During the past two months, I have had the great privilege of working with elected representatives on a bill that would recognize the human rights of unborn children under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. It was an honor to stand behind a true statesman, Del. Bob Marshall, in this effort. (Go, Bob!!!)

It was sometime late last week when Thomas Jefferson's words came to mind: it is for the purpose of securing these fundamental rights that "Governments are instituted among men!" That's the whole point of government!

Throughout my intellectual, legislative and literal journey, I have had an army of faithful friends supporting me through prayer, encouragement, and practical assistance. I'm writing this blog for those who want to continue to follow the progress of this effort. There is much yet to be done! It is my hope that by providing periodic updates here, I can empower you to join with me in praying for this work, and, when the time is right, maybe even to enter the fray by contacting those in positions to influence the outcome.