Wednesday, January 31, 2007


— "I died while waiting for a cure to be found by research on embryonic stem cells, and you?"

— "I was that embryo!"


Wednesday January 31, 2007

Leading Scientist Charges Colleagues With "Misleading" Public on Humanity of Embryos
Asks them to justify why other human embryonic life is less worthy than their own was

By Gudrun Schultz

BOSTON, Massachusetts, January 31, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.Com) - A leading U.S. Researcher in adult stem cell technology has stated there is no legitimate scientific justification for questioning when human life begins

In an interview with Anita Crane for Celebrate Life magazine, Dr. James Sherley--recently denied tenure at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he says for his views on embryo research--accused some of his colleagues of deliberately misleading the public about the beginnings of human life in order to justify embryonic research.

"I am upset when I hear knowing scientists needlessly confuse and mislead people who look to them for objectivity and integrity," he said. "The world is a complicated place and there is a vast amount that we do not know about how it works and how we in it work.

"Science, in its best formulation, seeks to define how the world works in terms that transcend human belief, human psyche and human mystery," Dr. Sherley said. "It seeks to define the world in terms that are universal and knowable by all.

"For this specific discussion, within this clear framework of scientific principle, scientists can define when a human life begins. Like thousands of other multicellular organisms on this planet, human beings start life as a single cell embryo, the product of the union of a complete human genome and the programming cytoplasm of a human egg. This union occurs at fertilization."

The only issue, Dr. Sherley said, is, "When does a human life begin?"

"Whether or not the embryo has yet developed spinal nerves or self-awareness is an irrelevant point made to distract and confuse. I challenge the promoters of human embryonic stem cell research to justify why another human embryonic life is less
Worthy than their own was."

While Dr. Sherley said he initially attributed the MIT chair's refusal to consider him for tenure to racism--Dr. Sherley is of African descent--suggestions by colleagues during the two-year investigation of his complaint pointed to his outspoken opposition to embryonic research as a major factor in the case.

Dr. Sherley, who has concentrated his research on techniques to improve the multiplication capability of adult stem cells, has been a significant player in the effort to expose the immorality of embryonic research. Dr. Sherley participated in the campaign to prevent the passage of a bill permitting human cloning for research purposes in Missouri last November, and earlier in the fall spoke to an international group of scientists, theologians and bioethicists in Rome at a congress entitled "Stem Cells: What Future for Therapy?" organized by the Pontifical Academy for Life and the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations.

"My father is a Baptist minister and one of my important role models for life. The strength that has sustained me through life's many difficulties and allowed me to be forever optimistic of the goodness that begins every human life is my Christian faith," Dr. Sherley told Celebrate Life.

Objections to embryonic research are dismissed if a scientist is found to have any religious beliefs, he said.

"How convenient for promoters of human embryonic stem cell research. My objections are on both moral grounds and scientific grounds, independent of my religious bearing. Religious belief is not required to recognize and seek to prevent a human atrocity; and religious belief cannot invalidate the scientific facts that human life begins when a human genome meets the wonder of the human egg."

With 15 patents pending for Dr. Sherley's technique of multiplying adult stem cells, the researcher's contributions to the field are evident.

Dr. Sherley warned MIT in December that he would begin a hunger strike in protest Feb. 5 if the Institute did not acknowledge his denial of tenure was unjust.

To respectfully express your concerns, contact MIT at:

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA

Tel: (617) 253-1000

Read complete coverage from Celebrate Life:

See previous LifeSiteNews coverage:

Prestigious MIT Professor Who Opposes Embryo Research Faces Ousting by University


Planned Parenthood Misleads Women on Abortion's Mental Health Risks


by Steven Ertelt Editor
January 30
, 2007

Washington, DC ( -- The Planned Parenthood Federation of America is coming under fire for continuing to mislead women about the mental health risks associated with having an abortion. In a statement released Tuesday by PPFA medical director Vanessa Cullins, the abortion business claims there are no emotional or psychological concerns.

Cullins answered a sample question from a Planned Parenthood supporter asking if "having an abortion emotionally and psychologically dangerous."

"No. Most women feel relief after an abortion," Cullins responded.

"But anti-choice extremists make false claims about this. They want people to believe that most women who choose abortion suffer severe and long lasting emotional trauma. This is not true," Cullins added.

"For more than 20 years, most scientific studies have found that emotional reactions to having abortion are relatively positive," Cullins explains.

However, her statements run counter to the latest research studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals.

Dr. David Fergusson, a New Zealand college professor, published the results of a study he conducted in January 2006 which showed women who have abortions are more likely to become severely depressed.

"Those having an abortion had elevated rates of subsequent mental health problems, including depression, anxiety, suicidal behaviors and substance use disorders," said Fergusson, whose study was published in the Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology

According to the study, 42 percent of the women who had abortions had experienced major depression within the last four years. That's almost double the rate of women who never became pregnant. The risk of anxiety disorders also doubled.

Women who had abortions were twice as likely to drink alcohol at dangerous levels and three times as likely to be addicted to illegal drugs compared with those who carried their pregnancies to term.

Fergusson's research was right in line with what professors at Bowling Green State University in Ohio found in 2004. They examined data on nearly 11,000 women between the ages of 15 and 34 who had experienced an unintended pregnancy.

Dr. Priscilla Coleman, a research psychologist at BGSU, who published the report in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, said their survey found that women who have abortions of unexpected pregnancies were 30 percent more likely to experience subsequent problems with anxiety than those who don't have one.

Women in the study who had abortions and suffered from general anxiety disorder experienced irritability, fatigue, difficulty sleeping, a pounding or racing heart, or feelings of unreality.

Coleman pointed out that, while having a child as a teen may be problematic, "the risks of terminating seem to be even more pronounced."

"The scientific evidence is now strong and compelling," Coleman said. "Abortion poses more risks to women than giving birth."

In an interview with a New Zealand newspaper about his study, Fergusson said he doesn't oppose abortion but his results show that abortion is dangerous for women.

"I'm pro-choice but I've produced results which, if anything, favor a pro-life viewpoint," he explained. "It's obvious I'm not acting out of any agenda except to do reasonable science about a difficult problem."

"Our study is strongly suggestive of a link between abortion and developing mental illness," he concluded.

Professor Fergusson plans a followup study next year asking more detailed questions about the women who had abortions.

Get Free Pro-Life News From
Receive the Pro-Life News Report via email daily or weekly at no cost. Email with the message "subscribe daily" or "subscribe weekly."


South Dakota Reintroduces Abortion Ban With Stiffer Penalties Georgia abortion ban introduced earlier this year.

 Operation Rescue ............
Press Release ..... 
Pierre, SD - Jan 31, 2007 Today the South Dakota House of Representatives once again introduced an abortion ban, but this time with harsher penalties. The new bill increases punishment for illegal abortion to a class 4 felony punishable by 10 years in prison.
Last year, South Dakota became the first state since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973 to pass a near total ban on abortion, but the law was challenged by a voter referendum, where it was narrowly defeated because it did not include exceptions for rape and incest.
About 870 abortions take place in South Dakota every year, according to the most recent statistics listed with the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a pro- abortion organization that tracks abortion numbers.
"We know that some in the pro-life movement will be opposed this legislation because of the rape and incest exceptions, but we believe that position is irresponsible," said Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullenger. "A statistical analysis of abortions done in South Dakota indicates that if the current bill passes into law – even with the rape and incest exceptions – numerically it would allow only one abortion every four years. This means that over a four- year period, this legislation would save the lives of almost 3,500 children. To oppose this legislation would have to be considered 'pro-abortion.'"
Earlier this year, Georgia introduced a bill to ban abortion that contained virtually no exceptions.
"This bill is the ideal, of course, and we pray that the State of Georgia will successfully enact this law," said Sullenger. "In the meantime, Operation Rescue will continue to work on behalf of life until all pre-born babies in every state once again enjoy the legal protections of personhood, and the heinous act of abortion is brought to an end."
About Operation Rescue
Operation Rescue is one of the leading pro-life Christian activist organizations in the nation. Operation Rescue recently made headlines when it bought and closed an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas and has become the voice of the pro-life activist movement in America. Its activities are on the cutting edge of the abortion issue, taking direct action to restore legal personhood to the pre-born and stop abortion in obedience to biblical mandates.
Operation Rescue
Troy Newman
Phone: 316-841-1700  Operation Rescue
Cheryl Sullenger
Outreach & Media Coordinator
Phone: 316-516-3034 

THE FETUS #4and #5

Twins in the womb
4. Does the fetus become a person at viability?

* According to US Supreme Court, viability is when a child is "potentially able to live outside the Mother's womb [that is, can survive], albeit with artificial help" [R v. W at 45]. The State has interest in the 'potential life' of the unborn at the 'compelling' point of viability, because "the fetus then presumable has the capacity of meaningful life outside the mother's womb" [R v. W at 163]. What is "meaningful life"?

* At that time (1973) the age of viability was 30 weeks. Today it is 20 weeks. Who changed? Not the baby, but the technology. Viability is a measure of the sophistication of the life support system around the baby -- not the humanness of the baby.

* It is philosophically and legally bankrupt to determine personhood in a legal sense based on a relative standard which is dependent upon technology.

5. Does the fetus become a person at birth?

* This is the present view of the US Supreme Court. Something about birth moves the unborn child from "potential life" to real life and personhood. What is it?

* The only change that occurs at birth is a change in the external life support system of the child. The child is materially no different before birth than after, except that she has changed her method of feeding and obtaining oxygen.

* The only position consistent with legal precedent and historic medical opinion is to recognize the legal personhood of all human life, and afford to each person the rights which are his or her due, and most fundamentally, the RIGHT TO LIFE!
[From 'A Resource Manual' pages 33 to 35, article by Dan Davis, Christian Research Associates, Denver Colorado]

Tuesday, January 30, 2007


3. Is the fetus a person?

* If not, what is it?

* What is a person? There are many philosophical, theological and legal definitions which differ. In this country, legal persons include corporations and institutions such as the US Air Force Academy. Definitions of personhood which exclude the unborn also exclude infants and the comatose, as well as many handicapped.

* The unborn HAVE legal rights as persons under US law: They have inheritance rights; in their name lawsuits can be brought against individuals for harming them in the womb; "wrongful death" actions are brought against individuals who accidently injure an unborn child and cause death; criminals who assault pregnant women have been successfully prosecuted for murder when the child has been killed [Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113, @ 159].

* American Jurisprudence, one of the two most authoritative American legal encyclopedias states: "Biologically speaking, the life of the human being begins at the moment of conception in the mother's womb, and as a general rule of construction in the law, a legal personality is imputed to an unborn child for all purposes which would be beneficial to the infant after its birth."

* The US Supreme Court (Roe v. Wade) arbitrarily declared every human but the unborn child a person. It recognized that if the unborn were considered legal persons, their right to life would be protected under the 14th Amendment [Av at 156]. The Court's arbitrary, unjustified definition of personhood boils down to an undefined standard of what determines a life worth being allowed to live.

* The 14th Amendment declares that "no person . . . shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."

* Even if we were in doubt whether a fetus is a person, would it be the wise thing, then, to kill it? Does a wise hunter who sees a stirring in a bush shoot it without knowing what it is?

[To be continued.]

Monday, January 29, 2007


Triplets in the womb
2. Is the fetus a human being?

* If not, what is it? Celery? It's alive and of the human species (homo sapiens).

* "The birth of a human life really occurs at the moment the mother's egg cell is fertilized by one of the father's sperm cells" (Life, April 30, 1965).

* "Since the old ethic [sanctity of life] has not been fully displaced it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or extra-uterine until death" [California Medicine 113, no. 3 (1970), pp. 67, 68].

At fertilization, 23 chromosomes of the sperm unite with 23 chromosomes of the ovum to produce one 46 chromosome cell, and a human being: either male or female, unique, complete (nothing will be added until death but nutrition and oxygen; his or her complete genetic code is present).

* "Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception" - - J. Lejeune, discoverer of the chromosomal pattern of Down's Syndrome [Senate Subcommittee on Separation of Powers, Report to the Committee on the Judiciary Regarding the Human Life Bill - - s. 158, 97th Cong., 1st Session, 1981, p.9].

* "No witness raised any evidence to refute the biological fact that from the moment of human conception there exists a distinct individual being who is alive and is of the human species" [Ibid., pp. 11, 12]. "The question of when the life of a human being begins -- when an individual member of the human species comes into existence -- is answered by scientific, factual evidence" [Ibid., p. 3].

* As a 1964 Planned Parenthood pamphlet states: "Abortion kills the life of a baby, once it has begun."

[To be continued]

Sunday, January 28, 2007


Twins in womb

Latin For "Unborn Child"
by Dan Davis,
Christian Research Associates
Denver, Colorado

1. Is the fetus alive?

* If it's not, what is it? Does life arise from nonlife? [Not according to the Law of Biogenesis (Pasteur, Virchow)].

* "This much beyond serious dispute: biological life begins at fertilization, when the female's egg is united with the male's sperm" (Time, April 6, 1981).

* "Potential life" is absurd, an oxymoron (a contradiction in terms). The US Supreme Ct. in Roe v. Wade used this term, unknown in legal terminology, without definition, because it is "less rigid" than considering life to begin at conception [410 U.S. 113, at 150]. Ignoring the scientific evidence as to the beginning of life, the Court dismissed the question: "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer" [Ibid., at 159]. Then they decided: life begins at birth.

* Does this sound like it's not alive? the heart beats (18 days), brain functions (40 days), it responds to touch (6-7 wks), sucks its thumb (2 mo.), breathes (3 mo.), swallows (11 wks), has fingernails (3 mo.), eyelashes (16 wks.), all bodily systems present and working (2 mo.), hearing (14 wks), dreams (17 wks.), has active emotional life (6 mo.).

* At the very least, we should medically accept fetus as alive when brain waves are measurable on an EEG, since authorities accept absence of brain function as definition of death. Brain waves have been measured at 6 weeks. [J. Goldenring, "Development of the Fetal Brain," New England Journal of Madicine, Aug. 26, 1982, p. 564].

{To be continued . . .}

Saturday, January 27, 2007

Democrats Plans for Dividing and Demonizing Pro-Lifers


Plan to promote more contraception and thereby make pro-lifers look like hypocritical extremists

By Joseph A. D'Agostino

FRONT ROYAL, Virginia, January 26, 2007 ( - Democratic leaders in Congress have quietly begun the next phase of their new strategy to divide and demonize pro-life Americans. This strategy includes targeting crisis pregnancy centers because of their tremendous success, a strategy led by Rep. Henry Waxman (D.-Calif.), the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee thanks to last fall's election results.

Waxman and others are miffed because CPCs tellwomen about the incontrovertible connection between abortion and breast cancer. He is also the Democrats' point man against teaching children to abstain from sexual relations. Yet going after CPCs is unlikely to divide pro-lifers or go far in demonizing us outside of the Dems' base voters.

More insidious is the issue of contraception. Having learned the hard way that the unabashed celebration of abortion was losing them votes, Democrats in the last election cycle sought to portray themselves as
Moderate on the issue and even recruited a fair number of pro-life candidates to run for Congress, with considerable success. Now that they have taken control of our national legislature, they must appear to care about reducing abortion while not doing anything that would actually reduce abortion and alienate their fanatically pro-death base, and at the same time isolate truly pro-life Americans in the minds of the so-called "abortion grays."

These are American voters who have qualms about abortion but do not wish it outlawed, and are thus susceptible to appeals from either side of the abortion divide. Most abortion grays view as unpleasantly extremist both the NARAL, Barbara Boxer types who embrace even partial-birth abortion and principled anti-abortion activists who believe every single unborn child should be saved however inconvenient he may be.

Because of Roe v. Wade and political realities, banning most abortions is not on congressional pro-lifers' agenda for the time being, so pro-abortion forces have found another way to do harm, in more ways than
One. Their approach could not only divide and demonize pro-lifers, but would spread disease among youth, increase their psychic distress, and inflate the number of abortions.

The Dems' plan is to promote contraception as a means of reducing abortion and watch pro-lifers, who know contraception increases abortion, squirm as the media portrays any opposition to more federal funding for contraceptive programs as hypocritical extremism on the part of pro-lifers. Of course, a plan to reduce abortion by increasing contraceptive prevalence has highly persuasive surface plausibility. More
Contraception means fewer unwanted pregnancies, right? And fewer unwanted pregnancies means fewer abortions, right? It seems so obvious, common-sensical, and practical.

Yet experience has proven it false. You don't need statistics to know this, and this time I will refrain from offering a passel of them. When contraceptive use exploded in the United States during the 1970s, so did the abortion rate. Continued promotion of contraception, including the distribution of free condoms en masse to high-schoolers, in the '80s and '90s did nothing to reduce the abortion rate, which has dipped slightly in the past few years—coinciding with a rise in abstinence and anti-abortion attitudes among young people. Foreign countries have experienced the same pattern: Wherever contraceptive use has become widespread, so has abortion. Far more often than not, they go in tandem, not in opposition.

Why is this? For one thing, contraception isn't very effective. Some methods work well in the laboratory, but few people conduct their sex lives in laboratories. In the real world, contraception fails all the time. In fact, 53% of unplanned pregnancies happen to women who are using contraception.

More fundamentally, the contraceptive mentality causes abortion. When women and girls choose to sleep with men whose children they don't want, they will take steps to ensure those children aren't born. If
Contraception fails, they will abort. And because abortion is easily available, these women can be lax about using contraception, knowing there is a cheap and legal fall-back option.

Some anti-abortion Democrats, though, are pursuing the pro-contraception strategy. New Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), who says he opposes abortion, introduced a bill on Congress' first day this year that would increase funding for contraception and the morning-after pill. Senators Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy have signed on—which should tell you something. Rep. Tim Ryan (D.-Ohio), another abortion opponent, has a bill that would fund more contraception but also provide help to women who decide to carry unplanned pregnancies to term. These sort of bills could split pro-life members of Congress and make those who oppose them seem extreme and heartless.

They should remember that contraception increases abortion. They should also remember that contraceptives give young people a false sense of security, leading them to engage in riskier behavior than they otherwise would even though contraception is of limited effectiveness in preventing
pregnancy and disease (and many forms of contraception actually increase disease risks, at least for women). Moreover, all forms of artificial contraception cause illness. For example, there is no doubt that the contraceptive pill increases cancer risks. Putting more pills into the hands of young women means federal funding for killing American girls.

Pro-lifers should be ready for these controversies when the Democratic establishment and their media allies choose to move them to the front burner of American politics.

Joseph A. D'Agostino is Vice President for Communications at the Population Research Institute.

"There is a God in heaven. He will prevail." (St. Gerard Majella)
Deacon John

Friday, January 26, 2007


Interview with U.S. Presidential Candidate Sam Brownback: Unequivocally Pro-Life, Passionately Pro-Family
By John-Henry Westen WASHINGTON, DC, January 26, 2007 (
He is seen by supporters as a man of wisdom and intelligence, not too old and not too young, with stamina and good looks and the determination it takes to become the President of the United States of America. Sam Brownback and his team of youthful volunteers were all over the March for Life in Washington DC this week.
Brownback was definitely not shy about testifying to his pro-life and pro-family beliefs at the March for Life. Campaign material handed out by the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands emphasized that the senior Senator from Kansas is "proudly" and "unequivocally pro-life". He refers to Roe v Wade as a "tragedy" that must be "overturned."
Speaking of the March he told "This is a big cause and it's a big moment for the cause because we are just now getting across to people, the majority of people, about the pro-life message and the country is moving pro-life so we just really have to move that forward."
Asked at one meeting about foreign funding of abortion, Brownback remarked "What I have run on consistently is we should not be using taxpayers' dollars to fund abortions period - anywhere. Domestically or internationally." also spoke with the Kansas Senator about Canada. He expressed his love for Canada and hope that the causes of life and family would catch on there as well. "I love Canada. Canada is a great neighbour," he said. "Canada has been a great friend and neighbor for many, many years. And I am hopeful that some of these causes will start catching on there too - there will be pushes for life, marriages because it's about the basic building blocks of society and we do impact each other so I would hope that Canada really could engage some of these as well."
Encouraging the youth at another meeting Brownback said "We are one Supreme Court Justice away from over-turning Roe." He explained that with regard to Roberts and Alito - "now we don't know exactly how they are going to vote. We hope they will vote pro-life on this or hope that they can't sleep at night if they don't vote pro-life on the Supreme Court."
Brownback also spoke of the impetus for this passion for life. "I met a little girl about seven and a half years ago," he said. "Her name was Chenyi Dan. I met her in China. She was from Shantou City, China. And at the time she was about 20 months of age. Beautiful girl - she had been dropped at an orphanage by her mother who had carved a little area, an oval on her stomach with a pen knife - very, very scant. As a mark, I guess at some point and time maybe they would be able to find each other - again, at some point and time.""That girl now," he continued, "her name is now Jenna Joy Brownback - I had her at my announcement yesterday for President. She's been living in my home for the last seven and a half years as my daughter. Because somebody fought for her, I get to kiss a little girl goodnight. Somebody fought for her - who I will probably never meet or ever see or ever know. But they fought for her and because of that, she is alive."He added with a proud smile: "and she won her third grade class Spelling Bee Contest."
A faithful Catholic family man with wife and five children, Brownback bills himself as a principled, conservative Republican. His "passion" he says, is to defend the family. As his brochure bills it, he is "a staunch defender of traditional marriage."In addition to fighting the imposition of same sex 'marriage' and the threat of pornography, Brownback has, as a Senator, already initiated positive measures to boost family life. He has proposed Marriage Development Savings Accounts to encourage healthy marriages and cut the rate of out-of -wedlock births.
In addition to his strong positions on life and family issues, Sam Brownback is touted as an experienced political leader on many fronts with fresh and formidable ideas on health, education, social security, taxation and energy.For more information visit the Brownback website:


Therefore, despite the general disinclination to call abortion "murder" by those who are wary of being considered to be extremists, and despite the guilt such terminology may engender in abortion proponents and in persons who have performed or undergone abortions, I concluded that the law should regard the typical abortion (i.e., one obtained for mere convenience rather than justified by any legally cognizable circumstances) as murder in the first degree. note that I say "should" regard. The law, in actuality, has never regarded abortion as murder although, prior to the Supreme Court decisions declaring it to be a Constitutional liberty, every state in the Union regarded it as criminal. What I mean to point out is that there appears to be no rational basis, given our current state of biological knowledge, to treat it as a lesser offense than murder. As such, I think the prior statutory schemes were repugnant to the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment in that they denied a certain class of "persons" (i.e., the unborn child) equal protection of the law.

[Excerpted from 'A Resource Manual', Legal Considerations, pages 23 - 32]


First Things' Fr. Neuhaus Criticizes Archbishop Wuerl on Pro-Abortion Politicians Fiasco

Bishop and Priest Hasten to Apologize to Pro-Abortion Politician for Homily Calling Him to Account

Historically Catholic Santa Cruz Self-Declared “Pro-Choice” City

“Roe v. Wade Week” at Yale Features Do It Yourself Abortions

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Prenatal Diagnosis

Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
The push for prenatal diagnostic tests for pregnant mothers just became stronger. Recently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists began recommending that every pregnant woman, regardless of age, be offered a choice of tests to determine whether her baby has Down Syndrome. The reason for this recommendation is, first of all, that although the common practice has been to recommend these tests for women over 35, doctors point out that there is no single event that happens at age 35 to make Down Syndrome more likely. The scale of risk is a continuum.
Secondly, ACOG points out that new methods of testing have been developed that are less invasive. Their top recommendation simply involves ultrasound and a blood test.
Aside from the medical questions, however, many moral questions arise. Are such tests morally permissible? What are they meant to accomplish? Is undue pressure being placed on pregnant mothers to have these tests? Is pressure being put on them to abort?
Pope John Paul II addressed the issue of prenatal diagnosis with these words in "The Gospel of Life" (Evangelium Vitae):
Special attention must be given to evaluating the morality of prenatal diagnostic techniques which enable the early detection of possible anomalies in the unborn child. In view of the complexity of these techniques, an accurate and systematic moral judgment is necessary. When they do not involve disproportionate risks for the child and the mother, and are meant to make possible early therapy or even to favor a serene and informed acceptance of the child not yet born, these techniques are morally licit. But since the possibilities of prenatal therapy are today still limited, it not infrequently happens that these techniques are used with a eugenic intention which accepts selective abortion in order to prevent the birth of children affected by various types of anomalies. Such an attitude is shameful and utterly reprehensible, since it presumes to measure the value of a human life only within the parameters of "normality" and physical well-being, thus opening the way to legitimizing infanticide and euthanasia as well.
The Church's approach is quite balanced. Diagnosis, not immoral in itself, must have a proper purpose and motive. In some ways, diagnosis advances a culture of life, because the unborn child is medical science's newest patient. I have been privileged to participate in conferences of fetal surgeons, and this branch of medicine can serve life in increasingly effective ways.
Yet every tool can be used for good or for harm. Dr. Jerome Lejeune, a strongly pro-life geneticist who discovered the origins of Down Syndrome, lamented the fact that this knowledge was sometimes being used for a "search and destroy" mission. And it is no secret that there is a bias among medical professionals to recommend abortion when test results even a hint (often mistakenly) of Down Syndrome, as Brian Skotko of the National Down's Syndrome Congress found out when he surveyed 2,945 mothers of children with this condition.
Let's stand both for the advancement of the treatment of the unborn, and against the deadly mentality that pushes to kill the less than perfect.
Remember to support our work at
This column an be found online at
Comments on this column? Email us at, Priests for Life, PO Box 141172, Staten Island, NY 10314; Tel: 888-PFL-3448, 718-980-4400; Fax: 718-980-6515; web: NewsBytes - NewsBytes

Informed-Choice Bill May Have Tough Time in Congress

Informed Choice — Mental Health and Abortion

Out-of-Wedlock Babies: Intended . . . Or Not?

Payment For Stem Cell Eggs Debated

China's one child policy won't change despite causing skewed male/female ratio

Catholic Church and the unborn among most discriminated in Argentina

Contraceptive side effects study needed: panel

(c) Copyright:, a production of Interim Publishing.
Permission to republish granted but acknowledgement of source (use is *REQUIRED* 


Tuesday, January 23, 2007


Hundreds of Thousands of Pro-Life People March for Life in Washington

by Steven EditorJanuary 22, 2007

Washington, DC ( -- Proving the pro-life movement is alive and well despite abortion advocates obtaining control of Congress last November, hundreds of thousands of pro-life advocates participated in the annual March for Life. The mood was optimistic and positive despite 34 years of legalized abortion since the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision.

"We come out here to remember lives that were lost and to let people know we all need to remember that," Tom Gill of South Bend told WSBT News.
"The more people we can get to take notice of this issue, the more people will realize abortion is killing innocent human beings," he added.
"We're here letting people know we are for life," added Florida teacher Sister Veronica Marinari. "We are against abortion and for life at all its stages."
The 2006 elections dashed the hopes of pro-life advocates of continuing the pro-life agenda they've been able to enact during large portions of President Bush's tenure in office.

However, National Right to Life political director Karen Cross said the election results didn't mean Americans were changing their attitudes opposing abortion.
"We know that the majority of the country is opposed to the vast majority of abortions," Cross said. She pointed to a post-election poll conducted by the Polling Company firm showing 24% of voters were opposed to abortion except when the mother's life is in danger, or in cases of rape or incest. Another 14% were opposed to abortion except to save the mother's life and 14% were opposed to abortion in all circumstances. "Fully 52% of the country is opposed to abortion except in very rare circumstances," Cross explained.

Cardinal Rigali, chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities, told the Catholic News Service there are other reasons to rejoice despite 34 years of legalized abortion.
"The rate and number of abortions in the United States continue to decline, most notably among teens," he said. "More and more citizens are coming to question abortion and to recognize -- as a starting point for deeper conversion -- that there is something radically wrong with abortion and the support given it by our laws," he added.

Printed from:

President Bush's Address by Phone to the March for Life Participants



Hints that he will veto the Embryonic Stem Cell Funding Bill

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Nellie, thank you. Thank you very much, Nellie. And I want to thank everybody there for taking part in today's March for Life. I appreciate so very much the devotion to such an honorable cause, and the good work everyone is doing to defend life.

And, Nellie, it's good to hear your voice again, and I thank you very much for giving me a chance to visit with you and the crowd that is assembled there on the Mall.

It is important for all Americans to remember that our Declaration of Independence states that every person has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It also states that these rights come from our Creator, and that governments are formed to secure these rights for all their citizens. And we believe every human life has value, and we pray for the day when every child is welcome in life and protected into law.

Nellie, I want to thank you very much, and the members of Congress there who have worked hard to make progress toward this goal over the last six years. I want the folks assembled there to know that we're making progress. We promoted adoption, support parental notification laws, ended federal funding for abortions overseas, and are funding crisis pregnancy programs.

I had the privilege of signing legislation that extends legal protection to children who are born, despite abortion attempts, allows prosecutors to charge those who harm or kill a pregnant woman with harming or killing her unborn child, as well. I signed into law a ban on the cruel practice of partial-birth abortions, and we will vigorously defend that law in the courts.

Nellie, what I'm saying is, is that we're building a culture of life here. And I want to thank you and everybody assembled for helping.

We are a caring nation, and our values should also guide us on how we harness the gifts of science. New medical breakthroughs bring the hope of cures for terrible diseases and treatments that can improve the lives of millions. Our challenge is to make sure that science serves the cause of humanity instead of the other way around.

Last summer I vetoed a bill that would support the taking of innocent life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others, and I have made it clear to the Congress we must pursue medical advances in the name of life, not at the expense of it. 

As we move forward, we've all got to remember that a true culture of life cannot be built by changing laws alone. We've all got to work hard to change hearts. We will find areas where we can agree and, at the same time, work to persuade more of our fellow citizens to join this great cause. The sanctity of life is written in the hearts of all men and women. And so I say, go forth with confidence that a cause rooted in human dignity and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens cannot fail.

Again, Nellie, thank you very much. I appreciate your dedication to this important cause. I send my thanks to all there on the Mall. I ask for God's blessings on your work, and that God continue to bless our country.

Thank you.

(c) Copyright:, a production of Interim Publishing.
Permission to republish granted but acknowledgement of source (use is *REQUIRED* 


Monday, January 22, 2007


Today, January 22, the anniversary of the infamous decision of the Supreme Court to allow the killing of pre-born children, is like 911 to many of us who have been active in the pro-life cause for these many years. Think about it! 34 years of killing! The people who know about these things say that over 48 million babies have been destroyed in the U.S. Shame on America! May God have mercy on us!

What can you do? Pray, do penance, protest, vote, donate, and join a pro-life group to help others see the truth: That life is sacred!

Deacon John

Sunday, January 21, 2007


A Website saved this baby
Heidi found herself pregnant, scared and alone. An abortion seemed the only way out. Then she found the Option line Website. Heidi realized she wasn't alone, that she had life-saving options and that there was someone out there who cared. Heidi made an appointment and chose life for her baby!
We have learned that one of the most cost effective ways to reach pregnant women is through the Internet. And we can use the Internet to lead women to a secure place where they can learn their options, talk to loving counselors, and find a local Pregnancy Counseling Center in their area.
With the help of current donors to the LifeDonor Network, Care Net's website for women in crisis was able to directly communicate to over 80,000 women in the past few months because of internet advertising.
Please consider joining the LifeDonor Network. You can help keep Option-line online in serving women and give them hope. Hope that can save lives.
It only takes a small monthly contribution and your support WILL save lives!

Saturday, January 20, 2007

LifeSiteNews.Com NewsBytes


Pro-Life information via

Georgetown University draws pro-life stars to Cardinal O'Connor event

Abortion & Richard Hays's Moral Ambiguity

Brownback, Hunter to Join Blogs For Life Conference

Ambivalence and Resolve About Roe By Richard John Neuhaus

Couple pay £9,000 to have first British web baby

Astonishing images have been captured on a new 'four-dimensional' ultrasound scan of the womb

More than half of ethnic Norwegian women under age 25 choose abortion if they get pregnant

Schiavo Family Will Join March for Life

Battle lines drawn in Portugal ahead of abortion referendum

Patients Want Faith Honored While Dying

South Dakota Abortion Ruling Reconsidered

UNICEF Gender Equality Gobbledygook -UNICEF still a problem

First test-tube baby in the world gives birth – without IVF,,3-2545718,00.html


A Cry For Justice - Report On Day One

January 20, 2007

Wichita, KS -- Operation Rescue's four day event, A Cry For Justice, kicked off today with a press conference at George Tiller's abortion mill. It was announced that the group would call for a federal investigation to uncover the reason why the laws of Kansas are not being enforced. The 30 criminal charges against George R. Tiller have not yet been reinstated even though 2 judges found probable cause to believe that crimes had been committed.

The group conducted a protest at the County Courthouse and ended the day with a rousing talk from Rev. Pat Mahoney.

For a full account of the day's activities and to view additional photos, please click here.

Visit Our Website

Operation Rescue is one of the leading pro- life Christian organizations in the nation. Its activities are on the cutting edge of the abortion issue, taking direct action to restore legal personhood to the pre- born and stop abortion in obedience to biblical mandates.
Click here to support Operation Rescue.

Operation Rescue
"There is a God in heaven. He will prevail." (St. Gerard Majella)
Deacon John

Friday, January 19, 2007


Texas couple's child born on Roe anniversary seen as miracle baby

Yvonne Alomia plays with her daughter Sofia in their home in El Paso, Texas. CNS/Nohemy Gonzalez

Janet M. Crowe EL PASO, Texas (CNS). El Pasoan Sofia Alomia will celebrate her first birthday this January much like any other toddler. However, amid the cake and presents, Sofia's parents, Yvonne and Santiago Alomia, will take time from the joyous celebration to commemorate the millions of babies killed by abortion.

Sofia was born Jan. 22, 2006 -- the 33rd anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion throughout the nine months of pregnancy.

She could be considered a miracle baby not only because of her date of birth but because several doctors, fearing she might have a severe cardiovascular disorder, repeatedly urged her parents throughout the pregnancy to abort her.

But Yvonne Alomia refused to consider abortion, despite the repeated urging of doctors, colleagues, friends and her own patients from her optometrist practice.

Sofia was born with heart problems. When she was 3 days old she had heart surgery. She is due to have a second surgery after her first birthday and faces additional heart surgeries but her parents are optimistic.

"We would not do anything differently," Alomia said, and Sofia's every smile proves that "it has definitely been worth all the trials."

During her third month of gestation, Sofia was diagnosed with DiGeorge velo-cardio-facial syndrome; a portion of her 22nd chromosome was missing. It can result in conditions ranging from relatively mild to severe, including cleft palate, Down syndrome, immune deficiencies, kidney abnormalities and cardiovascular diseases. The concern for Sofia was cardiovascular.

Two fetal echocardiograms showed no pulmonary arteries from the baby's heart to her lungs, which meant she might die shortly after birth or have a range of critical medical problems affecting her health and life. The doctors said the arteries perhaps existed and maybe were too undeveloped to see, but they also strongly encouraged Alomia to terminate the pregnancy.

Alomia and her husband concentrated on what Sofia would need after she was born. Late in the pregnancy, Sofia's heart was enlarged and appeared to fill her chest cavity, making successful heart surgery questionable.

Still, Alomia refused to consider aborting her baby but sought advice from doctors, priests and El Paso Bishop Armando X. Ochoa on making a decision regarding extraordinary medical measures, including immediate surgery after birth, which might only cause Sofia pain without increasing her chances of survival.

"We just wanted to make the best decision according to the progress that Sofia made or did not make," Alomia said in an interview with The Rio Grande Catholic, El Paso's diocesan newspaper.

"We were expecting her to die within hours of birth since no pulmonary arteries were seen and it was the most probable outcome," she said.

A Caesarean section was scheduled for Jan. 24, 2006, but during morning Mass Jan. 22 Alomia went into labor and the doctors decided to deliver the baby at 3 p.m.

Alomia considers the day and time of Sofia's birth no mere coincidence. She credits the intercession of a neonatal nurse on duty at the El Paso hospital who began praying her Divine Mercy chaplet when Sofia was delivered, who convinced the neonatal doctor to take a second look at the baby and who talked Alomia into surgery for Sofia.

Recalling that Jesus died at the age of 33, Alomia stated, "I do not feel that Sofia's birthday being the 33rd anniversary of Roe and the C-section starting at 3 p.m. are coincidences."

Alomia feels that her difficult pregnancy was planned by God so she and her husband would "reach out to people who have had abortions and convince them of God's infinite mercy and to let people know it is wrong to abort."

Although many people urged Alomia to have the abortion, many others supported her decision to nurture life.

"The response was incredible and is still ongoing. The people of El Paso are beautiful people and we are thankful to God for allowing us to be surrounded by them," Alomia said.

For others experiencing a difficult pregnancy, Alomia recommended Prenatal Partners for Life ( for assistance and support.

Alomia said she would tell those parents: "They are not alone and that God has a special plan for each and every one of us."


Pregnancy and the Development of the Child

First Trimester(Weeks 1 - 12)

Weeks 4 - 10
The period with the greatest risk of birth defects.

Week 4 Day 1
The baby's fetal organs begin forming.

Weeks 4 - 6
The baby is a small, almost tadpole-like embryo. During this time, vital organs develop, which will include the spine, heart, digestive tract, and arm and leg buds.

Weeks 6 - 10
The baby will weigh approximately one third of an ounce and grow to about one and one fourth inches. The heart will be beating and the arms and legs will grow and begin developing fingers and toes.

Week 9 Day 1
Major organs have already formed.

Weeks 8 - 12
The baby will be about two and a half to three inches long and weigh about a half ounce. Amniotic fluid cushions the fetus, allowing the baby to move easily. A baby is able to open and shut its mouth and turn its head, as well as make a fist and kick. More organs are beginning to develop, including the reproductive organs. It is, however, difficult to determine the gender at this point.

Second Trimester(Weeks 13 - 27)

After Week 12
The risk of miscarriage decreases sometime after week 12.

Weeks 16 - 20
The baby now weighs between four and six ounces and is four to five inches long, with the head making up about one-third of its length. The baby will grow very rapidly during weeks 16-20 and the baby’s gender can probably be determined by this point. The eyelashes and fingernails have begun to grow, but the toenails have not. And, even thought the vocal chords have formed, the baby is unable to cry.
The baby’s nourishment is being provided by the placenta. The baby has begun swallowing amniotic fluid and is now urinating and forming meconium, the stool, in its intestines. The tongue is also working, so the baby can begin gentle sucking.

Weeks 20 - 24
The baby will weigh between eight ounces and a pound and is eight to 12 inches long, still small enough to hold in the palm of your hand. The head, body, arms and legs are proportionate in size. Toenails, eyebrows and hair are beginning to grow and teeth are forming under the gums. There is a fine, soft hair now covering the body called lanugo, and a creamy, white covering all over the skin called vernix. During this time the mother will begin feeling the baby move, but she could mistake it for gas bubbles. The baby is able to kick and turn over by now, and everyday maternal activity gently rocks the baby in the amniotic sack.

After Week 22
If the baby is premature, but born sometime after week 22, he/she has a chance to survive with intensive care.

Weeks 24 - 28
The baby weighs about one and one half pounds and is between 12 and 14 inches long. There is little body fat and the skin is still very thin. The eyelids are beginning to part and your baby can open its eyes. Because it is swallowing some amniotic fluid, the mother can feel rhythmic jerks or jolts when it hiccups. A baby’s unique fingers and toes are now visible. During these weeks the mother may begin to recognize the baby’s pattern of activity and rest. It is different for every baby, but most will kick or turn at least 10 times in a 12-hour period.

Third Trimester(Weeks 28 - 40)

Weeks 28 - 40
During the third trimester, a baby will grow significantly. In fact, it will more than double its weight.

Weeks 28 - 32
At this point, the soon-to-be newborn only weighs two to three pounds and is 14 to 17 inches long. Lanugo, the fine downy hair, begins to disappear, first from the face, while the vernix, the thick creamy-white substance, still protects the skin. The baby’s vision has developed and his/her ears are now capable of picking up sound. If a light is shone directly on the mother's abdomen, the baby will react to it. The baby can also hear the mother's heartbeat, as well as food moving through her body and blood flowing through her uterus. The baby also knows her voice and enjoys certain kinds of music. Loud music or sudden movements will cause the baby to jerk, a startle reflex. A baby’s movements over the next several weeks become more intense.
Weeks 32 - 36
By sometime around week 32, the baby weighs approximately five pounds and is from 16 to 18 inches long. This is a time for tremendous growth, especially of the brain. Most of the baby’s systems are well developed by this point, except the lungs, which could still be underdeveloped. Calcium, protein and iron are very important in these last few weeks of growth. The baby is developing skills that will allow it to eat, and taste buds are now present on his/her tongue.
Weeks 36 - 40
The baby is now plump and pink, smooth skin and can weigh from six to nine pounds, waiting for its debut to the world.

Week 40
The baby should be born at week 40.
Based on the Pregnancy Calculator at BabyWorld, St. Vincent's Hospital, Birmingham, AL
Provided courtesy of: Eternal Word Television Network, 5817 Old Leeds Road, Irondale, AL, 35210

President Bush Proclaims National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 2007


Dear Readers,

Just thought you'd like to see this proclamation hot off the presses.

Steve Jalsevac and I are headed down to Washington DC for the March for Life, we hope to see some of you there.

For life,

John-Henry Westen

President Bush Proclaims National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 2007

Full text of proclamation follows:

America was founded on the principle that we are all endowed by our Creator with the right to life and that every individual has dignity and worth. National Sanctity of Human Life Day helps foster a culture of life and reinforces our commitment to building a compassionate society that respects the value of every human being.

Among the most basic duties of Government is to defend the unalienable right to life, and my Administration is committed to protecting our society's most vulnerable members. We are vigorously promoting parental notification laws, adoption, abstinence education, crisis pregnancy programs, and the vital work of faith-based groups. Through the "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002," the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003," and the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004," we are helping to make our country a more hopeful place.

One of our society's challenges today is to harness the power of science to ease human suffering without sanctioning practices that violate the dignity of human life. With the right policies, we can continue to achieve scientific progress while living up to our ethical and moral responsibilities.

National Sanctity of Human Life Day serves as a reminder that we must value human life in all forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient. Together, we can work toward a day when the dignity and humanity of every person is respected.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Sunday, January 21, 2007, as National Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon all Americans to recognize this day with appropriate ceremonies and to underscore our commitment to respecting and protecting the life and dignity of every human being.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first.


Donate to at


Thursday, January 18, 2007


1. That the fetus is undeniably alive.

2. That the fetus, or unborn child, is clearly human.

3. That the unborn child is a "person" and traditionally has been regarded as such within the contemplation of both law and medicine.

4. That abortion is the intentional deprivation of the life of a person. That it is, in short, a homicide (by definition).

5. That the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution should not permit the States to treat the homicide of a member of one class of persons as a lesser offense than the homicide of others. Therefore, the abortion of an unborn child should properly be analyzed in precisely the same manner as the homicide of a child after delivery (or of an adult for that matter).

6. That applying a traditional homicide analysis to the typical abortion would lead to its classification as murder since the necessary element of "malice aforethought" is present and there is no basis to mitigate or lesson the offense to manslaughter or to exculpate the parties absent clear legal justification such as self-defense.

7. That the element of "premeditation" is also generally present elevating the offense from second to first degree.

[To be continued]

Wednesday, January 17, 2007


Christians Answer O'Reilly's Call For Protests At Late-term Abortion Mill
Leaders of 1991 "Summer of Mercy" return to Wichita for "A Cry for Justice"

Wichita, KS - Jan 17, 2007 Christians from across the nation are making their ways to Wichita, KS for four days of pro-life activism focusing on late-term abortionist George R. Tiller on January 19-22.

Included are the majority of members from the original Operation Rescue leadership team that made Wichita, Kansas, the focus of the abortion battle for six weeks during the summer of 1991, including Rev. Pat Mahoney, Jeff White, Mike McMonagle, and Joseph Slovenic.

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly has recently focused several segments of his popular show, "The O'Reilly Factor," on Tiller's late-term abortion business and its questionable legality.

O'Reilly said on his program, "You know, I've been covering the news in America for 30 years and this Kansas situation is the worst thing I've ever seen. . . Americans cannot turn away from this; cannot ignore it. There should be thousands of people demonstrating outside Tiller's abortion clinic in Wichita."

The group plans to call for 30 criminal charges against Tiller involving illegal late term abortions to be reinstated. The charges were filed by former Attorney General Phill Kline on December 21, but were dismissed the following day after pro-abortion District Attorney Nola Foulston intervened in the case and persuaded a judge to dismiss the charges on technical jurisdictional grounds.

Kline has since been replaced and the special prosecutor that he assigned to the case has been fired by pro-abortion Attorney General Paul Morrison.

"We simply cannot be silent and allow Tiller's cronies to sweep this matter under the rug. We are talking about allegations that Tiller is illegally killing viable babies in the latest stages of pregnancy that Kansas law has been enacted to protect," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "We are simply asking for the authorities in Kansas to enforce the law and allow Tiller have his day in court. Let the allegations come forth and let the witnesses be heard. We are convinced that the charges against Tiller are credible and deserve a public hearing. Innocent lives literally depend on it."

Visit "A Cry For Justice" Event Page




HOUSTON, January 17 (CNA) - A new poll conducted by a leading Christian web site finds that an overwhelming majority of Christians believe that life begins at conception.

www.ChristiaNet.Com recently surveyed 500 members of its web site and asked: "Does life start at conception, first heart beat, second trimester, or birth?"

Of the 500 participants, 440 (88 percent) believe that life begins at conception; nearly 7 percent believe that life begins at birth. Only two respondents selected the option that life begins at the second trimester and 24 respondents believe that life begins at the first heart beat, reported www.LifeNews.Com.

"The Bible is clear about life," said ChristiaNet president Bill Cooper. "But many people, even some Christians, are unclear on this fact because our society accepts abortion procedures. The truth has become skewed in order to ease the social conscience." 

"There is a God in heaven. He will prevail." (St. Gerard Majella)
Deacon John

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Georgia Prepares to Battle Roe v. Wade


House bill challenges Roe by establishing personhood of unborn

By Peter J. Smith

Atlanta, Georgia, January 15, 2007 ( - The Georgia House of Representatives has taken up the gauntlet to challenge the 34-year-old Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion with a new bill that establishes an unborn child as a human person at conception deserving full protection under the law with no exceptions.

House Bill 1 sponsored by Bobby Franklin with many other cosponsors, declares that "a fetus is a person for all purposes under the laws of this state from the moment of conception" and cites the decision of Roe v. Wade itself to justify its complete ban of abortion.

Franklin's bill states that "The State of Georgia has the duty to protect all innocent life from the moment of conception until natural death," and adds that three decades of legal human abortion have "negatively impacted the people of this state in many ways, including economic, health, physical, psychological, emotional, and medical well-being."

"As a direct result of three decades of legalized abortion on demand, the nation has seen a dramatic rise in the incidence of child abuse and a dramatic weakening of family ties, with the infamous Roe v. Wade decision pitting mothers against their children and women against men."

The legislation continues: "Georgia Constitution, at Article I, Section I, Paragraph II, provides: 'Protection to person and property is the paramount duty of government and shall be impartial and complete. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. Because a fetus is a person, constitutional protection attaches at the moment of conception."

Under article 5, the legislation quotes the Roe decision: "Justice Blackmun, writing for the majority in Roe v. Wade , 410 U.S. 113 (1973), wrote: 'when those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer [to the question of when life begins].' Now, 30 years later, the General Assembly knows the answer to that difficult question, and that answer is life begins at the moment of conception."

In the 1973 Roe decision, Justice Blackmun admitted that Roe would lose its legal justification if an unborn child were determined as a person deserving of rights guaranteed in the 14th Amendment. "[Texas] argue[S] that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment… If this suggestion of personhood is established, the [pro-abortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."

The bill was brought before a house committee hearing January 9, where Sandra Cano, "Mary Doe" of Roe's companion case Doe v. Bolton, offered testimony and was joined by Dr. Alveda King, daughter of the famed Civil Rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, jr.

The bill has been greeted with enthusiasm from pro-life organizations. Rev. Flip Benham, Director of Operation Save America/Operation Rescue, described the measure as "the very best bill that any state has brought before its legislative body yet… it is an all out declaration that human life begins at conception and therefore is due protection under the color of Law."

A copy of Georgia's House Bill 1 can be found at:.