By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Banner of Liberty (www.bannerofliberty.com)
November 12, 2003
Last Friday House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco was quoted as saying the photograph of President Bush surrounded by male lawmakers as he signed legislation earlier this week outlawing partial-birth abortions was "a group of men celebrating depriving women of a medical procedure that could save their health and their lives, and . . . because of the celebratory nature . . . it was . . . a slap in the face to women across America,'' the Democratic leader told reporters.
The Pelosi comment is in keeping with the feminist notion that men have no right to even TALK about family issues. When men in the House of Representatives first began to find out what Partial Birth Abortion was, back in 1995, the feminist lobby tried to take the right of the men to speak away from them. Rep. Patricia Schroeder, a Democrat from Colorado and Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat from California said on the floor of the House and Senate that, that abortion was a “woman’s issue,” that it involved “the right of women to control their bodies” and men didn't even have the “right” to bring it up Congress. Schroeder moved on November 1, 1995 to have diagrams Rep. Charles Canady brought to illustrate the procedure declared a “breach of decorum.” She was outvoted by the mostly male House of Representatives.
The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) is now using that photo of the President surrounded by the men who have tried to end the barbaric killing of viable late term infants and made it part of its $3 million advertising campaign keep feminist control of the courts. The reason why there were only men in that picture is because, to the shame of American women, most of the female representatives in Congress do not represent the majority of American women who love children and want to preserve their families.
For many years in American politics, at the United Nations and in the media, nurturing, family oriented women’s voices have been drowned out by the strident voices of radical feminism demanding that lesbianism, state-funded abortion on demand, state-run nurseries and preferential treatment in the job market be adopted as “women’s rights.” In recent years, however, family oriented women have begun to organize in support of their families. Concerned Women for America (CWA), headed by Sandy Rios and United Families International (UFI)headed by Sharon Slater, have worked to reverse the deterioration of our culture and the destruction of families.
Following President Bush signing the bill to ban Partial Birth Abortion, Rios noted that, according to the American Medical Association, there is no reason why a partial-birth abortion is medically necessary and “There is no excuse for this disregard for a woman’s safety.” The procedure not only kills viable babies but is dangerous for the mother.
In November and December 1995, over the loud objections feminists in Congress, the 104th Congress overwhelmingly passed the first ban on Partial Birth abortions. It, and a later similar bill were vetoed by President Clinton based on the canard that it was required in order for women to control their bodies. .
Now, what part of having an abortionist slaughter a viable late term baby by turning the infant so it is delivered feet first then drilling a hole at the base of its skull to suck out its brains has anything to do with a woman controlling HER body? SHE’S not controlling anything in such a procedure. The abortionist is controlling not only her body but also the body of the infant that is killed and almost invariably the abortionist doing the controlling is a male stranger. I totally agree that a woman should be allowed to control HER body and that is very easy to do these days before she gets pregnant. After she is pregnant, there are other “bodies” involved – like, the body of the child and the body of the father. .
In my book Coming Home: Families Can Stop the Unraveling of America, I quoted Senator Conrad Burns of Montana who said December 5,1995 on the floor of the Senate, “To me this (partial birth abortion) just sounds repulsive, absolutely inhuman. And it makes me wonder, if they were doing this to dogs or horses, whether we would have more support to ban this procedure.”
Actually, I’m quite sure that the animal rights folks would be blockading the steps of the Capital demanding immediate action if this brutal procedure were being used on dogs and horses.
The feminists who support such brutality have lost the battle among the people of America, and have now moved to seize total control of the American court system through Senate filibusters and a massive propaganda campaign. Through the filibusters, that require 60% of the votes in the Senate to end, the feminists believe they have a trick to overturn the U.S. Constitution’s simple majority for Senate approval of presidential nominees.
So far, six candidates have been subjected to such filibuster minority power grabs. One, Miguel Estrada, a highly qualified Hispanic American, finally withdrew his name – after two years of vilification and obstruction by the minority Democrats. Of the current 32 Bush pending judgeship nominees, five of them, or 15% of the total nominees, are being blocked with Democrat filibusters.
Three of the five judges being blocked by feminists are women who have become Supreme Court Justices or Superior Court judges in their own states. Janice Rogers Brown, California’s first black, female Supreme Court Judge , Carolyn B. Kuhl, a California Superior Court judge, and Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla R. Owen. The other two being blocked are Alabama Attorney General William H. Pryor Jr. and Mississippi’s U.S. District Court Judge Charles W. Pickering Sr.
At issue here is a blatant power grab by an organized minority in the Senate intent on destroying the concept of an independent Judiciary in the Constitution. Minority Democrats in the Senate are determined to control future Court decisions by blocking any nominee they fear might not support the policies of their feminist power base in the National Abortion Rights League (NARAL,) and the National Organization for Women (NOW). Both organizations have well organized and financed campaigns to block any nominee they fear will support the Constitution as written.
The men in that picture surrounding the president deserved that honor. They were the ones, in the great tradition of true masculinity, who had the courage to step forward to protect and defend those who could not defend themselves.
To comment: mmostert@bannerofliberty.com