partial birth infanticide

Planned Parenthood's Real (Partisan) Agenda

Today on the floor of the House of Delegates, SB 18, legislation that creates a pro-abortion license plate, was amended so that money raised from the plate will not go to Planned Parenthood. The identical amendment was placed on the House version of similar legislation earlier in session. The action by the House to divert the money from Planned Parenthood to the Virginia Pregnant Woman Fund has caused a verbal hissy fit from the pro-abortion lobby. It claims that the House is being "unfair" and is not treating Planned Parenthood the same as other organization’s that receive money from license plates.

The reasons for the House different treatment of the Planned Parenthood bill, patroned by Senator Louise Lucas (D-18, Portsmouth), are numerous. Of course, one reason is its pro-abortion agenda and its opposition to nearly every public policy in Virginia that relates to abortion, from our ban on partial birth infanticide to parental consent. There also is opposition because Planned Parenthood is the largest private provider of abortions in the Commonwealth. Planned Parenthood has "promised" that money raised by the plate will not fund abortion, but all we have is its word.

If those aren’t reasons enough, another explanation we have shared in the past was reinforced recently in a television interview I did on a local news broadcast regarding the license plate controversy. While interviewing the lead lobbyist for Planned Parenthood in her office, where she was arguing that Planned Parenthood is a health care organization, the camera caught an interesting sign in the background. Please watch the following brief video clip from that interview:

The camera doesn't blink on partisan Planned Parenthood.

Clearly, as I said in the interview, Planned Parenthood is a blatantly partisan political group masquerading as a health care organization. If the video isn’t enough, you can go to its  Web site and blog and see its endorsements of political candidates, nearly all of which are from one particular political party. Regardless of its claims to be all about women’s health, it really is about winning elections and making money — much of it off of the taxpayer. Isn’t it interesting that the candidates it supports are advocates of taxpayer funding of its organization.

In the next few days, the Senate will reject the amendment, reverting the money from the license plates back to Planned Parenthood. The House is likely to insist on the change, forcing the bills into a conference committee for a "compromise" to be worked out. At the same time, the budget conference committee will be debating the budget amendment that prohibits taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood. It is simply unacceptable that taxpayers continue to be forced to fund a partisan organization that does not support the laws of Virginia.

The evidence is abundant. It is time to put a stop to this funding.

When It Comes To NARAL's Report Card, Failure IS An Option For Virginia!

In some bright news amidst the regular drumbeat of negative national and state reports, Virginia earned a coveted grade from NARAL Pro-Choice America last week — an "F" in protecting abortion on demand! My message to them: You ain’t seen nothing yet!

However, just a quick glance at NARAL’s criteria for Virginia’s stellar grade conveys just how out of the mainstream NARAL actually is when it comes to abortion. For example, one strike against us is that we "ban a safe abortion procedure." That procedure is the brutal act of partial birth infanticide!

Another strike? We require "biased-counseling requirements and mandatory delays" prior to abortion. That would be the vastly popular and reasonable Informed Consent law. The bias-counseling? A pamphlet that describes the gestational development of an unborn child!

It gets better. Virginia also "restricts young women’s access to abortion services by mandating parental consent." Imagine that, requiring a parent be involved in a medical procedure when a teenager is the patient!

They also claim that Virginia law "subjects abortion providers to burdensome restrictions." What would that be? We don’t allow women to be subjected to second and third trimester abortions inside unregulated and uninspected abortion centers, but instead require that they be done in hospitals.

All that before we even get to the lies. In one place they claim Virginia restricts low income women’s access to abortion when, in fact, Virginia is one of only 17 states that goes beyond federal requirements and pays for low income abortions that are "elective."

While we can all be somewhat proud of this failing grade, to me, we have a long way to go to restore a respect for human life in Virginia. That will happen when we finally require Virginia’s abortion centers to be regulated and inspected; when we no longer force taxpayers to fund Planned Parenthood and low income abortions; when we bring our Informed Consent laws into the 21st century by requiring an ultrasound prior to an abortion.

So, although we don't think we truly deserve an "F," we hope you celebrate it for a moment. Then, let's all get back to work to truly earn that grade next year.

Official Statement Of The Family Foundation On The 4th Circuit Court Of Appeals Upholding Virginia's Ban On Partial Birth Abortion

STATEMENT BY VICTORIA COBB, PRESIDENT OF THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF VIRGINIA, CONCERNING THE RULING BY THE 4th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UPHOLDING VIRGINIA'S LAW BANNING PARTIAL BIRTH INFANTICIDE

The simple fact that pro-abortion forces continue to defend the heinous and unnecessary act of partial birth infanticide with such vigor reveals their extremism. It must be noted that the procedures being discussed, a "dilation and evacuation" (D&E) abortion and an "intact D&E" both require the dismemberment of an unborn child past the known date of viability. The people of Virginia are seeing the true nature of the abortion movement.

The more people learn about the barbaric nature of these procedures, the more they support this ban. There is little doubt that we are seeing a shift toward a more pro-life nation because of the debate over partial birth abortion and as modern technology such as 4D ultrasounds reveal life in such vivid color at its earliest stages. As the truth of abortion is revealed, those willing to open their eyes to that truth are changed.

Breaking News: Full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Agrees to Rehear Partial Birth Abortion Case

The full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today agreed to hear Attorney General Bob McDonnell's appeal of a ruling by a three-judge panel of the court which ruled Virginia's partial birth abortion law unconstitutional. Oral arguments will be heard almost a year to the day the panel heard the case. This is welcome and good news. One interesting aspect of the case is that the Fourth Circuit has a new judge, nominated by President George W. Bush and confirmed by the U.S. Senate this spring: former Republican Delegate from Salem and Virginia Supreme Court Justice Steven Agee. Although our scorecards were not as in-depth as they are today, a look back at our 1991 Voting Index, as it was called then, shows two pro-life issues, both of which he voted for. No cases on this issue came before the Virginia Supreme Court during his tenure there. Below is the news release issued by Attorney General McDonnell: 

Full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Agrees to Rehear Partial Birth Abortion Case

- Attorney General Bob McDonnell Requested Rehearing-

Richmond - The full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has granted Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell's request that the full court hear the case challenging the constitutionality of Virginia's ban on partial birth infanticide.

In 2005, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit ruled — by a vote of 2-1 —that the statute-passed overwhelmingly by the General Assembly in 2003 was unconstitutional. Then Attorney General Judith Williams Jagdmann asked the Supreme Court of the United States to review the decision. In 2007, after upholding the federal partial birth abortion act, the high court vacated the Fourth Circuit panel's 2005 decision, and sent back the issue to the Fourth Circuit for reconsideration.

On May 20th of this year a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit — again by the vote of 2-1 — ruled that the statute was unconstitutional. On May 30th Attorney General McDonnell announced that he would ask the full court to reconsider the ruling.

The Attorney General's brief requesting a rehearing by the full court can be read here: http://www.vaag.com/LEGAL_LEGIS/CourtFilings/03-1821-Petition%20for%20Rehearing%20En%20Banc.pdf

Speaking about today's granting of a rehearing by the full court, Attorney General McDonnell noted, "I am pleased by today's decision that the full Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear this case for the first time. Virginia's partial-birth infanticide ban was passed into law by an overwhelming majority of our elected representatives in the General Assembly. Additionally, it is substantively similar to the federal partial birth abortion ban that was recently upheld by the United States Supreme Court. I am hopeful that the full court will overturn the earlier divided panel decision , and Virginia's partial birth infanticide ban will be found to be constitutional."

Oral argument in this case has been tentatively scheduled for October 28-31 of this year.