What on earth is that cartoon supposed to represent?
Click it. It will bring you to a blog that explains it.
Thanks. I did click and read about the conference, and I also went to a page that showed different cartoons by this cartoonist, but I was specifically wondering about this image: http://www.faithmouse.com/daily827.jpg
A ghostly figure with a patriotic hairbow cuddling a baby angel? Those who are aborted become angels? Who is the ghost, and why the patriotic bow in her hair?
Why not email the artist and find out?
OK, I might do that. If I do, I’ll share whatever response I get. I know it’s common in popular piety to speak of the departed (esp departed children) as angels, but that’s obviously not church teaching.
For that matter, I have long wondered about the tendency to use images of babies in prolife literature, billboards, etc. It’s true that fetuses become infants, but they also become toddlers, children, teenagers, and then adults – young, middle-aged, elderly. Abortion prevents all those stages of life, not just babyhood. I’d personally like to see prolife billboards picturing surly pierced teenagers, paunchy balding guys, etc, with slogans like the one shown here – http://www.prolifeacrossamerica.org/ – “No kidding? I had fingerprints 9 weeks from conception?”
Democrats for Life taking action to reduce abortions:
Plan to Reduce the Number of Abortions Unveiled
Congressman Tim Ryan to Introduce Legislation Modeled After DFLAâ??s 95-10 Initiative
WASHINGTON, DC â?? Democrats For Life of America (DFLA) joined Congressmen Tim Ryan, Bart Stupak, Lincoln Davis and other pro-life Democrats at a national press conference at the Democratic National Committee today to unveil an innovative abortion-reduction proposal. The proposal they call the â??95-10 Initiativeâ?? was released after months of research, political outreach and planning.
The 95-10 Initiative is a comprehensive proposal of 15 different policy programs that, when fully funded and implemented in coordination with each other, will hopefully reduce the number of abortions in America by 95 percent over the next 10 years.
â??The 95-10 Initiative is our number one priority. While many talk about protecting life, weâ??re proposing a legitimate policy initiative that will actually reduce the number of abortions in America. The 95-10 Initiative has been met favorably by both pro-life and pro-choice advocates and elected officials,â?? said Kristen Day, Executive Director of Democrats For Life of America.
Former Congressman and 9-11 Commissioner, Tim Roemer said, â??95-10 is meant to put words into action. Our party has made more progress on this issue in the last three months than we have in the last 10 years. Ours can be the party that reduces the number of abortions in this country.â??
Among the elected official already in support of the 95-10 Initiative is Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE). â??Democrats for Life of America share the same goal as most Americans â?? to reduce the instance of abortion in America. The plan outlined today is a good first step to successfully reduce the rate of abortion by offering alternatives that promote family, promote adoption, and provide education and support for new mothers. I commend Democrats for Life of America for their efforts to bring this issue to the forefront of the agenda and for putting the care and support for newborns and new mothers above all else.â??
I followed your link but it gave no information on what these proposals are. Do you have any information? Just because a political group says that they have a proposal that claims to address a problem, I don’t automatically assume that their proposal will really do anything to help the problem.
The package of federal legislation and policy proposals inlude:
Empower Women
1. Federal Funding for Toll-Free Number/National Public Awareness Program
Enact an advertising campaign in each state to provide a toll free number that will direct a woman to organizations that provide support services for pregnant women who want to carry their children to term and/or direct
2. Conduct a National Study & Update Abortion Data. National Institutes of Health will collect accurate data on why women choose abortions. Within five years of enactment, the NIH will present its findings to Congress.
3. Federal Funding for Pregnancy Prevention Education. Provide grants to school districts that are in need of funds to administer effective, age-appropriate pregnancy prevention education.
4. Federal Funding for Abortion Counseling and Daycare on University Campuses. Provide grants for universities and colleges to support pregnant women; provide resources and support to help women continue their education if they keep their child or make an adoption plan for their child.
5. Provide Accurate Information to Patients Receiving a Positive Result from an Alpha-Fetoprotein Test tests.
6. Make Adoption Tax Credits Permanent.
7. Ban Pregnancy as a â??Pre-Existing Conditionâ?? in the Health Care Industry
8. Require Adoption Referral Information. Require pregnancy centers and women’s health centers that provide pregnancy counseling and that receive federal funding to provide adoption referral information.
9. Women’s Right to Know. Any women’s health center or clinic that provides pregnancy counseling or abortion services must provide accurate information on abortion and the adverse side effects to a woman’s health.
10. Provide Ultrasound Equipment. Provide grants to nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations for the purchase of ultrasound equipment to provide free examinations to pregnant women needing such services. This equipment will be operated by licensed professionals.
11. Increase Funding for Domestic Violence Programs.
Protect our Children
12. Fully Fund Federal WIC Program. It is estimated that every dollar spent on WIC results in between $1.77 and $3.13 in Medicaid savings for newborns and their mothers (Food Research and Action Center).
13. Parental Notification. *Passed by the House on June 22, 2005.
14. Safe Haven Laws: Forty-six states now have some type of safe haven legislation.
15. Require Counseling in Maternity Group Homes. Adoption counseling in federally funded maternity group homes and teaching of parenting skills.
16. Require SCHIP to cover pregnant women. Expand coverage to pregnant women through Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and to newborns through the first full year of life.
It’s nice sentiment Dean, but unfortunately Democrats for Life are not in power in the party and are out of step with the platform. They are a hollow organization that are willing to compromise their politics. If they really believe what they advocate they would create a new party.
We will defend the dignity of all Americans against htose who would undermine it. Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand produly for a woman’s right to choose consistant with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
Jerry: This is why we haven’t been able to make any major progress reducing the number of abortions. Some Republicans are more interested in playing politics with the issue, than working together with Democrats in a constructive manner towards a common goal. Portraying Democrats as “pro-abortion” allows them to continue beating on them like a Pinata. Acknowleging that many Democrats also want to reduce the number of abortions takes away an issue that works to the Republican’s advantage.
Public opinion polls indicate that 43% of Democrats define themselves as “Pro-Life”. After the 2004 election a number of major Democratic figures, like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, acknowleged that the party needed to disassociate itself from extreme “pro-abortion” positions and acknowlege the moral concerns of people of faith. During the Samuel Alito hearings, Democratic comments on Roe v. Wade issue were muted and were not a major theme of questioning by most of the Senators.
It’s true that a segment of the Democratic party defends Roe v. Wade and portrays the abortion question as involving only one issue, a woman’s privacy, and nothing else. I believe that these people are a slowly shrinking minority, even in the Democratic party. The 2004 elections were a sobering experience demonstrating that even an incompetent liar whose policies have seriously harmed our nation can win the election if he is able to portray his oponnent unfavorably on certain moral issues.
Father Jacobse has said that the culture and attitudes on abortion is changing, and I think recent events show that is certainly true. Many on both sides are moving from their extreme positions towards support for more moderate solutions.
If Republicans wanted to they could certainly join with Pro-Life Democrats and have enough votes to pass the 95-10 initiatives. Of course that would mean giving up a perfect wedge issue and vote-getter. Let’s see what’s more important.
Jerry –
If you were really pro-life, then you would create a new political party also. The Republican establishment is happy with abortion as an issue. They are not concerned about actually ending the reign of terror under the Roe Case.
Why do I know this? Because if the Republicans were serious then they would have taken action back in 1980 to do something about the situation, or at some point since then. The court that gave us Roe had 7 Republican appointees, including the chief justice. They didn’t spring from nowhere, but instead, represented the views of the majority of the Republican establishment then and since.
What could Republicans have done? They could have stripped abortion from the jurisdiction of federal courts. They could have amended the Constitution. Republican administrations could have declared the Roe ruling an affront to federalism and the separation of powers and refused to allow DOJ resources to be used for its enforcement. Republicans at the state level could have provoked a Constitutional crisis by refusing to keep the abortion mills open in defiance of state law.
In short, we could have fought. But we didn’t. Instead, Reagan appointed Sandra Day O’Conner and cemented the pro-Roe majority. We allowed the Republican establishment to focus us only on the Supreme Court, ignoring the other options at our disposal. We allowed them to push us into voting for Presidents we didn’t want, and Senators we couldn’t stand, all in the vain hope that something would be done about abortion. Year after year, nothing was done. First was O’Conner. Then Kennedy, then Souter.
And still we kept lining up to vote for the Republicans, and still we got nothing. This time around, we were assured over and over again that there was no abortion ‘litmus’ test for Roberts and Alito. Bush told us he didn’t know how they would decide on abortion issues. Is he lying? Or is he being cagey, because the important thing is to preserve this issue for the Republicans?
Did Bush appear in person at the pro-life rallies over the weekend? No, he called in as is usual. He wouldn’t want to appear extreme, you see. While he was on the phone, I’m sure his pro-abortion wife Laura was on the phone with Republicans for Free Choice to assure them that the Republican Party is a ‘big-tent’ with lots of room for them.
Am I bitter? Sure, I’m bitter. I’m tired of Christians being taken for granted by the Republican Party. I’m tired of having well-meaning pro-life homeschoolers at my door every election to get me to vote for Republicans to ‘save babies.’ Well, I’ve been doing that for 20 years, and I doubt it has saved any babies.
I want a party that will actual fight for its base, not one that will ignore it. That is why I jumped ship in 2004 and voted Constitution Party. I’m sick of the abuse.
Glen why do you assume I’m Republican?
Jerry –
Based on your past posting history, I assumed you are a Republican. You are certainly no Democrat (which is not a bad thing.) If you are an independent/member of a 3rd Party – then good for you! I have maintained my Republican Party affiliation, though my presence at party events tends to cause a stir.
My son Joshua and I enjoyed meeting and talking with you at the conference.
Hope to see you again.
Blessings,
Galen
Galen,
Welcome to the blog! Good to meet you and Joshua as well. God bless your good work.
What on earth is that cartoon supposed to represent?
Click it. It will bring you to a blog that explains it.
Thanks. I did click and read about the conference, and I also went to a page that showed different cartoons by this cartoonist, but I was specifically wondering about this image:
http://www.faithmouse.com/daily827.jpg
A ghostly figure with a patriotic hairbow cuddling a baby angel? Those who are aborted become angels? Who is the ghost, and why the patriotic bow in her hair?
Why not email the artist and find out?
OK, I might do that. If I do, I’ll share whatever response I get. I know it’s common in popular piety to speak of the departed (esp departed children) as angels, but that’s obviously not church teaching.
For that matter, I have long wondered about the tendency to use images of babies in prolife literature, billboards, etc. It’s true that fetuses become infants, but they also become toddlers, children, teenagers, and then adults – young, middle-aged, elderly. Abortion prevents all those stages of life, not just babyhood. I’d personally like to see prolife billboards picturing surly pierced teenagers, paunchy balding guys, etc, with slogans like the one shown here – http://www.prolifeacrossamerica.org/ – “No kidding? I had fingerprints 9 weeks from conception?”
Democrats for Life taking action to reduce abortions:
Plan to Reduce the Number of Abortions Unveiled
Congressman Tim Ryan to Introduce Legislation Modeled After DFLAâ??s 95-10 Initiative
WASHINGTON, DC â?? Democrats For Life of America (DFLA) joined Congressmen Tim Ryan, Bart Stupak, Lincoln Davis and other pro-life Democrats at a national press conference at the Democratic National Committee today to unveil an innovative abortion-reduction proposal. The proposal they call the â??95-10 Initiativeâ?? was released after months of research, political outreach and planning.
The 95-10 Initiative is a comprehensive proposal of 15 different policy programs that, when fully funded and implemented in coordination with each other, will hopefully reduce the number of abortions in America by 95 percent over the next 10 years.
â??The 95-10 Initiative is our number one priority. While many talk about protecting life, weâ??re proposing a legitimate policy initiative that will actually reduce the number of abortions in America. The 95-10 Initiative has been met favorably by both pro-life and pro-choice advocates and elected officials,â?? said Kristen Day, Executive Director of Democrats For Life of America.
Former Congressman and 9-11 Commissioner, Tim Roemer said, â??95-10 is meant to put words into action. Our party has made more progress on this issue in the last three months than we have in the last 10 years. Ours can be the party that reduces the number of abortions in this country.â??
Among the elected official already in support of the 95-10 Initiative is Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE). â??Democrats for Life of America share the same goal as most Americans â?? to reduce the instance of abortion in America. The plan outlined today is a good first step to successfully reduce the rate of abortion by offering alternatives that promote family, promote adoption, and provide education and support for new mothers. I commend Democrats for Life of America for their efforts to bring this issue to the forefront of the agenda and for putting the care and support for newborns and new mothers above all else.â??
http://www.democratsforlife.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=49&Itemid=2
Actions speak louder than words.
Dean,
I followed your link but it gave no information on what these proposals are. Do you have any information? Just because a political group says that they have a proposal that claims to address a problem, I don’t automatically assume that their proposal will really do anything to help the problem.
SteveB: Here is a better link: Democrats for Life
The package of federal legislation and policy proposals inlude:
Empower Women
1. Federal Funding for Toll-Free Number/National Public Awareness Program
Enact an advertising campaign in each state to provide a toll free number that will direct a woman to organizations that provide support services for pregnant women who want to carry their children to term and/or direct
2. Conduct a National Study & Update Abortion Data. National Institutes of Health will collect accurate data on why women choose abortions. Within five years of enactment, the NIH will present its findings to Congress.
3. Federal Funding for Pregnancy Prevention Education. Provide grants to school districts that are in need of funds to administer effective, age-appropriate pregnancy prevention education.
4. Federal Funding for Abortion Counseling and Daycare on University Campuses. Provide grants for universities and colleges to support pregnant women; provide resources and support to help women continue their education if they keep their child or make an adoption plan for their child.
5. Provide Accurate Information to Patients Receiving a Positive Result from an Alpha-Fetoprotein Test tests.
6. Make Adoption Tax Credits Permanent.
7. Ban Pregnancy as a â??Pre-Existing Conditionâ?? in the Health Care Industry
8. Require Adoption Referral Information. Require pregnancy centers and women’s health centers that provide pregnancy counseling and that receive federal funding to provide adoption referral information.
9. Women’s Right to Know. Any women’s health center or clinic that provides pregnancy counseling or abortion services must provide accurate information on abortion and the adverse side effects to a woman’s health.
10. Provide Ultrasound Equipment. Provide grants to nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations for the purchase of ultrasound equipment to provide free examinations to pregnant women needing such services. This equipment will be operated by licensed professionals.
11. Increase Funding for Domestic Violence Programs.
Protect our Children
12. Fully Fund Federal WIC Program. It is estimated that every dollar spent on WIC results in between $1.77 and $3.13 in Medicaid savings for newborns and their mothers (Food Research and Action Center).
13. Parental Notification. *Passed by the House on June 22, 2005.
14. Safe Haven Laws: Forty-six states now have some type of safe haven legislation.
15. Require Counseling in Maternity Group Homes. Adoption counseling in federally funded maternity group homes and teaching of parenting skills.
16. Require SCHIP to cover pregnant women. Expand coverage to pregnant women through Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and to newborns through the first full year of life.
It’s nice sentiment Dean, but unfortunately Democrats for Life are not in power in the party and are out of step with the platform. They are a hollow organization that are willing to compromise their politics. If they really believe what they advocate they would create a new party.
Democratic platform
Democratic Platform
Jerry: This is why we haven’t been able to make any major progress reducing the number of abortions. Some Republicans are more interested in playing politics with the issue, than working together with Democrats in a constructive manner towards a common goal. Portraying Democrats as “pro-abortion” allows them to continue beating on them like a Pinata. Acknowleging that many Democrats also want to reduce the number of abortions takes away an issue that works to the Republican’s advantage.
Public opinion polls indicate that 43% of Democrats define themselves as “Pro-Life”. After the 2004 election a number of major Democratic figures, like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, acknowleged that the party needed to disassociate itself from extreme “pro-abortion” positions and acknowlege the moral concerns of people of faith. During the Samuel Alito hearings, Democratic comments on Roe v. Wade issue were muted and were not a major theme of questioning by most of the Senators.
It’s true that a segment of the Democratic party defends Roe v. Wade and portrays the abortion question as involving only one issue, a woman’s privacy, and nothing else. I believe that these people are a slowly shrinking minority, even in the Democratic party. The 2004 elections were a sobering experience demonstrating that even an incompetent liar whose policies have seriously harmed our nation can win the election if he is able to portray his oponnent unfavorably on certain moral issues.
Father Jacobse has said that the culture and attitudes on abortion is changing, and I think recent events show that is certainly true. Many on both sides are moving from their extreme positions towards support for more moderate solutions.
If Republicans wanted to they could certainly join with Pro-Life Democrats and have enough votes to pass the 95-10 initiatives. Of course that would mean giving up a perfect wedge issue and vote-getter. Let’s see what’s more important.
Jerry –
If you were really pro-life, then you would create a new political party also. The Republican establishment is happy with abortion as an issue. They are not concerned about actually ending the reign of terror under the Roe Case.
Why do I know this? Because if the Republicans were serious then they would have taken action back in 1980 to do something about the situation, or at some point since then. The court that gave us Roe had 7 Republican appointees, including the chief justice. They didn’t spring from nowhere, but instead, represented the views of the majority of the Republican establishment then and since.
What could Republicans have done? They could have stripped abortion from the jurisdiction of federal courts. They could have amended the Constitution. Republican administrations could have declared the Roe ruling an affront to federalism and the separation of powers and refused to allow DOJ resources to be used for its enforcement. Republicans at the state level could have provoked a Constitutional crisis by refusing to keep the abortion mills open in defiance of state law.
In short, we could have fought. But we didn’t. Instead, Reagan appointed Sandra Day O’Conner and cemented the pro-Roe majority. We allowed the Republican establishment to focus us only on the Supreme Court, ignoring the other options at our disposal. We allowed them to push us into voting for Presidents we didn’t want, and Senators we couldn’t stand, all in the vain hope that something would be done about abortion. Year after year, nothing was done. First was O’Conner. Then Kennedy, then Souter.
And still we kept lining up to vote for the Republicans, and still we got nothing. This time around, we were assured over and over again that there was no abortion ‘litmus’ test for Roberts and Alito. Bush told us he didn’t know how they would decide on abortion issues. Is he lying? Or is he being cagey, because the important thing is to preserve this issue for the Republicans?
Did Bush appear in person at the pro-life rallies over the weekend? No, he called in as is usual. He wouldn’t want to appear extreme, you see. While he was on the phone, I’m sure his pro-abortion wife Laura was on the phone with Republicans for Free Choice to assure them that the Republican Party is a ‘big-tent’ with lots of room for them.
Am I bitter? Sure, I’m bitter. I’m tired of Christians being taken for granted by the Republican Party. I’m tired of having well-meaning pro-life homeschoolers at my door every election to get me to vote for Republicans to ‘save babies.’ Well, I’ve been doing that for 20 years, and I doubt it has saved any babies.
I want a party that will actual fight for its base, not one that will ignore it. That is why I jumped ship in 2004 and voted Constitution Party. I’m sick of the abuse.
Glen why do you assume I’m Republican?
Jerry –
Based on your past posting history, I assumed you are a Republican. You are certainly no Democrat (which is not a bad thing.) If you are an independent/member of a 3rd Party – then good for you! I have maintained my Republican Party affiliation, though my presence at party events tends to cause a stir.
My son Joshua and I enjoyed meeting and talking with you at the conference.
Hope to see you again.
Blessings,
Galen
Galen,
Welcome to the blog! Good to meet you and Joshua as well. God bless your good work.
Fr. Hans