$10,000 Challenge to National Right to Life

.

Press Release

$10,000 Cash Offered to Nat'l RTL
from American RTL to name 'one' pro-life justice

See this also at Yahoo Denver Post CovenantNews USA Today etc.

"American Right To Life is offering attorney James Bopp $10,000 for National RTL," said the group's president Brian Rohrbough, "if he can name a single justice on the current U.S. Supreme Court who has ever written, or joined in an opinion, that the unborn child has a right to life, whether in a majority ruling or a dissent."

"In 1981, after president Ronald Reagan agreed he would sign federal personhood legislation for the unborn, National Right to Life and their longtime attorney James Bopp actually opposed that effort claiming they supported a states' rights approach," says the group's site AmericanRTL.org. "A quarter century later notice that NRTL and Bopp have long opposed all state personhood efforts."

On May 13, Colorado pro-lifers turned in 131,000 signatures exceeding by 55,000 the number needed to force a statewide vote to acknowledge in law the personhood of the unborn child.

"National Right to Life has misled the pro-life community to think that this is the wrong time to advocate personhood because we need one more Justice on the Supreme Court to have a pro-life majority," said Rohrbough. "But if we added a Justice who would uphold the right to life of the unborn, then we would have only one such Justice. The failed long-term strategy of regulating the killing of a fetus has left America without a single Justice who knows that it's wrong to kill an unborn baby; National RTL's compromise will never produce a pro-life Supreme Court."

Even Dr. James Dobson, a supporter of the failed regulation strategy admits that: "Ending partial-birth abortion... does not save a single human life." And in an article about NRTL's failed PBA ban, Notre Dame Law School's professor emeritus Charles Rice said, "Every justice now on the court accepts the Roe holding that the unborn child is a non-person... The situation remains as described by Justice John Paul Stevens in Planned Parenthood v. Casey." For Stevens had written that "the Court... rejected, the argument ‘that the fetus is a "person"'. ... there was no dissent..." And Clarence Thomas wrote in his Stenberg dissent that "a State may permit abortion," and Antonin Scalia wrote in Casey, "The states may, if they wish, permit abortion-on-demand..."

"American Right to Life will give a $10,000 cash prize to National if their general counsel James Bopp can name even a single U.S. Supreme Court Justice who has ever written or joined in any ruling or dissent advocating the personhood of the unborn," said Steve Curtis, ARTL's vice president and former chairman of the Colorado Republican Party. "To make their strategy appear successful, National Right To Life has misled the pro-life movement into believing that abortion accomplices like Samuel Alito, John Roberts, Thomas and Scalia are pro-life."

In 2002 Scalia said, "I will... strike down a law that is the opposite of Roe v. Wade. ... One wants no state to be able to prohibit abortion and the other one wants every state to have to prohibit abortion, and they're both wrong..." In 2004 Scalia claimed, "Take the abortion issue... there's something to be said for both sides." And on April 9, 2008 Scalia said, "You want the right to abortion? Create it the way most rights are created in a democracy. Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea - and pass a law."

"National RTL claims success in Antonin Scalia but he is not pro-life; like all the Republicans on the Court, he is a legal positivist, which is a courtroom moral relativist," Rohrbough said. "Like their Dred Scott counterpart that ruled a black man could be owned as property, the current Republican Supreme Court is wicked and will only learn about the right to life of the unborn from the advancing personhood wing of the pro-life movement."

Contact:
National RTL can contact Donna Ballentine
1-888-888-ARTL (2785)
office@AmericanRTL.org

Personhood Makes the Ballot!!!

Unborn Personhood on Colorado Ballot
American RTL Elated at Historic Development

DENVER, May 29 -- "For the first time in forty years of 'legalized' child killing, pro-lifers have moved an entire state to consider the God-given right to life of the unborn," said Brian Rohrbough, president of American RTL. "We thank sponsor Kristi Burton of Colorado for Equal Rights, the 500 participating churches, and Colorado RTL for getting personhood on the November ballot."

Today the Colorado Secretary of State's office validated 103,000 signatures on human life petitions, 27,000 more than required to force a statewide vote. If passed, the Colorado constitution would define 'person' as "any human being from the moment of fertilization."

"Abortion is wrong because it's a baby; it's always wrong to intentionally kill a baby," said Rohrbough, "even when its father is a criminal, as with incest."

American RTL has launched its Colorado personhood campaign with a rebuttal to the so-called 'hard cases' of abortion for incest. "The abortion clinic covers up the crime of incest, and typically sends the victim back home to her rapist," says Rohrbough. "Even worse, they often send her home with her rapist, the criminal who brought her to the clinic."

"There are no 'hard cases'," said Steve Curtis, the group's vice president and former chair of the Colorado Republican Party. "Abortion for incest emboldens a criminal to rape his young relative, helps him escape being caught, tempts him to repeat his crime, and is not compassionate because it kills a baby and increases the woman's suffering." Rohrbough added, "Personhood for the unborn helps people understand there are no hard cases when deciding to protect a baby; you don't kill the baby because her father is a criminal."

"Abortion clinics nationwide refuse to comply with mandatory reporting laws for suspected child rape," said Jo Scott, director of Pro-Life Colorado. "We brought audio taped evidence provided by Life Dynamics of that failure to the Colorado attorney general's office, and they choose to look the other way; personhood for the unborn will reduce crimes against women and children."

"American RTL applauds the dozens of Colorado politicians and candidates who have publicly endorsed the personhood amendment," says AmericanRTL.org, "and urges all Christians, pro-life leaders and organizations to support personhood as the only foundation on which to reverse the de-criminalization of killing unborn children."

Media contact:
Donna Ballentine
1-888-888-ARTL (2785)
office@AmericanRTL.org

CRTL Candidate Questionnaires Released!

Colorado Right to Life has published the responses it has received so far from Congressional and Legislative candidates in Colorado!

They will continue to publish more, as they receive them, and so will we here.

The most disappointing result, so far, is that US Senate candidate Bob Schaffer has not only refused to meet with Colorado Right to Life (early on), but since then has refused to agree to support the Personhood Ballot Initiative, which is now approved to be on the 2008 November ballot!

Schaffer has said he is a pro-life candidate in past races, and maintains a 100% rating from National Right to Life (but so do some pro-aborts!) and has made statements in the past to the effect of believing life begins at conception. Therefore, he cannot have anything to gain by not supporting this -- he's already on record claiming the position. But there is also no reason whatsoever why he would not, could not, or should not support it, especially now that it's approved to be on the ballot. There have been exchanges with American Right to Life in the media about his position on Personhood, as well as his conduct during an investigation in the Marianas Islands, but all that came after he had already refused to support Personhood, and had also refused to speak to American or Colorado Right to Life.

Schaffer believes his past record should speak for itself, even while he is refusing to meet with pro-life groups and actively refusing to support Personhood.

Conversations continue with Schaffer, but for now he remains steadfast in not intending to support Personhood 2008! Pro lifers should urge him to agree to support it.

To not support Personhood is to deny the very Right to Life in the first place. If Life is not a right recognized under law at any age or time, then it's not a right. Life, under the law, would remain a privilege, granted or taken away from innocent Persons by the government, in direct opposition to God's Law.

A chart, listing all the candidates' answers, and a graphic image of the original documents (including notes) can be seen at:
CRTL Candidate Responses.

CANDIDATE RESPONSES
(more posted in later posts, as we get them)

US SENATE

Bob Schaffer (R) - No response (has said he does not support the Personhood Initiative, and repeatedly has refused to meet with us)

US CONGRESS

5th District
Cong. Doug Lamborn (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
Jeff Crank (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
Bentley Rayburn (R) - 100% (7 of 7) (see notes at the link above for his detailed explanation)

6th District
Mike Coffman (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
Ted Harvey (R) - 100% (6 of 7 *see note) EDITOR'S NOTE (8/11): From conversations we have had with Sen. Harvey, it appears he was being intentionally deceptive in his response to question #7 about supporting compromised legislation that undermines the Personhood of the unborn child. Ted answered that he would not support such legislation, but has now confirmed to CRTL board members that he will support compromised child-killing regulations in the future! Therefore, he can only be considered to have responded correctly on 6 of the 7 questions, and we are deeply disturbed by his deception and continued adherence to a regulator mindset.
Wil Armstrong (R) - No response (there is no mention of life issues on his website as of today except for "support for traditional values")
Steve Ward (R) - No response (Steve Ward wrote and passed a bill that would limit or take away certain rights CRTL has exercised to protest abortion, abortionists, or those who build abortion centers -- i.e. the Collaborators Project).


No responses yet from any other Congressional Districts, though some candidates in those districts are just getting started.


STATE SENATE

SD 12 - Keith King (R) - Responded, saying he does not answer questionnaires. Noted his pro-life record.

SD 17 - Katie Witt (R) - Responded, saying she is pro-life but cannot take the survey.




No other State Senate candidates have responded. Only half of the Senate offices are up for election this year, so not all verified pro-life Senators are listed. Also, not every district has a candidate from both parties.



STATE HOUSE

HD 5 - JJ Swiontek (R) - 100% (7 of 7) (see notes at link above)

HD 7 - Josh Raines (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 9 - James Landauer (R) - 100% (7 of 7)
HD 9 - Paul Rosenthal (D) - 0% (0 of 7) - Responded that he disagrees with us, but thanks for asking!

HD 17 - Catherine Jarrett (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 34 - Tom Bopp (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 42 - George Carouthers (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 53 - Donna R. Gallup (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

HD 56 - Muhammad Ali Hasan (R) - 29% (2 of 7) (Respects our organization, sounds open to dialogue, but also somewhat firm in opposition to some of our positions)

HD 65 - Jerry Sonnenberg (R) - 100% (7 of 7)

No other candidates for the State House responded. Every effort has been made to reach them by either mail or e-mail.



Keep in mind that it's very promising to have this many very positive responses! The Republican Party's "typical" candidate even just 5 or 10 years ago would likely have scored only 3 or 4 out of 7. Sadly, many Republican candidates today would score only 3 or 4 still, and some Republican candidates would score a pro-abortion "0". Almost all Democrat candidates would score a "0".

No responses were received from third party candidates, even though a number of them were approached. It may be that they are just starting to get organized.

If your candidate for public office is not on this list, please encourage them to send their responses to the survey questions to the CRTL office, so we can publicize their answers! Please make sure to do this before you commit to support them -- otherwise, pro-lifers will continue to support candidates who are not really pro-life.



Also, two candidates for Delegate to the Republican National Convention replied (NOTE: these candidates were not approached for the questionnaire, so there may be other candidates running for Delegate who did not have the opportunity to answer).

Bill Howerton - 100% (7 of 7) (see notes)
Catherine Jarrett - 100% (7 of 7) (is also a candidate for office, listed above)

Personhood Probably On Nov. Ballot!

Congratulations to all of you volunteers who helped with the Personhood Initiative petition drive!!!

On Tuesday, Colorado for Equal Rights turned into the Secretary of State's Office 131,245 signatures! That's 55,000 MORE than was required, which should give them a good cushion against invalid signatures.

Which all probably means: COLORADO VOTERS WILL BE VOTING ON THE PERSONHOOD OF THE UNBORN CHILD THIS NOVEMBER!!!



One of the most consistent supporters of Personhood, over many years, has been Dr. Alan Keyes, who is still running for President. He sent this statement, when he heard the news:



For Liberty and Our Posterity

A statement by Ambassador Alan Keyes concerning the successful petition drive to place the Personhood initiative on the November ballot

"With the submission of the signatures needed to put the Personhood amendment on the ballot in Colorado this November people all over America have cause to thank God for the dedicated efforts of Coloradans of good heart and conscience whose faithfulness produced this opportunity for truth. Of course, this success also marks the beginning of a major effort to rally spiritual resources and understanding throughout the state for a victory of conscience and American principle in November.

"In the infamous “Roe v. Wade” decision, its author (Justice Blackmun) admitted that recognition of the personhood of the child vitiates the claim to a so-called right to abortion. Tragically, Blackmun ignored the U.S. Constitution’s clear assertion of equality for our posterity (in and beyond the womb). The words of its Preamble declare that the ultimate goal of our constitutional system is to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” These words place posterity’s claim to these blessings on an equal level with our own. They accord it a position of equality utterly inconsistent with the murderous extinction of our offspring at any stage of their lives.

"When the Highest Court in the land ignores and abandons the Constitution’s clearly stated goals, it is necessary and proper for the people to remember whose words and will that document finally represents. “We the people” are the final arbiters of the Constitution’s meaning, especially on those issues that involve the security of liberty itself. This is especially true when an issue involves the integrity and truth of the very principle that allows us to claim the right of self-government: the clear and simple moral premise that we are all created equal and endowed by God (not human choice) with our unalienable rights.

"Like the issue of slavery in the nineteenth century, abortion starkly challenges us to live according to this principle, or else discard it, and with it our claim to unalienable rights and the political liberty founded upon them. This is the challenge the Personhood amendment places before the people of Colorado. As they defend and vindicate the life of posterity in the womb, they will restore and strengthen the premise of God ordained moral equality that is the soul of our republic and the indispensable foundation of our life as a free people."

Alan Keyes

Judie Brown - Philosophical Split, Or Absence of Logic?

Judie Brown, President of the American Life League, and guest speaker at a recent fundraising dinner, hits it out of the park when she writes about why Personhood is the only sensible position for any pro-life group.

This article is reprinted from Judie's blog at the ALL website.


Philosophical Split, Or Absence of Logic?

A couple of days ago a member of the leadership team from Colorado for Equal Rights sent me a link to the NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado home page where I found something remarkable.

You see the pro-abortion forces in Colorado are up in arms, literally, over the personhood effort in the state, and have made the statement: "Changing Colorado’s constitution in such an extreme way could have far-reaching consequences beyond banning abortion, including making it illegal to use of the most effective forms of birth control, restricting in-vitro fertilization, and curbing embryonic stem cell research."

Well, I have to ask, what is so extreme about being consistent in the pro-life struggle to protect the personhood of the human being from the time his life begins, regardless of the manner in which that life begins? Would the pro-aborts like it better if pro-lifers contradicted their principles by arguing that they "take no position on contraception," or "will not oppose in vitro fertilization" or "support exceptions in cases of rape, incest and life of the mother?"

Because if they would be less offended by such inconsistent illogical politically correct positions they need only focus attention on South Dakota or some other legislative effort where consistency is lacking altogether. For as one recent news report stated: "The Wall Street Journal on Monday examined the 'philosophical split' among antiabortion groups over five state ballot initiatives, with some groups supporting only measures that seek to ban abortion, while others are supporting attempts to 'chip away' at abortion rights through initiatives aimed at restricting access or limiting certain procedures."

If you are familiar with this blog you already know where I stand on the "split" but perhaps you have not quite gotten your arms around the reasons why. After all, you might be thinking, "Judie Brown is simply one of those 'all or nothing' pro-lifers who doesn’t get it." Well, my friend, I do get it and that is why I abhor the argument that we can chip away at abortion rights in America in 2008.

Why? Let’s start with 35 years ago when the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton Supreme Court decisions decriminalizing abortion during all nine months of pregnancy. From that moment to this, the split in the pro-life movement has widened as many have inconsistently chosen to add on an exception here and an exception there until, as we all know, we have reached a point where we cannot even outlaw infanticide – partial birth abortion – unless we support a life of the mother exception in the legislation.

What do these exceptions mean to the future of pro-life political efforts to restore personhood to the preborn child?

To put it succinctly, it means that we, at least some of us, are so good at undermining the personhood principle by "chipping away" at the fringes of abortion-murder that we have become extraordinarily efficient at denying that there is anything wrong with this "strategy." It is obvious that many of us simply do not want to do the difficult thing - the right thing - and be consistent in our arguments.

My view is that until we as a pro-life movement decide, from one end of the movement to the other, that we are dedicated to personhood and will oppose abortive birth control, in vitro fertilization and surgical abortion, we are going to spin our wheels. We are going to continue to cut down a small tree here and tinier one there, while thousands of babies continue to die every single day.

Personhood means defending every single human being without excluding a single one; anything less, commonly known as chipping away, is equivalent to opposing ourselves by claiming we are being realistic!

Come on, give me a break! NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado gets it! Why can’t some pro-lifers?

Candidate Questionnaire

We are currently in the process of surveying candidates for their views on crucial life issues. If you have a local legislative candidate running in your area, from any party, and want to make sure we have their name and address so we can send them a questionnaire, please contact Donna at office@coloradorighttolife.org, or call her at 303-753-9394.

Here are the questions currently being circulated to candidates for certain elective offices in Colorado:

Colorado Right To Life: Candidate Questionnaire

Colorado RTL, the largest pro-life organization in the state, has just moved our office across the street from the Capitol. Please consider your responses to the questions below and then mail your answers back to us at 1535 Grant Street, Suite 303, 80203. We will mail voter guides out to registered pro-lifers and post the results of our candidate questionnaires online at ColoradoRightToLife.org. We would like to hear from you before your constituents vote at the Assem bly, so they will benefit from our Pro-life Voters' Guide. The time is short, so please respond as soon as possible. We hope you will answer "Yes" to each of the following fundamental moral questions. Thanks!

Candidate Name: __________________________;

Party: __________________________

Office Sought: __________________________

1. Do you advocate that the government uphold the God-given, inalienable Right to Life for the unborn?

2. Do you agree that abortion is always wrong, even when the baby's father is a criminal (a rapist)?

3. Do you support the 2008 Colorado Personhood amendment effort to define "person" to include any human being from the moment of fertilization?

4. Do you oppose all public funding for Planned Parenthood, the largest and richest organization in the abortion industry?

5. Will you oppose any attempts to allow doctor-assisted suicide and other forms of euthanasia?

6. Will you oppose any research or practice that would intentionally destroy the tiniest living humans (embryonic stem cell research)?

7. Will you refuse to support any legislation that would allow abortion, even if it is a 'pro-life' bill? (i.e. legislation that says "Abortion shall be prohibited unless...")


Colorado RTL opposes every law that regulates the killing of unborn children because, regardless of the intention, such laws:- violate God's enduring command, Do not murder,- merely prune the abortion weed and strengthen its root,- make abortion seem more palatable to the public and politicians,- turn conservative judges increasingly against the Right to Life of the unborn,- will keep abortion legal if Roe v. Wade is merely overturned, and because they- end with the meaning, "and then you can kill the baby."

Colorado RTL is glad to work with you on wording for pro-life legislation, and we have an extensive nationwide network of pro-life organizations, lawyers, and public officials to draw upon. We will, however, oppose legislation and all candidates who would authorize the intentional killing of the innocent. Since we're two doors north on Grant Street from the Capitol, we invite you to call us at 303 753-9394 and arrange to come by and meet our officers to discuss strategy for ending legalized abortion. Feel free also to just stop by and say hello!

Joe Riccobono

President, Colorado RTL

Personhood and Judicial Crisis Resolutions

Colorado Right to Life had two petitions circulating at Caucus time, this year.

One of them was the Personhood Resolution, which encouraged Republicans to embrace Personhood as the new standard for the Republican Party, which had long operated by the standard mantra of wanting exceptions for "rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother." These exceptions were specious -- if a baby really has a "right to life" then why would abortion (murder of the innocent) be okay in cases of rape or incest? Where else do we execute the innocent third party because one person committed a crime against a second? And we are wisely advised by pro-life medical professionals that, because abortions take time to do, that it is never medically necessary, nor medically wise, to spend time killing a baby in the womb rather than trying to deliver the baby alive -- i.e. trying to save both, the baby and the mother.

We are pleased to note that in Jefferson County, 65% of Republican voters at the County Assembly supported an abstracted version of our Personhood Resolution (simpler wording, but with the same goal). This may sound like a dishearteningly low number, but pro-abortion Republicans have a strong and vocal presence in the Jeffco GOP, and the Personhood Resolution was a solid step beyond where the Republican Party has long stood. This is a victory!

If you have totals showing votes on Personhood resolutions in other counties, please forward them to us by replying to this post (comment).

_________________________________________________________________

Personhood Resolution

WHEREAS, the God-given right to life from our Creator comes not at birth but at our creation; and

WHEREAS, the state of Mississippi unleashed the "legitimized" killing of unborn children on America in 1966 using the brutality of rape as an excuse, and Colorado then extended that state's crime in 1967 by "legalizing" abortion for rape, incest, and health excuses; and

WHEREAS, in the past twenty seconds, an unborn child in America was killed by a surgical or chemical abortion; and

WHEREAS, in the pro-abortion Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision Republican Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that if "personhood is established, the [abortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed... The [pro-abortion side] conceded as much on reargument"; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the Colorado Republican Party that we support the 2008 personhood amendment sponsored by Colorado for Equal Rights to define "person" to include any human being from the moment of fertilization.

_______________________________________________________________

The other was an effort to educate Republican voters as to the betrayal they have suffered at the hands of unprincipled compromisers in the Republican Party. As they say, you can't overcome a great challenge until you admit that it exists. Here is the wording of the other Resolution:

Colorado RTL Report for Candidates:U.S. Judicial Crisis

Colorado RTL is informing pro-lifers politicians and candidates of a crisis among the federal judiciary. For 35 years, pro-lifers have hoped that by electing pro-life presidents such as Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and George W. Bush, America would get judges who support the God-given right to life of the unborn. Justices, who we all hoped were pro-life, have made it increasingly clear that they are not.

Antonin Scalia has publicly stated that he would strike down any law that prohibited abortion in all fifty states, and Clarence Thomas has ruled that the public has the right to decide to legalize the killing of unborn children. Sadly, not even one of the seven current U.S. Supreme Court Justices nominated by Republican presidents support the right to life of the unborn.

Further, our pro-life presidents have nominated sixty percent of the U.S. federal judiciary, and yet the judiciary utterly rejects the right to life of the unborn. Also we should remember that the pro-abortion Roe v. Wade decision was written by a Republican Justice and passed by the Republican majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, and abortion was legalized in Colorado by Republican governor John Love in 1967.

Colorado RTL is educating pro-life politicians and candidates to the sobering judicial crisis because it tells us that the status quo strategy of regulating abortion over the last decades is leading to a judicial culture exactly the opposite of what the pro-life movement had expected. When we ask judges to uphold abortion regulations, that very request moves "our own" judges to accept that the government has the right to regulate the killing of children, which they do by upholding the pro-life movement's own initiatives.

Thus Colorado RTL advocates enforcement of the God-given right to life and promotes the Personhood strategy to end legalized abortion in America!