Ben Johnson

,

Sen. Cruz: Democrats support ‘abortion no matter what the consequences, no matter what the context’

Ben Johnson
Ben Johnson
Image

DALLAS, June 28, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Senator Ted Cruz had strong words for Democrats this morning, lambasting them for turning a blind eye to forced abortion and the crimes committed by late-term abortionists like Kermit Gosnell and Douglas Karpen, and favoring a policy of abortion "no matter what the consequences, no matter what the context."

The media and the Obama administration follow a “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy when it comes to late-term abortion atrocities, the senator told an enthusiastic crowd of pro-life activists at the National Right to Life Convention in his native Texas.

Referencing Gosnell, Cruz said, “I was proud to stand with Senator Mike Lee condemning those horrific crimes and calling for an investigation in the Senate for other late-term abortionists in this country committing similar atrocities.”

The senator also referenced late-term abortionist Douglas Karpen, whom former staff members have accused of twisting newborn babies' heads off, someone Cruz noted works “in Houston, my hometown.”

Senate Democrats cowered away from a motion to condemn Gosnell's atrocities, because it mentioned abortion. Instead, they sought a bland general condemnation of unsanitary conditions in any medical environment, such as denist offices.

“Apparently a physician having an unsanitary clinic that passes on disease in their mind is morally equivalent to” the actions of “Kermit Gosnell as he took the lives of living, breathing children outside their mother's womb,” he said. “What a sad statement of moral equivalence.”

The senator told the crowd that the right to life is the cornerstone of all governance, one that Barack Obama and the Democratic Party are undermining through an extreme policy that places abortion-on-demand above all other goods – including religious freedom.

The first-term senator called on attendees to reflect on the Declaration of Independence just before the upcoming Fourth of July holiday.

“Without life, there is no liberty. Without life, there is no pursuit of happiness,” he said. “The ability to take life is the ultimate power, and the ultimate deprivation, of our God-given rights.”

Referring to the pro-life and Tea Party movements, he said, “I am inspired that we see Americans standing up – standing up for life, standing up for liberty...standing up for the Constitution.”

One of those first liberties enshrined in the First Amendment is the freedom of religion, something Cruz said the Obama administration undermined by “ordering those who disagree to disregard their rights of conscience, disregard their faith and provide abortifacients or contraceptives” to their employees.

“It wasn't long ago that the Democratic Party was proud to nominate the first two Catholic candidates for president,” he said. “What do you think an Al Smith or a John F. Kennedy would say to a president who says to the Catholic Church, 'Change your faith, or we will shut down your...hospitals'?”

The conservative favorite took advantage of the three-day-long national meeting, which is taking place in the Dallas suburb of Grapevine, to burnish his own pro-life credentials.

Cruz contrasted the actions of a mob of angry protesters in Austin, and of legislator Wendy Davis, who waged a 13-hour filibuster against a pro-life bill, to his own filibuster with Rand Paul and Mike Lee against the use of drones.

“We were filibustering to protect the sanctity of life from arbitrary government destruction,” he said. “When Austin Democrats stood together in their filibuster, they were standing together to protect the ability to carry out late-term abortions, to protect the ability to take yet more lives. What a contrast.”

“If you listen to the media – well, that's your first mistake,” he joked. “But if you listen to the media, those rowdy protesters were adopting a popular view. Yet the simple reality is 62 percent of Texans oppose late-term abortions after 20 weeks. Over 80 percent of Americans oppose abortions in the third trimester. And one of the sad consequences of the Culture of Death we have seen is that the policies in this country are extreme.”

Click "like" if you want to end abortion!

Cruz, whom NRLC says has earned a 100 percent pro-life voting record in the Senate, also rapped Senate Democrats for refusing to condemn forced abortion in China.

“China has aborted some estimated 300 million children – 300 million, the population of the United States,” he said.

“Regardless of your views on the right to life,” he stated, “you should be united against the horrific evil that is the practice of forced abortions, that is the practice of the government saying to a mother, 'We will force you to abort your child.'”

Cruz lamented, “When that came to the floor of the senate, it was defeated, as the Democrats stood together embracing their policy of abortion no matter what the consequences, no matter what the context.”

Despite these positions, many Democrats tell their constituents they are moderates on the issue of life, Cruz said.

“As you know, Harry Reid does not like for Senators to vote,” he stated, “because he wants to prevent his Democrats from having to make uncomfortable votes.”

“Truth and light has a way of counteracting those representations back home,” he said.

In concluding his speech to the conference – built around the theme “Winning for Life in 2014” – Cruz saluted the work of crisis pregnancy centers and 40 Days for Life specifically, for “explaining the consequences, explaining it not in anger but in love.”

He said the task facing the pro-life movement is to win the national argument over abortion and instill a “culture of life” against the reigning “culture of death.”

“There's nothing we need to do more than persuade our fellow Americans that there is nothing more precious than an infant child, and that every infant child has a right to life, a right to breathe, to live, to work towards a better tomorrow,” Cruz said. “In Texas last year, 80,000 children were aborted. That will change only when we persuade our fellow Americans to embrace an historic culture of life.”

In an announcement released on the same day as his NRLC speech, Senator Cruz confirmed he will be speaking at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., in October. 

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, , , ,

The first pro-abortion Republican enters the 2016 presidential race

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

EXETER, NH, May 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The large and expanding field of would-be Republican presidential candidates grew by one today, as George Pataki became the first GOP presidential hopeful this election season to openly support abortion-on-demand.

The 69-year-old long-shot candidate also has a history of supporting homosexual legislative causes.

In the weeks leading up to his formal announcement, George Pataki took out TV ads asking Republicans to refrain from talking about abortion and gay “marriage,” branding them “distractions.”

“In 12 years [as governor], I don’t think I talked about that issue twice,” he once said of abortion.

On same-sex “marriage,” he says, “I think, leave it to the states. I don’t think it’s a role in Washington.”

However, Pataki has a long history of enacting the homosexual political agenda as governor of New York from 1994-2006. He signed a “hate crimes” law that added the words “gay” and “lesbian” to New York state law for the first time.

He signed the Sexual Orientation Nondiscrimination Act (SONDA), which prohibits business owners from “discriminating” against homosexuals in housing or hiring, with an exemption only for religious institutions.

He also added sexual orientation to state civil rights laws, alongside such immutable characteristics as race and sex, in an apparent quid pro quo for a gay activist group's endorsement in his last run for governor. The New York Times reported that, under pressure from Pataki, then then-Senate Majority Leader “shifted his position on the bill as part of what is tacitly acknowledged, even by Senator [Joseph] Bruno's senior aides, to have been a deal to win an endorsement for Governor Pataki from the state's largest gay rights group, the Empire State Pride Agenda.”

After the LGBT activist group endorsed Pataki in 2002, citing a long list of his service to the homosexual political cause, Pataki personally lobbied senators for the bill's passage, then signed it into law that December.

Coupled with his stance on gun control, environmentalism, and other issues, he stands well to the left of the Republican mainstream.

The three-term governor of New York, who belongs to the Roman Catholic Church, took his own advice by largely avoiding social issues today. The closest he came was his vow, “I'd repeal oppressive laws like ObamaCare and end Common Core.”

He added that he would “fire every current IRS employee abusing government power to discriminate on the basis of politics or religion. That is not America!”

Otherwise, Pataki's announcement speech hewed to stand pat Republican issues like reducing taxes, shrinking the number of federal employees, increasing military spending, and supporting entrepreneurship.

He began by thanking his supporters, in English and Spanish.

Smiling, his head pivoting between twin teleprompters, he said, “Let me tell you some of the things I'd do right away to get oppressive government off the backs of Americans.”

He would institute a lifetime ban on congressmen acting as lobbyists after they leave office. “If you ever served one day in Congress, you will never be a lobbyist,” he said. He favors forcing Congress to live under the laws it passes, so there will be “no special rules for the powerful.”

He cited his history of cutting taxes, reducing welfare rolls, and leaving his state with billions of dollars in surplus. “That's what our policies can do,” he said. “I know we can do the same thing for the United States.”

In recent weeks, he has called for a more interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East. Today, he reminded his audience that he was governor of New York in 9/11. “I will not fear the lesson of September 11,” he said. “To protect us, first we must protect the border,” he said – an unexpected phrase, as Pataki supports amnesty for the at least 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

“We will stand with our ally, Israel, a democracy on the front lines of terror and barbarism,” he said.

Like former Sen. Rick Santorum, who announced he is running for president yesterday, Pataki agreed that “if necessary, American forces will be used to actually defeat and destroy ISIS on the ground – although he promised not to become “the world's policeman.”

Some of his campaign promises drew skepticism, such as seeking to develop self-driving cars and to cure Alzheimer's disease and cancer within the next decade.

The speech's venue was chosen deliberately by Pataki, who considered entering the presidential race in 2000, 2008, and 2012. The town of Exeter, New Hampshire, claims to be the founding place of the Republican Party. (Ripon, Wisconsin, makes a similar claim.)

More importantly, the first-in-the-nation primary skews more libertarian on social issues than evangelical-dominated Iowa and South Carolina, so Pataki has essentially staked his candidacy on doing well in New Hampshire. Fellow pro-abortion Republican Rudy Giuliani made a similar bet in 2008, banking on a good showing among transplanted New Yorkers in the Florida primary. He left the race after finishing a distant third.

Short of a stunning upset in the Granite State, Pataki has little chance of breaking through the pack this year. A Fox News poll ranks him dead last among 16 announced and potential candidates. Holly Bailey of Yahoo! News said, “George Pataki would never say this, but you do have to wonder if he's sort of, maybe, gaming for vice president.”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Pataki is not the first “pro-choice” Republican to run for president.  Giuliani (who supported partial birth abortion) and Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore (another potential 2016 candidate, who supports abortion during the first trimester) ran in 2008. Twelve years earlier, both California Gov. Pete Wilson and Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter supported abortion-on-demand. Arlen Specter later left the party and became a Democrat.

In 1988, General Alexander Haig opposed a human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution. So did Texas Gov. John Connally in 1980.

George H.W. Bush supported abortion and voted for Planned Parenthood funding early in his career but changed his position by the time he ran for president the second time, in 1988.

President Gerald Ford was the last Republican nominee to proclaim himself “pro-choice.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Steve Jalsevac / LifeSiteNews
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

, , , ,

Ireland ‘defied God’ by voting for gay ‘marriage’: Cardinal Burke

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

OXFORD, May 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Cardinal Raymond Burke lamented how formerly Catholic Ireland has gone further than the pagans in the pre-Christian days of old and “defied God” by calling homosexual behavior “marriage” in the referendum last week.

“I mean, this is a defiance of God. It’s just incredible. Pagans may have tolerated homosexual behaviours, they never dared to say this was marriage,” he told the Newman Society, Oxford University’s Catholic organization, in an address Wednesday about the intellectual heritage of Pope Benedict XVI. The Tablet, Britain’s liberal Catholic newspaper, reported his remarks.

On Friday, 1.2 million Irish people voted to amend the country’s constitution to say: “Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.” A little over 734,000 people voted against the proposal. 

Burke said that he could not understand “any nation redefining marriage.”

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

The cardinal also emphasized the important role that parents play in protecting their children in a culture increasingly hostile to God’s laws. “The culture is thoroughly corrupted, if I may say so, and the children are being exposed to this, especially through the internet,” he said. One practical piece of advice that he offered families was to put computers in public areas to prevent children from “imbib[ing] this poison that’s out there.”

During the same Oxford visit, but during a homily at a Mass the day before, Burke called marriage between a man and woman a “fundamental truth” that has been “ignored, defied, and violated.”

Burke warned during the homily of the dangers of “various ideological currents” and of “human deception and trickery which strives to lead us into error.”

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
John Stonestreet

,

Why young Christians can’t grasp our arguments against gay ‘marriage’

John Stonestreet
By John Stonestreet

May 28, 2015 (BreakPoint.org) -- For five years, Dr. Abigail Rine has been teaching a course on gender theory at George Fox University, an evangelical school in the Quaker tradition.

At the beginning of the semester, she tells her students that “they are guaranteed to read something they will find disagreeable, probably even offensive.”

Writing at FirstThings.com recently, she related how five years ago it was easy to find readings that challenged and even offended the evangelical college students “considering the secular bent of contemporary gender studies.”

But today, things are different. “Students now,” she says, “arrive in my class thoroughly versed in the language and categories of identity politics; they are reticent to disagree with anything for fear of seeming intolerant—except, of course, what they perceive to be intolerant.”

And what do they find “intolerant”? Well, in her class, an essay entitled “What is Marriage?” by Sherif Girgis, Robert George, and Ryan Anderson, which was the beginning of the book “What Is Marriage?: Man and Woman: A Defense.”

In their article, Girgis, George, and Anderson defend what they call the conjugal view of marriage. “Marriage,” they write, “is the union of a man and a woman who make a permanent and exclusive commitment to each other … that is naturally fulfilled by bearing and rearing children together.” They defend this view against what they call the “revisionist view” of marriage, which redefines marriage to include, among other things, same-sex couples.

“My students hate it,” Dr. Rine wrote. They “lambast the article.” “They also,” she adds, “seem unable to fully understand the argument.” And again, these are evangelical students at an evangelical school.

The only argument for conjugal marriage they’ve ever encountered has been the wooden proof-texting from the Bible. And besides, wrote Rine, “What the article names as a ‘revisionist’ idea of marriage—marriage as an emotional, romantic, sexual bond between two people—does not seem ‘new’ to my students at all, because this is the view of marriage they were raised with, albeit with a scriptural, heterosexual gloss.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

As Rine points out “the redefinition of marriage began decades ago” when “the link between sexuality and procreation was severed in our cultural imagination.”

And if marriage “has only an arbitrary relationship to reproduction,” then it seems mean-spirited to Rine’s students to argue that marriage by its very nature excludes same-sex couples.

And where do students get the idea that marriage “has only an arbitrary relationship to reproduction”? Well, everywhere—television, church, school, their homes, in youth groups.

Rine writes, “As I consider my own upbringing and the various ‘sex talks’ I encountered in evangelical church settings over the past twenty years, I realize that the view of marital sex presented there was primarily revisionist.”

In other words, once you say, “I do,” you get “the gift” of sex which is presented as “a ‘gift’ largely due to its [erotic], unitive properties, rather than its intrinsic capacity to create life.” Even in the Church, children have become an optional add-on to married life rather than its primary purpose.

What can we do to win back our children, our churches, and the culture? In our recent book “Same Sex Marriage,” Sean McDowell and I lay out a game plan. We offer strategies for the short-term and the long-term, with the ultimate goal: re-shaping the cultural imagination towards what God intended marriage to be, starting with the church. Come to BreakPoint.org to pick up your copy.

As Chuck Colson once said in a BreakPoint commentary about marriage, “We Christians are very good at saying ‘No.’ But we’ve got to get better at saying ‘Yes’: showing how God’s plan for humanity is a blessing. That His ways, including faithful, life-giving marriage between one man and one woman, lead to human flourishing physically, emotionally, and spiritually.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Reprinted with permission from Break Point.

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook