Monthly Archives: April 2007

SC House Republican leader blocking progress

of Right to Life Act of SC

Republican Chairman of the Constitutional Laws Subcommittee, Rep. Greg Delleney (R Chester) statements indicate he is not intending to hold a public hearing during current Legislative Session ending June 7

Please contact Rep. Delleney immediately, and ask him to hold a public hearing for the Right to Life Act of SC in his Subcommittee as soon as possible, not later than May 10.

Representative F. Gregory “Greg” Delleney, Jr.
District 43 – Chester & York Cos.
www.scstatehouse.net/members/bios/0463636308.html

Contact Address:

(H) P.O. Drawer 808, Chester, 29706
(127 West End, Chester, 29706)
Bus. (803) 581-2211
Home (803) 385-3580

(C) 532C Blatt Bldg., Columbia, 29211
Bus. (803) 734-3074
E-Mail Address: fgd@schouse.org
FAX: (803) 734-2925 (put “To: Rep. Greg Delleney” at the top of the page faxed)

————————————————-

2007:

The Right to Life Act of SC (H.3284) presently has 34 co-sponsors in the SC House.
(not including Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester), chairman of the ConLaws Subcommittee)www.scstatehouse.net/sess117_2007-2008/bills/3284.htm

2005 Background:

Rep. Delleney’s co-sponsorship and defense of the Right to Life Act of SC in the 2005/2006 Legislative Session (H.3213):

Rep. Delleney was a co-sponsor of the Right to Life Act of SC in 2005 (H.3213), and articulately explained and defended the bill in the full House Judiciary Committee on April 5, 2005.

H.3213 – Right to Life Act of SC – 2005/2006 Legislative Session
52 co-sponsors (including Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester), chairman of the ConLaws Subcomm.)
www.scstatehouse.net/sess116_2005-2006/bills/3213.htm

To listen to audio recording of April 5, 2005 full House Judiciary Committee debate on H.3213, when Rep. Delleney articulately explained and defended the Right to Life Act of SC, go to the home page of http://www.christianlifeandliberty.net/ and click on:

SC House Judiciary Committee, April 5, 2005 – H.3213
Following debate, bill passed favorably by vote of 15 – 5 (roll call)

The Attorney General of SC Legal Opinion dated March 30, 2005 stated the Right to Life Act of SC is constitutional on its face, though would have to be adjudicated if applied to abortion. To see the SC A/G’s written opinion, go to # 23 on the ‘RTL Act of SC’ page of http://www.christianlifeandliberty.net/:

Legal Opinion (2005) of South Carolina Attorney General on the Right to Life Act of SC
“Accordingly, it is our opinion that the Right to Life Act is constitutional.”

On the floor of the SC House on April 13, 2005, to the surprise of Columbia Christians for Life and Voice of the Unborn, Rep. Delleney acting as floor manager for the bill, accepted what appeared to be a pre-arranged agreement with a pro-abortion House member, to amend the Right to Life Act of SC with a rape exception amendment for the so-called “morning-after-pill.”

As explained in the Roe v Wade decision itself, exceptions to “personhood” undermine the legal concept and strategy of fetal “personhood.” The 1973 Roe text clearly stated that if fetal personhood was established, then the abortion argument would collapse. This rape “exception amendment added on the SC House floor, was therefore a “fatal flaw” to the bill. The bill passed the full SC House by a vote of 95 – 18 on April 13, 2005 with the rape exception amendment.

Is Rep. Greg Delleney still a supporter of the Right to Life Act of SC in 2007, or has he changed his position ? Rep. Delleney’s present obstruction of the progress of the Right to Life Act of SC is just the latest example of SC House and Senate Republican leadership opposition, resistance, and obstruction to ending abortion in South Carolina by passing the Right to Life Act of SC, which was first introduced in February 1998.

The 2007 Republican-majority make-up of the SC House is 73 Republicans and 51 Democrats.
www.scstatehouse.net/html-pages/house2.html

For more on the long-term history of obstruction of passage of the Right to Life Act of SC BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN-MAJORITY LEADERSHIP, go to the ‘RTL Act of SC’ page of http://www.christianlifeandliberty.net/ and read:

Right to Life Act of SC – news conference and “Jesus Christ is Lord of the Gates” pro-life rally – Jan. 17, 2006
www.christianlifeandliberty.net/H3213-S111-1032.doc

Present SC House Republican-majority Leaders who are not co-sponsors of H.3284 include:
www.scstatehouse.net/html-pages/houseinfo.html

Speaker of the SC House Rep. Bobby Harrell (R-Charleston)
Speaker Pro Tempore of the SC House Rep. Doug Smith (R-Spartanburg)
House Majority (Republicans) Leader Rep. Jim Merrill (R-Berkeley & Charleston Cos.)
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Harrison (R-Richland)
House Constitutional Laws Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester)

Once again, as in 2001, 2004, and 2005/2006, it appears that “the Republican Leadership ‘Fix’ is In” to continually perpetuate government-protected child-murder-by-abortion
___________________________________

Further 2005 Background:

Report on Right to Life Act of SC (H.3213) passing Constitutional Laws Subcommittee (with Rep. Delleney’s affirmative vote) on March 31, 2005:

‘Take Action to Pass the RTL Act of SC’ – April 1, 2005
South Carolina’s pro-life bill to end “legalized” abortion (SC House bill H.3213)
On Thursday, March 31, the RTL Act of SC (H.3213) passed the Constitutional Laws Subcommittee, on a 3 – 0 vote ! Rep’s Delleney, F.N. Smith, and Hagood voted for the bill. Rep. Harrison abstained. (Rep. Coleman was not present.)
www.christianlifeandliberty.net/H3213-201.doc

Report on Right to Life Act of SC (H.3213) passing the full Judiciary Committee (with Rep. Delleney’s affirmative vote) on April 5, 2005:

‘Take Action to Pass the RTL Act of SC’ – April 7, 2005
South Carolina’s pro-life bill to end “legalized” abortion (SC House bill H.3213)
On Tuesday, April 5, the RTL Act of SC (H.3213) passed the House Judiciary Committee on a 15 5 vote !
We give praise and all glory to the Lord Jesus Christ for the bill’s progress !
www.christianlifeandliberty.net/H3213-252.doc

_______________________________________

Why did Rep. Delleney co-sponsor and defend the Right to Life Act of SC in 2005 (H.3213), and now in 2007, he has noticeably not signed on as a co-sponsor to H.3284 (the same exact bill as H.3213 as introduced), and he is now stating his intention not to even hold a public hearing for the bill in the Constitutional Laws Subcommittee, which he chairs ?!

Please contact Rep. Delleney immediately, and ask him to hold a public hearing for the Right to Life Act of SC in his Subcommittee as soon as possible, not later than May 10.

“And the LORD said … I will harden Pharoah’s heart, and multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt. But Pharoah shall not hearken …, that I may lay My hand upon Egypt, and bring forth Mine armies, and My people …, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments. And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch forth Mine hand upon Egypt, and bring out the children of Israel from among them.”

Exodus 7:1,3-5

Hallelu-Yah !

Steve Lefemine, pro-life missionary
dir., Columbia Christians for Life
PO Box 50358
Columbia, SC 29250
(803) 765-0916
www.ChristianLifeandLiberty.net
www.RighttoLifeActofSC.net
April 29, 2007

AGAIN ! – Pro-abort, CFR-member John McCain votes for federally-funded embryo destruction

AGAIN ! – Pro-abort, CFR-member, Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain (R-AZ) voted AGAIN ! for federally-funded embryo destruction – destroying early human life with taxpayer dollars

U.S. Senator John McCain, Republican candidate for U.S. President in 2008, who has previously already voted for federal funding of embryonic stem-cell destruction in July 2006 (see link below); and who also already supports “exceptions” to a ban on surgical abortion; has voted AGAIN ! on April 11, 2007 to use federal funds (our taxpayer money) to pay for the destruction of, and experimentation on, human embryos (S.5). See Senate bill S.5 at http://thomas.loc.gov/ for details on the bill and the roll call vote in the U.S. Senate, where S.5 passed by a vote of 63 Yeas (including 17 Republicans) to 34 Nays and 3 Not Voting.

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress – 1st Session

Vote Summary

Question: On Passage of the Bill (S. 5 )
Vote Number: 127
Vote Date: April 11, 2007, 05:53 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5
Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: S. 5 (Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 )
Measure Title: A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research.
Vote Counts:
YEAs 63
NAYs 34
Not Voting 3

———————————————————–

July 18, 2006 US Senate embryonic stem-cell federal funding vote:

Pro-abort, CFR-members, Republican Senators John McCain and Bill Frist vote to federally fund embryo destruction and experimentation
McCain and Frist, possible Republican candidates for U.S. President in 2008, already support “exceptions” to a ban on surgical abortion, and have now, on July 18, also voted to use federal funds (our taxpayer money) to pay for the destruction and experimentation on human embryos (H.R. 810, already passed by Republican-majority US House on May 24, 2005). See H.R. 810 at http://thomas.loc.gov/ for the roll call votes in both the Republican-majority US House, and the Republican-majority US Senate, both of which have now passed H.R. 810). Congressional profile, House and Senate:
http://clerk.house.gov/members/congProfile.html
www.christianlifeandliberty.net/NWO-0602.DOC

On “Meet the Press,” McCain said he had “come to the conclusion that the exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother are legitimate exceptions” to an outright ban on abortions.
www.issues2000.org/Social/John_McCain_Abortion.htm#8

Republican presidential candidate John McCain is member of the global (one-world) government advocacy organization, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), as are other Republican and Democrat 2008 presidential potential/candidates, including Republicans Newt Gingrich (former US House Speaker), and Fred Thompson former U.S. Senator, R-TN); and Democrats Bill Richardson (Governor of New Mexico; former Ambassador to the United Nations), and Christopher Dodd (U.S. Senator, D-CT).

A major plank of the New World Order platform is global population control / reduction (for example, see The Georgia Guidestones, new world order plank # 1), abortion being a primary wicked means to that evil end. This is why the globalist Establishment never wants to “ban” abortion, but will tolerate the faithless failed strategy of incessant incrementalist abortion/murder “regulations” (instead of establishing justice), such as the strategy largely followed by the National Right to Life and Focus on the Family organizations and their state level affiliates. Key persons in National Right to Life and in the Focus on the Family network are members of the conservative / ecumenical “Christian” Religious Establishment’s Council for National Policy (which in cludes Catholics and high-level Masons).

The CFR / NWO Establishment candidates are Mis-leaders – counterfeit, false leaders.

“As for My people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people,they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” Isaiah 3:12

Steve Lefemine, pro-life missionary
dir., Columbia Christians for Life
Columbia, SC
www.ChristianLifeandLiberty.net
www.RighttoLifeActofSC.net
April 13, 2007

_____________________________________

Focus on the Family
citizenlink.com
News Center

www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000004349.cfm

4-11-2007

Senate Lacks Votes to Override Veto on Embryonic Stem-Cell Bill

by Jennifer Mesko, associate editor

In a medical first, adult stem cells shown to cure young diabetics.

The U.S. Senate voted 63-34 today in favor of S. 5, which would allow federal tax dollars to be used as an incentive to destroy human embryos for stem-cell research. President Bush has promised a veto, and 67 votes were needed to override that veto.

“That would be the end of the bill, but not the end of the issue,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee. He said he expects the bill to come up again next year.

Supporters of S. 5, continue to argue that embryonic stem cells hold the most promise for medical breakthroughs and cures.

But in stark contrast to those claims, a study published Tuesday in The Journal of the American Medical Association shows 13 young Brazilians with type 1 diabetes have been able to stop taking insulin shots, thanks to a promising treatment with their own stem cells ­ not embryonic stem cells.

“It’s the first time in the history of type 1 diabetes where people have gone with no treatment whatsoever,” study co-author Dr. Richard Burt of Northwestern Memorial Hospital told The Associated Press.

Carrie Gordon Earll, senior analyst for bioethics for Focus on the Family Action, said it’s time for senators and others to pay attention to the benefits of noncontroversial adult stem cells.

“The Brazilian diabetes research confirms what opponents of destructive embryonic stem-cell research have said for years: we don’t have to destroy young humans to find cures for disease and treatment for injury,” she said.

“We don’t know if embryonic stem-cell research will ever directly benefit patients; however, we do know that research dollars invested into alternative sources of stem cells ­ like the Brazilian study ­ are paying off for patients. That’s where our tax dollars should go.”

Earll said CitizenLink readers who contacted their legislators played a role in protecting life.

“Every call, every e-mail makes a difference,” she said. “You better believe those who advocate destructive embryo research are calling, so it’s critical that pro-life citizens make their voices heard, too.”

© 2007 Focus on the Family.
CitizenLink is a registered trademark of Focus on the Family.
All rights reserved. International copyright secured.
(800) A-FAMILY (232-6459).
Privacy Policy/Terms of Use

US Generals ‘Will Quit’ If Bush Orders Iran Attack

“SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.”

“Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.”

“But General Peter Pace, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said recently there was “zero chance” of a war with Iran.”

The Sunday (UK) TimesFebruary 25, 2007
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece

_____________________________________________

Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:37:41 +0200
From: WPGAW wpgaw@westpointgradsagainstthewar.org
Subject: US Generals ‘Will Quit’ If Bush Orders Iran Attack

Published on Sunday, February 25, 2007 by the Sunday Times/UK

US Generals ‘Will Quit’ If Bush Orders Iran Attack

by Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter in Washington

SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.

Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.

“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”

A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.

“There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”

A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.

The threat of a wave of resignations coincided with a warning by Vice-President Dick Cheney that all options, including military action, remained on the table. He was responding to a comment by Tony Blair that it would not “be right to take military action against Iran”.

Iran ignored a United Nations deadline to suspend its uranium enrichment programme last week. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that his country “will not withdraw from its nuclear stances even one single step”.

The International Atomic Energy Agency reported that Iran could soon produce enough enriched uranium for two nuclear bombs a year, although Tehran claims its programme is purely for civilian energy purposes.

Nicholas Burns, the top US negotiator, is to meet British, French, German, Chinese and Russian officials in London tomorrow to discuss additional penalties against Iran. But UN diplomats cautioned that further measures would take weeks to agree and would be mild at best.

A second US navy aircraft carrier strike group led by the USS John C Stennis arrived in the Gulf last week, doubling the US presence there. Vice Admiral Patrick Walsh, the commander of the US Fifth Fleet, warned: “The US will take military action if ships are attacked or if countries in the region are targeted or US troops come under direct attack.”

But General Peter Pace, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said recently there was “zero chance” of a war with Iran. He played down claims by US intelligence that the Iranian government was responsible for supplying insurgents in Iraq, forcing Bush on the defensive.

Pace’s view was backed up by British intelligence officials who said the extent of the Iranian government’s involvement in activities inside Iraq by a small number of Revolutionary Guards was “far from clear”.

Hillary Mann, the National Security Council’s main Iran expert until 2004, said Pace’s repudiation of the administration’s claims was a sign of grave discontent at the top.

“He is a very serious and a very loyal soldier,” she said. “It is extraordinary for him to have made these comments publicly, and it suggests there are serious problems between the White House, the National Security Council and the Pentagon.”

Mann fears the administration is seeking to provoke Iran into a reaction that could be used as an excuse for an attack. A British official said the US navy was well aware of the risks of confrontation and was being “seriously careful” in the Gulf.

The US air force is regarded as being more willing to attack Iran. General Michael Moseley, the head of the air force, cited Iran as the main likely target for American aircraft at a military conference earlier this month.

According to a report in The New Yorker magazine, the Pentagon has already set up a working group to plan airstrikes on Iran. The panel initially focused on destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities and on regime change but has more recently been instructed to identify targets in Iran that may be involved in supplying or aiding militants in Iraq.

However, army chiefs fear an attack on Iran would backfire on American troops in Iraq and lead to more terrorist attacks, a rise in oil prices and the threat of a regional war.

Britain is concerned that its own troops in Iraq might be drawn into any American conflict with Iran, regardless of whether the government takes part in the attack.

One retired general who participated in the “generals’ revolt” against Donald Rumsfeld’s handling of the Iraq war said he hoped his former colleagues would resign in the event of an order to attack. “We don’t want to take another initiative unless we’ve really thought through the consequences of our strategy,” he warned.

© Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd

___________________________________________

Telegraph.co.uk
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/24/wiran124.xml

Ready for warAmerican armada prepares to take on Iran

8 February 2007: Iran threatens ‘worldwide strike’ if attacked

5 February 2007: Military strikes on Iran would be a disaster, says envoy