Abortion holocaust anniversary: 50 million dead

By Krista Kafer (krista555@msn.com) On January 22, 1973 the Supreme Court struck down most state laws protecting unborn children in the notorious Roe vs. Wade decision. Thirty-four years and 50 million lives later, there seems to be no end in sight for this American holocaust. New “uses” for unborn children as scientific guinea pigs does not bode well; as Eli Whitney’s cotton gin accelerated the demand for slaves, new “uses” for unborn children will likely increase the death toll. Although legislative victories have reduced the incidence of abortion since the late 1990’s, new technology could unleash the demand for human life.

Recent articles foretell a dark road ahead of science used to create and exploit human life. A chilling January Economist article described how scientists are using cloning technology to create human embryos and fusing them with cells from other species. Less macabre but more tragic, a U.S. News and Weekly Report article heralds pre-implantation testing on in vitro embryos to “weed out” those with genetic diseases. Such tests, however, are “increasingly… being used for choices that are less clearly beneficial to the child” such as sex selection,” the article states. The implication here is that death is a benefit to a disabled child but not one for simply being a girl or a boy.

Another January article in U.S. News said that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists are now recommending that all pregnant women receive screening to check for Down syndrome in the first trimester “allowing plenty of adjustment time… or an opportunity for an early abortion.” Again, the use of science to “weed out” disabled children is heralded as a good thing. While the magazine may quibble with less noble reasons to snuff out a life, the distinction is quite arbitrary. Whether a child dies because of her gender, disability, or the timing of her conception, she joins the yearly million casualties of choice.

Dem payoff to big labor & teacher union

Democrats in control of the Colorado House, ignoring Gov. Bill Ritter's inaugural criticism of narrow-interest legislation, are racing to put on his desk a pair of bills that empower organized labor and the teacher union at the expense of workers and parents. Both bills sailed through committee this week on party-line votes and are up for approval by the full House on Friday morning. Insiders say Senate Democrats will then speed them to Ritter for signature before January is out. Heavy political support for Dems by the AFL-CIO and CEA in 2006 would thus reap an early payoff in 2007.

House Bill 1072, by Rep. Garcia, makes an all-union closed shop far easier for labor bosses to obtain in negotiations with an employer. It removes Colorado's unique protection against coercion of workers to pay union dues -- the Labor Peace Act provision allowing employees to vote before the closed shop is imposed.

House Bill 1041, by Rep. Benefield and Sen. Windels, tightens the top-down, centralized educational conformity that already hinders innovation and flexibility in local districts. It requires any school board seeking a waiver of state-imposed red tape and regulations to get 2/3 approval by the State Board of Education, instead of the simple majority required by current law.

These bills give the lie to Democrats' campaign rhetoric last year about supporting policies that will grow the state's economy, create jobs, and improve learning performance for kids. If passed and signed, they will make Colorado less competitive with other states and nations, economically and educationally.

To voice your opinion about this unwise legislation and the unseemly haste with which it is moving, send an email through the Colorado General Assembly website at www.leg.state.co.us, or call...

House House Senate Senate Democrats Republicans Democrats Republicans 303-866-2346 303-866-5523 303-866-4865 303-866-4866

Killing embryos to further an agenda

By Krista Kafer (krista555@msn.com) Two days after the scientific community heralded the benefits of stem cells taken from amniotic fluid, the US House of Representatives passed Rep. Diana Degette’s bill (again) to use taxpayer funds to kill unborn children for their stem cells, a practice that has yet to produce any benefits.

For the record, the human body creates stem cells from conception to death. These cells are special in that they can become other types of cells like muscle cells or a brain cells. In adults, stem cells are present in the blood, bone marrow, skin, brain, liver, pancreas, fat, and hair follicle. They are also present in the placenta, umbilical cord, and amniotic fluid. Stem cells can be harmlessly culled from these sources to be used in medical experiments to treat diseases such as diabetes and spinal cord injuries.

In November of last year, the Rocky Mountain News reported Swiss scientists had grown human heart valves using stem cells from amniotic fluid. Another article on the same page lauded the use of adult stem cells in mitigating muscular dystrophy in dogs. The dogs were able to walk and jump after being injected with adult stem cells. On January 9, the RMN reported American researchers had discovered amniotic stem cells “have many of the key benefits of embryonic stem cells while avoiding thorny ethical issues.”

The “thorny ethical issue” is that the process of extracting embryonic stem cells kills the donor. That embryonic stem cells cause tumors and other complications in recipients is certainly a drawback. The lack of success in curing or mitigating diseases is another, but the main opposition to using taxpayer funds for embryonic stem cell research is that it kills unborn children. While it is legal to kill children from conception until birth and to sell their bodies or tissues including their stem cells (it is also perfectly legal to donate funds to these endeavors), we, the opposition, do not want to be complicit in the death of innocents by virtue of our tax dollars.

We support non-lethal adult, amniotic, placental, and umbilical cord stem cell research which incidentally is the research with the track record of success. Embryonic stem cell research has so little promise that it cannot attract sufficient private investment. So why, two days after yet another scientific breakthrough regarding non-lethal stem cell research, did the House of Representatives vote to use taxpayer dollars for that which is ineffective and opposed by millions of Americans? Do they not read the papers? Do they not talk with scientists or investors?

Perhaps it is not a question of ignorance. Perhaps it is a question of agenda. To back away from embryonic stem cell research is to admit that there might be something wrong with killing one human being to benefit another. To back away affirms the humanity of the child, an admission unacceptable to the abortion interests that profit in its absence. While the success of non-lethal stem cell therapies gives politicians a perfect out to change their votes, the stakes are too high to permit what may seem like a change of heart.

Sizing up the Owens years

(Andrews in Denver Post, Jan. 7) Bill Owens, you done good. Colorado is going to miss you. That’s my verdict on Colorado’s 40th governor as he leaves office Tuesday. We’ve been friends and allies (as well as infrequent adversaries) for over two decades, back to his days in the state House and mine at Independence Institute. Owens’ eight years as chief executive have seen our state thrive despite challenges. His honorable and capable leadership will wear well in history.

A free society is not defined by its government, let alone by any government official. To make politics the totality of our lives is the road to serfdom. It is people one by one, individually and with voluntary cooperation, who define America. Even to put a president’s name on an era is oversimplification. Still less can a single governor stamp his state’s destiny.

A governor can make a difference, though. That’s why we fight over electing them. And Gov. Bill Owens has made a big difference here. Either of his rivals for the Republican nomination back in 1998, the moderate Senate President Tom Norton or the conservative purist professor, Terry Walker, probably would have lost to liberal Democrat Gail Schoettler. The principles on which Owens has since governed contrast sharply with Schoettler’s – as her column on this page often attests.

Under a Gov. Gail Schoettler – or a Gov. Rollie Heath, the Boulder businessman whom Democrats ran against Owens in 2002 – Colorado would not have seen billions in tax relief, an expansion of our metro and statewide highway system, a school report card with teeth, the growth of public charter schools, and suppression of crime through tough sentencing with added prison capacity.

They would not have signed, as Owens did, bills for parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion, for defense of traditional marriage, for concealed carry of a handgun to protect yourself, for flexibility of health insurance mandates to keep costs down, and for the nation’s most generous voucher to help poor kids escape bad schools. (The state Supreme Court struck down the voucher law, however, in a political bow to teacher unions.)

Speaking of the justices, Schoettler or Heath would not have appointed such constitutionalists as Nathan Coats and Allison Eid. Nor would they have named, as Owens has, scores of appellate and trial judges who resist activism and sympathize with victims not criminals. They never would have defunded Planned Parenthood, or ended the coddling of public employee unions.

The Democrats whom Bill Owens bested for governor would not have cast almost 100 vetoes in the past two years as he did, protecting our liberty and prosperity against unwise bills ordered up by labor, educrats, trial lawyers, environmental extremists, and the minority grievance lobby – wheelhorses of the Democratic coalition.

Asked how his wife was, a man retorted: “Compared to what?” That’s the question in sizing up the Owens years, both for Republicans who are disappointed with him, and for all Coloradans as we welcome a new governor. Bill Ritter, decent but every inch a Democrat, will quickly undo many of the 2005-2006 vetoes and continue left from there. Last summer’s immigration reforms may wither legislatively this winter.

Billy O. will look better and better in retrospect. His bargain on Referendum C, bending but not breaking TABOR, turned off many of us. But Ref C was preferable to any deal Rollie Heath would have made, and we may feel nostalgic for it when Dems move to repeal the taxpayer amendment entirely.

Politics is the art of the possible, despite the occasional philosopher such as former Czech president Vaclav Havel, who titled one book “The Art of the Impossible.” Gov. Bill Owens gets pretty high marks for making the best of his circumstances to the benefit of our state. Godspeed, sir.

New Year's Resolutions for Republicans

Earnest resolutions to change and do better, upon the occasion of turning a new calendar page, don't usually appeal to me. But after a terrible 2006 for the GOP, it's time to sober up and begin anew. Here are five promises to ourselves for 2007 that I believe we ought to make as Republicans : 1- Be as devout as Washington in understanding America as a nation under God.

2- Be as forceful as Lincoln in upholding the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the political religion of the nation.

3- Be as implacable as Churchill in defending the great heritage of Western civilization and the English-speaking peoples.

4- Be as resolute as Reagan in pursuing victory over the Islamofascist enemy in World War III until, in his words, "We win and they lose."

5- Fight fiercely, cheerfully, and relentlessly for our convictions and against our enemies, with one focus each morning: "What can we do to them today?"