Life Marriage & Family Religious Liberty

Posts Tagged ‘Legislature’


Legislators Stand for Life

Posted in Life on: April 13th, 2012
  • Share

On Tuesday, April 10, the Arizona House of Representatives passed HB 2036 by a vote of 37-22. HB 2036, called “The Mother’s Health and Safety Act”:

  • Prohibits abortion after 20 weeks because of the safety risks to the mother and the pain endured by the preborn child.
  • Ensures women have an ultrasound at least 24 hours prior to an abortion.
  • Establishes an informed consent website which details the facts about fetal development, risks of abortion, and services available.
  • Requires doctors performing surgical abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within thirty miles of the abortion facility.

Over the course of the one-hour floor debate, several members gave very heartfelt speeches as they explained their votes. Here are a few of the highlights.

(more…)

Continue reading Legislators Stand for Life

ACTION ALERT: We Need Your Help Countering Planned Parenthood’s Attacks!

Posted in Life on: March 13th, 2012
  • Share

CAP-supported pro-life legislation needs YOUR help this week! The Mothers’ Health and Safety Act, HB 2036, sponsored by Representative Kimberly Yee will be heard on the Senate floor this week.

Planned Parenthood supporters have inundated legislators with attacks on this important legislation.

We need your help to counter these distortions with truth!

This bill:

  • Prohibits abortion after 20 weeks because of the safety risks to the mother and the pain endured by the preborn child.
  • Ensures women have an ultrasound at least 24 hours prior to an abortion.
  • Establishes an informed consent website which details the facts about fetal development, risks of abortion, and services available.
  • Requires doctors performing surgical abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within thirty miles of the abortion facility.
  • Informs women about perinatal hospice and other support options available in the event their child is diagnosed in utero with a disability.

Pro-life legislators need to hear from you! Even though this legislature has consistently voted pro-life, nothing can be taken for granted.

ACTION NEEDED:

  1. Click here to contact your Senator to encourage them to stand strong for life! Thank them for their commitment to life, if applicable. If you’re not sure how your legislator has voted on pro-life legislation in the past, check out last year’s voting records here.
  2. Forward this email to a friend, encouraging them to stand for life.
  3. Pray for this and other CAP-supported legislation. Without the Lord, victory is impossible.
  4. Track the progress of all CAP-supported legislation on our Bill Tracker and Facebook Page.  

Arizona has made immense progress recently to protect women and the preborn. Let’s keep the momentum going by showing our support for life this week!

A

Continue reading ACTION ALERT: We Need Your Help Countering Planned Parenthood’s Attacks!

Limiting Religious Liberty

Posted in Religious Liberty on: April 1st, 2011
  • Share

CAP-supported Senate Bill 1288, which says that professionals cannot lose their state-issued license or accreditation because of the free exercise of their religion, came under some fire during a floor session in the state House earlier last week. Opponents of the bill claimed the bill was broad and said its provisions went too far.

Is this a broad bill?

Yes, it is.

That’s because our religious liberty under the federal and state constitutions is broad.  Our Founding Fathers recognized the important contribution that religion makes to a free society and sought to ensure that religious freedom would be safeguarded and cherished.

Religious liberty is not something that the government may artificially limit by deciding whose ideas are acceptable and whose are not. And religious beliefs are not something that professionals should have to leave by the wayside in order to be licensed by the State. In fact, many professionals are motivated by their faith to enter their chosen professions.

SB 1288 recognizes that true religious freedom means that a person may incorporate his or her religious beliefs into his or her professional life.

Now, there is a limit – the bill does not authorize criminal conduct, regardless of whether it is motivated by religion.

But beyond that, the idea that a few “bad apples” may abuse religious freedom – or any other freedom for that matter – is not a reason to limit or take away that freedom for everyone.  SB 1288 protects professionals from having to choose between their faith and their profession.

Continue reading Limiting Religious Liberty

Who’s in Charge?

Posted in Life on: March 25th, 2011
  • Share

This week, I had the opportunity to testify in support of a strike-everything amendment for SB 1169.* In effect, what this bill will do is clarify that the Board of Nursing, which was created by the state Legislature to provide rules and regulations for Arizona’s nurses, is subject to the authority of the Legislature.

This seems like common sense – like an employer clarifying that he is in charge of his employees. But, unfortunately, this is necessary after the Board made a ruling that nurse practitioners could perform surgical abortions, even though state law already says they cannot. Based on the Board’s unlawful ruling, the Arizona Nurses’ Association has filed a brief in court arguing that the court should strike down the state law.

The Legislature has made several laws that prohibit non-doctors from performing abortions because of the importance of protecting the health and safety of women in Arizona. The first was passed in 1999 as part of regulations after Lou Anne Herron died in an Arizona abortion clinic. Two additional specific laws were passed in 2009 in response to the Board of Nursing’s contrary ruling. At least forty-one other states have similar laws.

SB 1169 is simply reasserting the Legislature’s authority over this issue in light of the argument the nurses are making in court. The Legislature is clarfiying who is really in charge.

After I spoke in favor of the bill, Planned Parenthood rolled out their tired talking points, that abortion is “safe” and that this bill was “anti-woman.” Of course that ignores the obvious fact that the sponsor is a woman and many of its most ardent supporters are women (like me) who care deeply about the harm that abortion does to women. I encourage you to view the comments of several of the representatives on the committee who did a great job of explaining why this bill is necessary and why Planned Parenthood’s attacks are completely irrelevant.

*A strike-everything amendment adds entirely new text to a bill, often on a different subject than the original bill.

Continue reading Who’s in Charge?

For the Record: CBS Missed the Point

Posted in Marriage & Family on: March 25th, 2011
  • Share

Children do best with a mom and a dad.

This is not news to most people, and when you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. The social science data only confirms this, which is why CAP is supporting SB 1188.

Apparently, accuracy on this issue isn’t enough for some of the media. They prefer to sensationalize opponents’ talking points. The favorite arguments are that this bill will stop single adults from adopting children, or that this is about stopping homosexuals from adopting.

But if you were to take a minute to read the bill, you’d see neither of these assertions are true. Nothing in this bill addresses homosexual adults adopting children. Nothing in this bill prohibits single individuals from adopting children.

Here’s what the bill does: It requires agencies placing children for adoption to place the child in the home best meeting the child’s emotional, safety, physical, social, and mental health needs, and consider “relevant factors” for placement that include (in no particular order):

1. Marital status.

2. The child’s birth parents’ wishes.

3. Whether the child has a pre-existing relationship with a single adult, including family members, foster parents, or family friends.

4. Whether the adult has the ability to financially provide for the child.

5. The placement of the child’s siblings.

Then, the bill says that, if all these factors are equal and the choice is between a married man and woman or a single individual, then the child should be placed with the married man and woman.

In committee testimony, Dr. Gary Auxier – a pediatrician for over 30 years – pointed out that all the studies he sees shows that children do best in an intact home led by a married mom and dad. The data is clear. In a 2006 study published in the William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal titled “Bringing Up Baby: Adoption Marriage, and the Best Interests of the Child,” Brad Wilcox and Robin Wilson said “Children appear most likely to thrive socially, emotionally, and educationally when they are reared in an intact or adoptive family headed by a married couple.”

CBS decided to skip this data and the facts, and went with this instead.

For the Record:

• Again, SB 1188 will not stop singles from adopting, it simply provides children the best opportunity to have a mom and a dad.

• In situations where the child has been placed with a single individual serving as a foster parent, then that single individual will be able to adopt the child. SB 1188 clearly says that a relevant factor to be consider is whether the child has a healthy, meaningful relationship already with a single individual.

• SB 1188 is not about homosexual adoption. If we decided to promote legislation to prohibit homosexual adoption, we would clearly state in the bill that same-sex individuals or couples could not adopt children in our state.

• This bill does not take away from the heroic work of single parents. It simply puts the best interest of the child before anything else. When all circumstances are equal, social science data shows that having a mom and a dad is what’s best for kids.

Continue reading For the Record: CBS Missed the Point