I am posting this because I think Illinois is in great trouble and I want to start working on prolife issues in my state. illinoisleader.com/columnists/columnistsview.asp?c=24900JOHNSTON:
There is no such thing as a “pro-life Democrat”
Friday, April 22, 2005
by Charlie Johnston
OPINION - Michael Madigan is one of the most powerful Speakers of the House in Illinois legislative history. When he wants a piece of legislation passed he gets it.
Mike Madigan is pro-life. In the concurrent tenure of Madigan as Speaker and Rod Blagojevich as governor, Illinois has become to abortion what Nevada is to casinos.
If you’re 13 years old and want to get an abortion without mentioning it to Mom, come to Illinois! We don’t care! Are you nine months pregnant and changing your mind? Come to Illinois! We’ll kill the kid for you and help get your Medicaid reimbursement. Attention abortionists! Want to pick up a little extra dough selling the dismembered body parts of your little victims (er, I mean blobs of tissue)? Come to Illinois! We won’t bog you down with hypertechnical legalities.
Of course, ultrasounds have been putting a bit of a dent in the abortion industry. It’s kind of hard to get a girl to approve the removal of a ‘blob of tissue’ or a ‘clump of cells’ when she is looking at a picture of what is clearly a baby. But not to fear. The Illinois House is pushing HB 2492, which would outlaw the use of ultrasounds except by doctor’s orders. The bill is clearly designed to shut down crisis pregnancy centers. Obscenely, its chief sponsor is a Republican, Rosemary Mulligan of Park Ridge.
Just to the east Indiana has just passed legislation which would require abortion clinics to provide expectant mothers with an ultrasound picture of the infant they are about to execute. In Indiana, they want to make sure the girl makes an informed decision. Not here in Illinois! Let’s keep ‘em ignorant so the abortion mills keep churning out the blood profits.
So what’s the deal? Madigan is hyper-powerful, gets what he wants, is pro-life, and yet can’t get the most innocuous of pro-life legislation out of the house.
Even with his abysmal record on the issue, he has prominent pro-life advocates in this state serving as apologists for him. What’s the deal?
The answer is simple. A lot of pro-lifers have fallen for one of the biggest sucker bets in politics - believing we can advance the agenda by electing a ‘pro-life Democrat.’
Now I don’t really want to add to the trauma of people who, when they were children, were eventually disillusioned about the existence of Santa Clause, the tooth fairy, and the Easter Bunny, but duty calls.
There is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. There used to be, just as a very long time ago there really was a St. Nicholas. And there are Democrats who will put on the equivalent of the red suit and fluffy white beard for their interviews with the Illinois Federation for the Right to Life (IFRL) and their visit with the Illinois Citizens for Life (ICL). But when it comes time to actually get bills out of committee or enacted into law, they aren’t there.
To keep the illusion going, Democratic leaders will allow supposedly conservative Democrats to vote with pro-life forces on two occasions - when they already have enough votes to pass the anti-life legislation and want to protect the electability of members from conservative districts and when they would lose the battle even if all the Democrats voted in unison. That’s the deal folks.
The pro-life movement has reached a truly seminal moment. The Culture of Death has always cloaked itself in a veil of lies, but recent events have caused the veil to wear thin.
The government-sanctioned execution of Terri Schiavo has raised profound questions for many people who have not thought extensively about it before. Leaving the decision solely to a spouse who had long since functionally abandoned Terri; claiming that Terri’s wishes were clear on the matter - when no one, including the functionally former spouse, ever mentioned anything about such wishes until seven years after her collapse; refusing to investigate credible evidence of physical abuse: the pro-death crowd can spin these things, but can’t erase the questions that simmer in ordinary peoples minds.
Juxtapose that with the outpouring at the death of the late John Paul the Great. Watching television coverage you could feel the uncertainty radiating from the anchors. They wanted to score him for opposing ‘women’s rights’ (read abortion), but they lacked confidence in their delivery. In the narrative of his many triumphs, the unasked question hung like a spectre over almost every broadcast: what if he was right about this, too?