Pin it

Monday, December 27, 2010

Pro-Life Events in Raleigh on January 15

North Carolina Right to Life, Inc. will host the 12th Annual Prayer Breakfast for Life on January 15, 2011, at the Holiday Inn Brownstone Hotel and Conference Center, 1707 Hillsborough Street, Raleigh, NC.

(Breakfast begins at 9:30 a.m. - Program 10:00 a.m.)

The cost for the breakfast is $25/person, $40/married couple, $20/students, clergy, and seniors. Payment can be made using MC/VISA/DISCOVER/Check. Call 1-800-392-6275 to register by phone using MC, VISA or Discover. Mail check or money order to NCRTL Events, PO Box 9282, Greensboro, N. C. 27429-0282.


Wayne Cockfield, USMC Retired, Florence, South Carolina, serves on the board of the National Right to Life Committee and works with South Carolina Citizens for Life, a state affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee.  He helped to successfully lobby the U.S. Congress for passage of the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act of 1997, which prevents federal tax dollars from being used to fund the killing of American citizens. He also lobbied successfully for a Medicare bill to ensure that Americans would not be prohibited from using their own money to obtain non-rationed health care and would not be denied medical treatment based on their quality of life.

A Vietnam War veteran, Cockfield stepped on a land mine in 1969 while on river patrol in Quang Nam Province. As a result, he lost both legs, much of the use of his right hand, and suffered numerous internal injuries.

"People with disabilities are often mistakenly considered by others to have a 'poor quality of life,'" Cockfield says. "Assisted suicide is spoken about by people with no serious disabilities. Disabled people do not want to die." Wayne will be the featured speaker at both events.

Reverend Jarrod Scott

Reverend Jarrod Scott, Senior Pastor of Green Pines Baptist Church in Knightdale, will give the Invocation and a reflection.

Alyse 2009.
(Photo-Kim Lancaster)
Alyse Player

Alyse Player,, will be the featured vocalist at both events. Since age 5, Alyse has been singing at many events, competitions, church services and festivals. She has won several local talent competitions, and has received a Top Vocalist Award with a National Competition Company. She was so well received at our events in 2010 that we asked her to be at our events in 2011.

The 2011 Annual Rally and March for Life will immediately follow the Prayer Breakfast at 1:00 p.m. at Nash Square, the corner of Hargett and McDowell Streets in downtown Raleigh, NC. All pro-lifers from across the state are invited to stand up for life and to display proudly your church or school banner in support of life. Our newly elected members of the General Assembly will be in Raleigh that day and will be taking note of our gathering. Come to represent your community as a voice for the voiceless.

The Most Reverend Michael F. Burbidge

Reverend Brent Tysinger

Speakers: The Most Reverend Michael F. Burbidge, Bishop of the Diocese of Raleigh, will give remarks and the Invocation. Reverend Brent C. Tysinger, Pastor of Mt. Pleasant Community Church in Asheboro, will give the Benediction.

Greetings from pro-life elected officials will be read. Information about North Carolina Right to Life's #1 legislative priority will be explained. A challenge will be issued to all pro-lifers to lobby their newly elected members of the NC General Assembly to pass an Abortion-Woman's Right to Know law which is estimated to save every year thousands of North Carolina's unborn children from abortion.

The NC Knights of Columbus Color Guard will present the colors at the Rally and lead the March.  The March for Life will end at Sacred Heart Cathedral with refreshments and an opportunity to get pro-life materials such as pamphlets, precious feet pins, bumper stickers, magnets, etc.  Alyse Player will have her CDs for sale.

For More Information, call: NCRTL at 1-800-392-6275.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010



Christian Action League first alerted North Carolina Right to Life (NCRTL) to an article in the Charlotte Observer about Reverend Exxo's plans to open an assisted suicide facility in Gastonia. We posted an article on this blog.  Then, Christian Action League posted its own article containing additional information to their web site. Please read their article: Click here.


Assisted suicide became an issue in the recent Wake County murder case in which Patrick Hare was convicted of murdering Matthew Silliman.  This case is a further illustration of the problem that exists in our state because North Carolina has no law banning assisted suicide.  Hare's attorney suggested to the jury that Hare had assisted Silliman in committing a suicide. Read the article by Luanne Williams with the Christian Action League which appeared on their web site on September 30, 2010: Click here.


On October 23, 2011, in Raleigh there will be a Life Conference where end of life and abortion issues will be discussed.  Dorothy Yeung, NCRTL Vice-President, will be one of the featured speakers. While some topics will be discussed like capital punishment which is not one of NCRTL's issues, the majority of the conference will address issues central to our educational and public policy efforts.  Visit their web site to learn more about the speakers and their topics and how to register for the event. Click here.


On January 15, 2011, Wayne Cockfield, USMC Retired from
Florence, South Carolina, will be the featured speaker at the 12th Annual Prayer for Life at the Holiday Inn-Brownstone Hotel and Conference Center at 9:30 AM and Rally for Life being held in Raleigh at Nash Square at 1:00 PM.
Wayne Cockfield successfully helped lobby the U.S. Congress for passage of the Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act of 1997, which prevents federal tax dollars from being used to fund the killing of American citizens. Prior to the enactment of the recent Obama Helath Care Law, he also lobbied successfully for a Medicare bill that assured Americans are not prohibited from using their own money to obtain non-rationed health care, and are not denied medical treatment based on their quality of life.
A Vietnam War veteran, Cockfield stepped on a land mine in 1969 while on river patrol in Quang Nam Province. As a result, he lost both legs, much of the use of his right hand, and suffered numerous internal injuries. "People with disabilities are often mistakenly considered by others to have a 'poor quality of life,'" Cockfield says. "Assisted suicide is spoken about by people with no serious disabilities. Disabled people do not want to die."  (Source: The Nightingale Alliance web site)

All pro-lifers are encouraaged to come hear Wayne make his compelling case against assisted suicide and euthanasia.  Be on watch for all the details coming to the NCRTL web site very soon. Click here.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Assisted Suicide Advocate and Practitioner to Bring His Deadly Business to North Carolina

The Rev. George Exoo, a self-described advocate for assisted suicide, has purchased property in Gastonia, NC where he hopes to assist individuals in killing themselves.  He claims to have helped already more than 100 people to commit suicide, as well as talk people through the process over the phone.  Because North Carolina does not have a law that specifically bans assisted suicide, he views our state and Gastonia, in particular, as an ideal place to assist persons who want to kill themselves.  As he explained to the Charlotte Observer reporter and News 14 Carolina, Gastonia is near the Charlotte International Airport and is close to states like Mississippi, Georgia, Florida, and New York which would allow people easy access to his so-called "right to die" hospice.

North Carolina Right to Life (NCRTL) advocated for a bill several years ago that would have banned assisted suicide in NC.  State Senator James Forrester, a physician, introduced the legislation.  Unfortunately, the chairman of the committee where the bill was referred, had the ear of the Hospice and Palliative Care of the Carolinas that forcefully lobbied against the bill so the bill never got a hearing.  The argument by the Hospice organization was two fold.  First, it was said they thought that the bill would have a chilling effect on doctors' use of morphine to treat pain.  Second, it was argued that NC did not have a problem with people helping others kill themselves, assisted suicide.

Morphine is a controlled substance; therefore, it is easy to get records showing the rise and fall in usage of the drug in every state.  Fortunately for us, there was a study done that showed a direct correlation between the rise in the use of morphine and the strengthening of the laws banning assisted suicide.  Hospice's first argument was easily refuted by the study.  Still, the opponents of the bill would not budge.

Next, NCRTL learned that a documentary called Live and Let Go, An American Death was filmed in NC by a son and daughter showing their father committing suicide with their assistance.  The purpose of the documentary was to make assisted suicide more acceptable.  The documentary won an Asheville Film Festival award and the producers were interviewed on public radio with this writer providing the "right to life" position that those who wish to kill themselves need to receive treatment for depression and help with pain management, not help in killing themselves.

Today, there are reports in the Charlotte Observer and News 14 of the Carolinas that George Exoo, known as "Reverend Death" from the documentary by that name, is planning to set up shop in NC in large part because our state legislature did not act swiftly to ban assisted suicide here.  He thinks it will take him a year to get his place ready for the killing to begin.

The state legislature must act in January 2011, when it reconvenes, to ban assisted suicide. If they do not act then, our state will later find itself fighting off a bill to legalize assisted suicide. Oregon and Washington states have already passed laws legalizing assisted suicide. The next logical step will be the state using our tax dollars to pay for assisted suicides rather than paying for expensive treatments to help cure a variety of illnesses.  This has already happened in Oregon.  If we are not diligent, our state could be next.


Friday, August 20, 2010

UNC Board of Governors Creates 2 Tier System

The UNC Board of Governors is now offering students two Health Plans from which to choose, rather than providing a single Student Health Plan that does not include elective abortion coverage.  One plan allows students to "opt out" of the elective abortion coverage in the Student Health Plan; and, one plan is the original plan which includes abortion coverage.  Regardless of the plan, the fees remain the same. If the UNC System through its insurance provider Pearce and Pearce can provide students with an "opt out" for the elective abortion coverage, they can provide a single plan that does not cover abortion. Those students who "opt" to have abortions can pay for their own abortions out of their own funds. 

The fact that the UNC System continues to keep the elective abortion coverage suggests that they want to make abortion more accessible to the students within the UNC System. As a state supported school system, the UNC University System should not be offering a Student Health Plan that provides elective abortion coverage.

According to a statement by the Board of Governors, "the University previously had hard-waiver student health insurance plans on 11 campuses and offered voluntary plans on another 5 campuses. All of these previous university plans except the one at NC Central University included elective abortion coverage." The current Student Health Plan used as its basis the previous 15 plans that had abortion coverage rather than the NC Central University plan which did not have abortion coverage. 

Their statement also mentioned that the State Employees' Health Plan provides elective abortion coverage.  While it is true that there is coverage for abortion in the State Employees' Health Plan, we maintain that the state should not be in the business of providing elective abortion coverage using our tax dollars. North Carolina Right to Life has been working with pro-life members in the NC House and Senate to get abortion coverage removed from the State Employee's Health Plan. Our efforts are similar to those in 1995 when we worked successfully to get the line item for abortion in the budget reduced to $50,000 and only for abortions to save the life of the mother and in cases of rape and incest.  The life, rape and incest language is consistent with language in the federal Hyde Amendment.

No tax funded government institutions, agencies, etc. should be providing Health Plans which contain  elective abortion coverage.  Statistics compiled by the State of North Carolina show that 32.2% of all abortions performed in NC are performed on young women between the ages of 20-24 and 15.2% between the ages of 15-19.  Additonally, the vast majority of abortions are performed in the counties that contain or are close to the universities that make up the UNC System. 

North Carolina Right to Life urges pro-life citizens to demand that the UNC System not offer any Student Health Plan that provides elective abortion coverage.  While they have shown by their actions that they have the ability to have a plan that excludes abortion coverage, it seems that they currently just lack the will to it.  That is where pressure from the people of this state can make the difference.  You can help them find the will to eliminate the elective abortion coverage from the UNC system wide Student Health Plan. Contact the Board of Governors to make your voice heard on this matter.

For more information about this issue, please visit the web site

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Action Update about Elective Abortion Coverage in Mandated UNC Student Health Plan

Students for Life of America (SFLA) is leading the effort to lobby the UNC System to take elective abortion coverage out of the UNC System's mandatory Student Health Plan.  SFLA has established a website where you can sign a petition, email the Chairman and other members of the Board of Governors to express your disapproval that elective abortion is a covered benefit, and also learn ways to spread the word to your friends, family, and contacts.

North Carolina Right to Life (NCRTL) urges action from everyone affected by this mandated elective abortion coverage.  Take action now.

Watch for further updates.

Friday, August 6, 2010

Senate confirms Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, 63-37

National Right to Life (NRLC) Responds to the Vote to Confirm Elena Kagan
(Source: NRLC Legislative Action Center):

WASHINGTON (Updated August 5, 2010) -- The U.S. Senate confirmed Elena Kagan to serve as an associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 63-37, on August 5, 2010.

Voting in favor of confirmation were 58 Democrats and five Republicans. Voting in opposition to confirmation were 36 Republicans and one Democrat. To view the official roll call, click here

What follows is part of the text of NRLC's earlier action alert in opposition to Kagan's confirmation:

The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) is opposed to the confirmation of Kagan to the Supreme Court. President Obama nominated her to replace Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired in June.

In a June 23 letter to senators, posted here, NRLC noted that recently released documents from a period (1995-99) in which Kagan was an aide to President Clinton "reveal Ms. Kagan to have been a key strategist -- perhaps, indeed, the lead strategist within the White House -- in the successful effort to prevent enactment of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act during the Clinton Administration. . . . Ms. Kagan played a key role in keeping the brutal partial-birth abortion method legal for an additional decade." In this letter, NRLC was the first to reveal Kagan's role in covertly persuading officials of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AGOG) to revise a statement that ACOG later issued as a supposedly authoritative statement on the medical aspects of the partial-birth abortion method -- a statement that was subsequently cited by federal judges and Supreme Court justices.

The recently released documents also show Kagan taking objectionable positions on such issues as assisted suicide, human cloning, and political free speech. Please see the letter for additional details on NRLC's objections to the Kagan nomination.


How did our two U. S. Senators vote on the confirmation of Elena Kagan, a confirmation which North Carolina Right to Life (the state affiliate of NRLC) also opposed?

Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) not to confirm Elena Kagan.

Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC) to confirm Elena Kagan

Monday, August 2, 2010

Elective Abortion is a Covered Benefit in a UNC System Wide Student Health Plan

The University of North Carolina Board of Governors has contracted with Pearce and Pearce to provide a system wide student health insurance plan, containing elective abortion as a covered benefit, for those students who do not have insurance through their parents, through an employer, or individually. Abortion is listed under the benefits' summary for the plan and says that elective abortion will be covered up to a $500 maximum benefit with 80% of PPO Allowance (in network) and a 70% of R & C (out of network).

The affected students will have to pay a student fee up to $750/year or $375/semester for the university provided plan.

North Carolina Right to Life contends that the UNC System, as a state supported system, should not be providing a student health plan that includes elective abortion as a covered benefit. Surely Pearce and Pearce would be very happy to exclude elective abortion as a covered benefit if the University made such a request.

Pro-life students, affected by this new policy, and parents of these students should protest this requirement and formally request that the benefit for elective abortion coverage should not be part of the student health insurance plan required by the University system. Pro-life alumni of the university system should lend their voices to those of the affected students to request that the benefit be excluded from the plan.

North Carolina Right to Life will continue to monitor this plan and bring updates as they are available. Those who have any contact with the UNC University system concerning this matter are encouraged to email us at to let us know if the university demonstrates its willingness to opt out of the elective abortion coverage for the student health plan required under their policy.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Hagan still undecided about her Kagan vote

Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC) is still undecided about how she will vote on the Elena Kagan nomination to be an Associate Justice to the U. S. Supreme Court. Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) is planning to vote "NO."

National Right to Life sent a 4 page letter to all U. S. Senators explaining why it is imperative to oppose her nomination.

In their letter, "NRLC noted that recently released documents from a period (1995-99) in which Kagan was an aide to President Clinton 'reveal Ms. Kagan to have been a key strategist -- perhaps, indeed, the lead strategist within the White House -- in the successful effort to prevent enactment of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act during the Clinton Administration. . . . Ms. Kagan played a key role in keeping the brutal partial-birth abortion method legal for an additional decade.' The documents also show Kagan taking objectionable positions on such issues as assisted suicide, human cloning, and political free speech."

The Senate should be voting soon on this nomination, so time is short to make your voice heard. If you wish to send an email, you can visit the NRLC Legislative Action Center where you can easily send your message.

A phone call is an excellent way to communicate your opposition to the Kagan nomination. Senator Kay Hagan's DC phone number is 202-224-6342. To thank Senator Richard Burr, call 202-224-3154.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

DISCLOSE Act passes U. S. House 219-206

The U. S. House voted 219-206 to pass H. R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act, a blatantly "unconstitutional" and "unprincipled" piece of legislation. In the North Carolina Congressional delegation, 5 voted for and 8 voted against the DISCLOSE Act.

The members voting to limit our free speech rights were: Reps. Bob Etheridge (D-2), David Price (D-4), Larry Kissell (D-8), Heath Shuler (D-11), and Brad Miller (D-13).

Those members voting against this infringement of our free speech rights were: Reps. G. K. Butterfield (D-1), Walter Jones (R-3), Virginia Foxx (R-5), Howard Coble (R-6), Mike McIntyre (D-7), Sue Myrick (R-9),Patrick McHenry (R-10), and Mel Watt (D-12). To communicate your appreciation or disapproval for your elected member's vote on the DISCLOSE Act, go here and follow the link.

The bill now moves to the U. S. Senate for consideration. Please contact your N. C. Senators, Kay Hagan (D) and Richard Burr (R) to ask them to vote "NO" on the DISCLOSE Act. For contact information, go here and follow the link.

To understand why both National Right to Life and North Carolina Right to Life oppose the DISCLOSE Act, go here.

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

URGENT- House Could Vote This Week On the DISCLOSE Act

Two of our pro-life members, Rep. Walter Jones (R-3) and Rep. Heath Shuler (D-11) are co-sponsors of the DISCLOSE Act. All NC House members need to hear from their constituency expressing strong opposition to the legislation. Please read the following letter and then contact your House members' office to tell them to vote "NO" on the DISCLOSE Act.

Click here to find your House member's phone numbers.

The following letter was sent by National Right to Life to all U. S. House members regarding the DISCLOSE Act:

Click here to view in a web browser. Click here to view or download this letter in PDF format.

June 15, 2010

RE: “DISCLOSE Act” (H.R. 5175)

Dear Member of Congress:

On May 27, 2010, we wrote to you to express our strong objections to the so-called “DISCLOSE Act” (H.R. 5175), as reported by the Committee on House Administration, which we characterized as an “attack on the First Amendment rights of your constituents and the private organizations with which they choose to associate.” Our letter (click here to read) provided detailed comments on some of the most objectionable provisions of the bill, which we will not repeat here.

More recently, House Administration Committee Chairman Brady proposed several modifications to the bill in the form of amendments filed at the Rules Committee. Mr. Brady's proposed changes range from minor to completely phony; they do not mitigate the nature or force of the objections that we expressed in our May 27 letter.

As we indicated previously, NRLC is the furthest thing from a “shadow” group. Our organization’s name and contact information always appear on our public communications, and we openly proclaim the public policies that we advocate. But there is very little in this bill, despite the pretenses, that is actually intended to provide useful or necessary information to the public. The overriding purpose is precisely the opposite: To discourage, as much as possible, disfavored groups (such as NRLC) from communicating about officeholders, by exposing citizens who support such efforts to harassment and intimidation, and by smothering organizations in layer on layer of record keeping and reporting requirements, all backed by the threat of civil and criminal sanctions.

On June 14, Congressman Clyburn’s office circulated a description of an additional change that the authors plan to make, which is being referred to informally as the “NRA carve-out.” While no legislative language for this amendment is yet available, the summary description is as follows:

Exempt Organizations from Disclosure: Section 501(c)(3) charitable organizations are exempt from the new disclosure requirements. “Exempt section 501(c)(4) organizations” are also exempt from new reporting requirements. These are organizations which have qualified as having tax exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code for each of the 10 years prior to making a campaign-related disbursement, that had 1 million or more dues-paying members in the prior calendar year, that had members in each of the 50 states, that received no more than 15 percent of their total funding from corporations or labor organizations, and that do not use any corporate or union money to pay for their campaign-related expenditures.

Based on this description of the “carve out,” we offer several observations. First, with respect to the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), this amendment is not only worthless, but adds insult to injury. NRLC is a federation of affiliated Right to Life organizations in all 50 states, each of which is separately incorporated, and each of which has its own membership structure. While the aggregate number of donors and members of the 50 state affiliates and their chapters exceeds the arbitrary one-million threshold, no individual affiliated corporation has one million “members,” nor does the federation headquarters (separately incorporated) meet that criterion. But why should this matter? Why should a movement that is comprised overwhelmingly of grassroots citizen-activists be penalized for adopting a federation structure?

It is perfectly understandable that another advocacy group that has a centralized corporate structure, and a unitary national membership roll, should wish to protect the privacy rights of its donors, and to avoid some of the crippling administrative burdens and legal traps that would be imposed by multiple provisions of H.R. 5175. But what conceivable public policy justification can be offered for imposing those very same burdens on much smaller organizations that are far poorer in the financial, administrative, and legal resources that would be demanded by the proposed array of legal traps, overlapping and accelerated reporting requirements, verbose “disclaimers,” and other devices contained in H.R. 5175 -- requirements that were clearly crafted for the very purpose of deterring speech?

Certainly, there can be no constitutional justification for the carve-out distinction. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects the right of incorporated groups of citizens to communicate with the public to express opinions about the actions of those who hold or seek federal office. The authors of the DISCLOSE Act have demonstrated that their overriding intent is to impede and deter the exercise of that constitutional right. The justifications offered for such legislation rest on the unspoken premise that the American people lack the capacity to properly evaluate advertising or other forms of mass communication, so the incumbent lawmakers will take it upon themselves to protect their hapless constituents from such troublesome communications, in order to prevent them from being “unduly influenced” -- and all of this is being deemed necessary to “protect democracy.”

However, the same authors now in effect propose that such “undue influence” is tolerable only if it is exercised by an especially big organization with a centralized corporate structure and large centralized professional staff. This is yet another demonstration that the real principle guiding the authors of the DISCLOSE Act is no principle at all, except crude self interest: They wish to mute as many as possible of the independent voices that might otherwise convey unflattering information to their constituents regarding legislative records and the policies of the current Administration.

One can imagine the outcry that would ensue if a lawmaker proposed that a substantial new “advocacy surtax” should be placed on all newspapers and opinion periodicals, but also proposed an exception for those publications with a national circulation of over one million. The institutional news media would characterize the tax itself as an outrageous infringement on the First Amendment, and the exception as an unsavory, unprincipled attempt to mute opposition by the largest and most influential publications. But there is not one First Amendment for the institutional news media and another First Amendment for everybody else. As the U.S. Supreme Court said in Citizens United v. FEC, “We have consistently rejected the proposition that the institutional press has any constitutional privilege beyond that of other speakers.”

We strongly urge you to oppose this pernicious, unprincipled, and unconstitutional legislation. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) will include the roll call on passage of H.R. 5175 in our scorecard of key roll calls for the 111th Congress, and reserves the right to also score key procedural votes on this measure. In our scorecard and advocacy materials, the legislation will be accurately characterized as a blatant political attack on the First Amendment rights of NRLC, our state affiliates, and our members and donors.


David N. O'Steen, Ph.D, Executive Director
Douglas Johnson,Legislative Director

(Please note: The just-published June edition of National Right to Life News, currently being disseminated to pro-life activists nationwide, highlights the DISCLOSE Act as the cover story. This article can be downloaded from the NRLC website here: )

Click here to find your House member's phone numbers.

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

NCRTL joins NRLC in opposition to "DISCLOSE Act"

North Carolina Right to Life joins the National Right to Life Committee in urging the U. S. House to reject the "DISCLOSE ACT" H. R. 5175, sponsored by Rep. Van Hollen.  The bill is the House's effort to circumvent the recent decision of the U. S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. FEC (2010).

In a letter to the House members, National Right to Life "suggests that the bill be amended to clarify that 'DISCLOSE' actually stands for 'Deterring Independent Speech about Congress except by Labor Organizations and Selected Elites.'"

"The four-page letter, signed by NRLC Executive Director David N. O'Steen and Legislative Director Douglas Johnson, said that the bill 'has been carefully crafted to maximize short-term political benefits for the dominant faction of one political party, while running roughshod over the First Amendment protections for political speech that have been clearly and forcefully articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court.'"

Originally, the bill was to be brought to the House floor on May 28, but action on the bill was postponed until June 7 when legislators return after the Memorial Day recess.  The mounting opposition to the bill by various groups appears to be one reason for the House's delay. 

To read the NRLC letter to the House members:

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Choose Life Rally Draws Large Crowd of Supporters and Brings Out Media

Pro-lifers from across the state, as far away as Charlotte and Asheville in the west to Wilmington in the east, converged on the Legislature today for the Rally for the Choose Life License Plate.

The program included remarks by the primary sponsor of the legislation, Rep. Mitch Gillespie (R-85). Rep. Gillespie explained what prompted him to introduce the Choose Life legislation when he was first elected and he promised that as long as he served in the legislature that he would continue to file the bill until it is heard. Joinng him on stage and speaking briefly were Reps. Ric Killian (R-105) and Pat McElraft (R-13).

Russ Amerling, the National Director for the Choose Life License Plate, brought a national perspective to the debate over the efforts to have a vote on the Choose Life License Plate.

Bishops Peter Jugis and Michael Burbidge, from the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Charlotte and Raleigh respectively, attended the Rally.  Bishop Jugis, with Bishop Burbidge at his side, addressed the crowd, asking all Catholics in the state to write and visit their legislators on this issue. 

Bobbi Meyer, the State Director of the Carolina Pregnancy Care Fellowship, introduced the next 3 speakers: Nicole Jackson, a volunteer at he Pregnancy Care Center in Rocky Mount, NC; Wagner Fields, a former client at the Pregnancy Care Center in Greensville, NC; and Gwen Gilbert, a former client at the Pregnancy Care Center in Washington, NC.

Dorothy Yeung, the last speaker, read a statement from the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) expressing their solidarity with the efforts to get a hearing for the Choose Life Plate. ADF indicated that they would "evaluate the group's legal options in the event that the legislature continues to deny pro-life persons their right to free expression."

When the Rally was over, volunteers took Choose Life Packets to each of the legislators' offices. The crowd was encouraged to visit their particular legislators' offices before they returned home.

Press packets were distributed to the members of the press who covered the event and the ADF statement was distributed also to the members of the press in the legislative press room.

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Schedule for NRLC 2010 Now Online!

Visit to find a complete schedule for the convention that includes details about the Prayer Breakfast and closing Banquet. There will also be a listing of all the titles for the workshops and general sessions and each of their presenters. After seeing the list, you will surely want to be in Pittsburgh June 24-26 for NRLC 2010, the National Right to Life annual convention.

There is the additional good news. "House Republican Leader John Boehner will receive the National Right to Life Leadership Award at the 10:30 general session on Saturday, June 26. Congressman Boehner will be joined by NRLC Executive Director David N. O'Steen, Legislative Director Douglas Johnson, and Burke Balch, director of the Robert Powell Center for Medical Ethics. These experts will help you to understand the mind-numbingly complex ObamaCare measure. The session's title hits the nail on the head: '2,000 Pages Plus of Really Bad Stuff.'"  Make plans now to be in Pittsburgh in June for NRLC 2010.

Additionally, at the Prayer Breakfast, Mark and LaRue Pickup will talk about "Tears of Regret – Tears of Love: A Couple's Story About Learning to Value Life." and Jaime Thietten ("My Chance") will be providing special music.
You can read more about the convention at

(Source: Dave Andrusko's NRL News, News and Views for May 20, 2010)

Monday, May 3, 2010

Pro-Lifers to Rally for the "Choose Life" License Plate in Raleigh on May 25 at 11:00 AM

The General Assembly begins its Short Session on May 12, 2010.  One of the bills that pro-lifers hope the legislature will finally take up is the "Choose Life" License Plate bill.  While the leadership has not acted favorably toward the bill by refusing even to allow the bill to be brought up in committee, the Carolina Pregnancy Care Fellowship (CPCF) is sponsoring an event in the hope of changing their minds.

CPCF is the organization representing  Pregnancy Centers and Maternity Homes across North Carolina. They will be the recipient of the funds raised from the purchase of a "Choose Life" plate and will distribute the funds to the various centers across the state.  CPCF is hoping the Rally in Raleigh on May 25, 2010, at 11:00 AM will bring hundreds of pro-lifers to the state legislature to hear from members of the legislature who support passage of the plate why the leadership should reverse course and allow the bill a fair hearing.

The theme of the Rally "Free Specch, Why Not North Carolina?" was chosen because North Carolina is the only Southeastern* state not to have a " Choose Life" license plate.  The millions of dollars raised from the sale of the plate in the states that have them are used to provide material help to mothers who have chosen to birth their babies.  As long as the North Carolina refuses to allow the sale of the plate, mothers will be denied the benefit of the funds that would have been raised through the sale of the "Choose Life" plate.

The rally will feature comments by Rep. Mitch Gillespie, the primary sponsor of the legislation, and other legislators who support passage of the bill. Mothers who have been helped by the pregnancy centers will also share how they have been helped.  Following the Rally, individuals will be encouraged to go by their house member's office to show their support for passage of the bill.

For more information on the bill, visit our web site and click on Legislative Action Center.
*What comprises the Southeastern states is based on a National Geographic map:

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

The Obama Health Care Rationing Law:

The Commission That Will Develop Standards the Administration Will Impose to Limit Private Sector Medical Care

An 18-member “Independent Payment Advisory Board” [Sec. 10320(b)] is given the duty, on January 15, 2015 and every two years thereafter, with regard to private health care, to make “recommendations to slow the growth in national health expenditures . . . that the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] or other Federal agencies can implement administratively” [Section 10320(a)(5)(o)(1)(A)]. In turn, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is empowered to impose “quality” AND “efficiency” measures [Section 10304] on health care providers (including hospices, ambulatory surgical centers, rehabilitation facilities, home health agencies, physicians and hospitals) [Section 3014(a) adding Social Security Act Section 1890(b)(7)(B)(I)] which must report on their compliance.

In complex gobbledegook, what this amounts to is that doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers will be told by Washington just what diagnostic tests and medical care is considered to meet “quality” and “efficiency” standards – not only for federally funded health care programs like Medicare, but also for health care paid for by private citizens and their nongovernmental health insurance. And these will be “quality and efficiency” standards specifically designed to limit what ordinary Americans spend on health care. Treatment that a doctor and patient in consultation deem needed or advisable to save that patient’s life or preserve or improve the patient’s health but which the government decides is too costly – even if the patient is willing and able to pay for it – will run afoul of the imposed standards. In effect, there will be one uniform national standard of care, established by Washington bureaucrats and set with a view to limiting what private citizens are allowed to spend on saving their own lives.

(For detailed analysis of other provisions that will impose rationing, see

The Prospect of Repeal

The silver lining to this very dark cloud is that the most onerous rationing elements of the Obama health care law will not go into effect until 2015– well after the next Presidential election. For repeal to be a realistic prospect, three things are essential:

–The President who takes office in 2013 would have to be someone who would sign a repeal. (Theoretically, a two-thirds majority of both Houses committed to repeal could accomplish it even over a presidential veto, but achieving such numbers would be extremely difficult.)

– As a result of the 2010 and 2012 Congressional elections, a majority of those in the 2013 House of Representatives must support repeal.

– Also as a result of the 2010 and 2012 Congressional elections, the 2013 Senate must have an adequate majority committed to repeal. Full confidence of repeal would come from 60 of the 100 Senators supporting repeal – enough to impose cloture so as to overcome a filibuster. However, it is possible that, if the elections were clearly seen to have been greatly influenced by popular rejection of the Obama Health Care Rationing Law, then even if there were 41 or more Senators who had supported its adoption, some of them might prefer not to obstruct repeal, especially those soon up for re-election. It is also conceivable that the “reconciliation” process used to secure enactment of the health care law could be used by pro-repeal Senators to gut it with 51 votes.

While most observers expect gains by opponents of Obamacare in the election of Senators in 2010, a shift to a majority in support of repeal may not be achieved. However, in 2012, only 10 or 11 opponents of the law will be up for re-election, compared to either 23 or 24 Senators who voted for it standing for re-election. (This number depends on who wins the 2010 special election to fill Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s New York Senate seat – its winner will have to face the voters again in 2012.) With these odds, the chance for pro-repeal Senators to emerge in control of the Senate in 2013 is a decent one.

In short, horrific as the enactment of the Obama Health Care Rationing Law is, now is not the time to despair. Rather, the pro-life movement must devote itself over these critical years – 2010 through 2012– to ensuring that the American people are given the facts needed to counter the placating misinformation the Obama Administration and its apologists in Congress and the press are already spreading, confident that with a spoon full of sugar we will swallow their deadly recipe. We must maintain and expand the current majority that, according to most public opinion polls, rejects the Obama Health Care Rationing Law.

(Source: National Right to Life Web Site)