JUDIE BROWN COMMENTARY

Earlier this year, the South Dakota legislature made history by passing a law to protect children in the womb ? and their mothers ?

Desperate to convince South Dakota voters that the state’s medical and surgical abortion ban must go, pro-abortion forces are concentrating on the fact that the law does not contain exceptions for abortion in cases of rape and incest.

“Catholic teaching on abortion is clear” is the title of a recent column from Archbishop Jospeh Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas.

A proposal that has recently surfaced from the Federal Food and Drug Administration boggles the mind. Under the suggested guidelines for Emergency Research, certain individuals would not be giving their consent ahead of time.

To be honest, I love most of what New Oxford Review publishes. Their articles are clear, concise and always full of facts.

Michiganders are decrying the long wait before they can get their hands on Merck’s Gardasil, the vaccine that is alleged to protect women from cervica.

It is always refreshing to read a secular commentator’s view of what the difference is between consistent principle and political incrementalism.

In an unprecedented move, according to various media reports, Oregon Right to Life has provided qualified support to Republican Ron Saxton, candidate for governor.

The journal Nature has decided to correct wording in the press release announcing publication of the results of a study conducted by Advanced Cell Technology.

It was wonderful to see so many truly pro-life physicians and health care practitioners covered today in a news report headlined “Medical practices blend health and faith.”

The American Bar Association has a special committee that deals with bioethics.

I have to point out that not only is the media getting the message on the morning after pill wrong, but so are far too many pro-life groups.