. . . because action speaks louder than words.
League history, NOW v. Scheidler, Action News, Joe Scheidler, League staff
Q & A on abortion, the unborn child, where we stand on the issues and more
Helping abortion-bound women choose life for their babies
Unmasking the truth about abortion in the public square
Our youth outreach, raising up a new generation of pro-life leaders
Abortion industry converts tell the inside story
News and commentary from the Pro-Life Action League
News and commentary from the Pro-Life Action League
William Saletan has two columns at Slate this week on what he thinks pro-lifers and pro-choicers should do to seek “common ground” on abortion in the wake of the Conference on Life and Choice held at Princeton last month.
Chief among his recommendations to both sides is, predictably, to push contraception. He calls for pro-lifers to “embrace” it, and for pro-choicers to embrace it even more than they already do.
In both columns, Saletan quotes various individuals who presented at the conference. Midway through his first column, he quotes at length an idea put forth by Mercer University Professor of Christian Ethics David Gushee, which Saletan called “the most important offer [he has] heard from anybody” on either side of the issue of contraception: [Continue reading ...]
Although the FDA last week approved the drug “ella” (ulipristal acetate) for prescription use, the controversy over how it works — Is it a contraceptive, or an abortifacient, or both? — shows no signs of going away any time soon.
According to the New York Times, the members of the FDA’s advisory committee that voted to approve it were largely indifferent to this question; all they concluded, in their wisdom, is that it’s supposedly “safe and effective”.
Meanwhile, ella’s manufacturers are going to great lengths to claim that it functions only as a contraceptive and not as an abortifacient. Witness David Archer, whom Slate calls an “expert” for ella’s manufacturer, HRA Pharma of Paris: [Continue reading ...]