Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [FSP] New Hampshire Committee Votes to Silence Parents

Expand Messages
  • matt qpublic
    And if you go ahead and email them anyway, you ll have your own 1st Amendment case you could take all the way to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, it sounds like
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 18, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      And if you go ahead and email them anyway, you'll have your own 1st
      Amendment case you could take all the way to the Supreme Court. Otherwise,
      it sounds like the government making a good decision (for a change) to
      repeal this parental notification business that infringes on the rights of
      the pregnant girl.


      --Matt


      >From: "tim condon" <tim@...>
      >Reply-To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
      >To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: [FSP] New Hampshire Committee Votes to Silence Parents
      >Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 05:34:04 -0500
      >
      >No matter how you feel about parental notification on abortion, it's
      >interesting that some government bureaucracy in New Hampshire believes
      >these
      >people must have a "registered lobbyist" in the state in order to exercise
      >their 1st Amendment rights. We have much work to do. ---Tim Condon
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [image: Family Research
      >Council]<http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
      >[image: Family Research
      >Council]<http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Refer a Friend
      ><http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=REFER&f=WU07B12&t=e&ref=> | *February
      >16, 2007*
      >
      >*New Hampshire Committee Votes to Silence Parents*
      >
      >While nearly a dozen states debate laws that would expand parents' rights,
      >the New Hampshire legislature is working overtime to undermine them. Since
      >2003, the Granite State has had a parental notification law on the books,
      >requiring at least one parent to be informed 48 hours before their minor
      >daughter has an abortion. Planned Parenthood, concerned that the law would
      >scare off business, challenged the measure in court on the grounds that it
      >didn't include a health exemption for the mother. Ultimately, the suit
      >landed in the U.S. Supreme Court, where, in January of last year, the
      >justices reversed a ruling that had struck down the law. Now the state
      >legislature is fighting to repeal the law, insisting that the
      >government--not moms or dads--should be the ultimate authority on matters
      >that affect children's health. Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee
      >voted 12-5 in favor of abolishing a parents' right to know. From there, the
      >measure will go before the full state House for a vote and, if successful,
      >could be signed into law by Gov. John Lynch (D) as early as March. If the
      >appeal passes, the court case is moot. When FRC attempted to alert our
      >supporters in New Hampshire to the urgency of this issue, we were informed
      >that unless our organization had a lobbyist registered in the state, we
      >were
      >forbidden from e-mailing New Hampshire voters. Obviously, the government is
      >intent on silencing those that would expose their strategy to suppress
      >parents on an issue as vital as teen abortion. In fact, some leaders
      >consider the whole matter of parental notification a distraction from state
      >business. As Rep. Liz Hager (R) said, "Let's get this expensive,
      >unconstitutional problem behind us." However, the true expense will be the
      >toll on innocent, human lives should the state erase a law that serves to
      >give young girls pause about killing their unborn babies. Our friend Karen
      >Testerman, head of New Hampshire's Cornerstone Policy Research, is
      >circulating a petition in hopes of persuading elected officials--not to
      >change their position on abortion, but to uphold parents' rights. For more
      >information on Cornerstone's efforts, log on to www.cnht.org.
      >
      >*Additional Resources*
      >The Coalition of New Hampshire
      >Taxpayers<http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B62&f=WA07B33>
      >
      >*FCC to Television Networks: Drop Your Weapons!*
      >
      >If Congress acts on the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) new
      >report
      >on TV violence, networks could get fewer bangs for their buck. After years
      >of analysis on whether the agency could regulate violent programming "in a
      >constitutional manner," the FCC released its findings yesterday. Among
      >them,
      >the agency recommends that Congress pass a law that would allow the FCC to
      >control violent content just as it does sexual content. One way to cut down
      >on the gore without violating First Amendment rights would be to ban
      >violent
      >material during the hours when children are more likely to tune in. Another
      >suggestion is to put cable and satellite TV on an "a la carte" system that
      >would let parents select their channels. Just last month, the Parents
      >Television Council found that violence on TV increased by 75 percent in the
      >last nine years. That's bad news for parents, whose kids see an average of
      >1,000 TV murders, rapes, and assaults each year. FRC has been instrumental
      >in the fight to bring graphic content under tighter government control. Now
      >that the FCC has done a better job of protecting kids from indecency, it's
      >time for Congress to give them the same authority to curb violence.
      >
      >*Additional Resources*
      >FCC targets violence on TV <http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B64&f=WA07B34>
      >
      >*Tune in to Washington Watch Weekly!*
      >
      >On this week's edition of Washington Watch Weekly, we'll talk with Jay
      >Hein,
      >director of President Bush's Faith-Based Initiative office, to discuss the
      >program's future. Our second guest, Bishop Harry Jackson, a member of FRC's
      >Pastors Council, joins me in studio to talk about his recent trip to South
      >Africa and about the lessons we can learn from his outreach there. We'll
      >also take a brief look back at the heroes of the civil rights movement as
      >we
      >observe Black History month.
      >
      >*Additional Resources*
      >Washington Watch Weekly <http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B66&f=WA07B35>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > <http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e>
      > <https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PG03G20&f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
      > <https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=CONTACT_FRC&step=2&f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
      >
      ><https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?e=roywrom@...&i=PG04G02&f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
      >
      >*Family Research Council: *801 G Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001
      >*P: *202/393-2100 or 800/225-4008 *W:
      >*frc.org<http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
      >unsubscribe<https://www.frc.org/file.cfm?f=OO&e=roywrom@...&s=FD&fi=WU07B12&t=e>
      >You are subscribed to the Washington Update as roywrom@...
      > <http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=FQ05I01>
      > <http://www.ecfa.org>
      >
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >

      _________________________________________________________________
      http://homepage.msn.com/zune?icid=hmetagline
    • Janet Justiss
      If parents have a good relationship with their daughters, the daughters will TELL them they are pregnant...I have done social work for many years and have seen
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 22, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        If parents have a good relationship with their daughters, the daughters will TELL them they are pregnant...I have done social work for many years and have seen first hand what happens when a girl's father, grandfather,step-father, uncle, etc. get them pregnant...most times the family will condemn the child...many mothers do...so, if a kid is in this predicament, they need the right to choose what to do, without their parents knowing...There just aren't many "Ozzie and Harriet" families anymore.

        matt qpublic <mattqpublic@...> wrote: And if you go ahead and email them anyway, you'll have your own 1st
        Amendment case you could take all the way to the Supreme Court. Otherwise,
        it sounds like the government making a good decision (for a change) to
        repeal this parental notification business that infringes on the rights of
        the pregnant girl.

        --Matt

        >From: "tim condon" <tim@...>
        >Reply-To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
        >To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
        >Subject: [FSP] New Hampshire Committee Votes to Silence Parents
        >Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 05:34:04 -0500
        >
        >No matter how you feel about parental notification on abortion, it's
        >interesting that some government bureaucracy in New Hampshire believes
        >these
        >people must have a "registered lobbyist" in the state in order to exercise
        >their 1st Amendment rights. We have much work to do. ---Tim Condon
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [image: Family Research
        >Council]<http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
        >[image: Family Research
        >Council]<http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Refer a Friend
        ><http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=REFER&f=WU07B12&t=e&ref=> | *February
        >16, 2007*
        >
        >*New Hampshire Committee Votes to Silence Parents*
        >
        >While nearly a dozen states debate laws that would expand parents' rights,
        >the New Hampshire legislature is working overtime to undermine them. Since
        >2003, the Granite State has had a parental notification law on the books,
        >requiring at least one parent to be informed 48 hours before their minor
        >daughter has an abortion. Planned Parenthood, concerned that the law would
        >scare off business, challenged the measure in court on the grounds that it
        >didn't include a health exemption for the mother. Ultimately, the suit
        >landed in the U.S. Supreme Court, where, in January of last year, the
        >justices reversed a ruling that had struck down the law. Now the state
        >legislature is fighting to repeal the law, insisting that the
        >government--not moms or dads--should be the ultimate authority on matters
        >that affect children's health. Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee
        >voted 12-5 in favor of abolishing a parents' right to know. From there, the
        >measure will go before the full state House for a vote and, if successful,
        >could be signed into law by Gov. John Lynch (D) as early as March. If the
        >appeal passes, the court case is moot. When FRC attempted to alert our
        >supporters in New Hampshire to the urgency of this issue, we were informed
        >that unless our organization had a lobbyist registered in the state, we
        >were
        >forbidden from e-mailing New Hampshire voters. Obviously, the government is
        >intent on silencing those that would expose their strategy to suppress
        >parents on an issue as vital as teen abortion. In fact, some leaders
        >consider the whole matter of parental notification a distraction from state
        >business. As Rep. Liz Hager (R) said, "Let's get this expensive,
        >unconstitutional problem behind us." However, the true expense will be the
        >toll on innocent, human lives should the state erase a law that serves to
        >give young girls pause about killing their unborn babies. Our friend Karen
        >Testerman, head of New Hampshire's Cornerstone Policy Research, is
        >circulating a petition in hopes of persuading elected officials--not to
        >change their position on abortion, but to uphold parents' rights. For more
        >information on Cornerstone's efforts, log on to www.cnht.org.
        >
        >*Additional Resources*
        >The Coalition of New Hampshire
        >Taxpayers<http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B62&f=WA07B33>
        >
        >*FCC to Television Networks: Drop Your Weapons!*
        >
        >If Congress acts on the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) new
        >report
        >on TV violence, networks could get fewer bangs for their buck. After years
        >of analysis on whether the agency could regulate violent programming "in a
        >constitutional manner," the FCC released its findings yesterday. Among
        >them,
        >the agency recommends that Congress pass a law that would allow the FCC to
        >control violent content just as it does sexual content. One way to cut down
        >on the gore without violating First Amendment rights would be to ban
        >violent
        >material during the hours when children are more likely to tune in. Another
        >suggestion is to put cable and satellite TV on an "a la carte" system that
        >would let parents select their channels. Just last month, the Parents
        >Television Council found that violence on TV increased by 75 percent in the
        >last nine years. That's bad news for parents, whose kids see an average of
        >1,000 TV murders, rapes, and assaults each year. FRC has been instrumental
        >in the fight to bring graphic content under tighter government control. Now
        >that the FCC has done a better job of protecting kids from indecency, it's
        >time for Congress to give them the same authority to curb violence.
        >
        >*Additional Resources*
        >FCC targets violence on TV <http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B64&f=WA07B34>
        >
        >*Tune in to Washington Watch Weekly!*
        >
        >On this week's edition of Washington Watch Weekly, we'll talk with Jay
        >Hein,
        >director of President Bush's Faith-Based Initiative office, to discuss the
        >program's future. Our second guest, Bishop Harry Jackson, a member of FRC's
        >Pastors Council, joins me in studio to talk about his recent trip to South
        >Africa and about the lessons we can learn from his outreach there. We'll
        >also take a brief look back at the heroes of the civil rights movement as
        >we
        >observe Black History month.
        >
        >*Additional Resources*
        >Washington Watch Weekly <http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK07B66&f=WA07B35>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > <http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e>
        > <https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PG03G20&f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
        > <https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?c=CONTACT_FRC&step=2&f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
        >
        ><https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?e=roywrom@...&i=PG04G02&f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
        >
        >*Family Research Council: *801 G Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001
        >*P: *202/393-2100 or 800/225-4008 *W:
        >*frc.org<http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?f=WU07B12&t=e&t=e>
        >unsubscribe<https://www.frc.org/file.cfm?f=OO&e=roywrom@...&s=FD&fi=WU07B12&t=e>
        >You are subscribed to the Washington Update as roywrom@...
        > <http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=FQ05I01>
        > <http://www.ecfa.org>
        >
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >

        __________________________________________________________
        http://homepage.msn.com/zune?icid=hmetagline






        ---------------------------------
        Need Mail bonding?
        Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.