Tuesday, September 09, 2008

Ohio Pro-Life Group Celebrates Victory in Lawsuit Over Free Speech Rights

From http://lifenews.com/state3472.html

Ohio Pro-Life Group Celebrates Victory in Lawsuit Over Free Speech Rights

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
September 9, 2008

addthis_pub = 'sertelt';

Email RSS Printer
yahooBuzzArticleId = window.location.href;


Buzz up!


Columbus, OH (LifeNews.com) -- An Ohio pro-life group emerged victorious in a federal district court case over a lawsuit it filed to protect its free speech political rights. During the critical days before the November general election, the Ohio Right to Life Society wants to be able to speak out on pro-life legislation but campaign finance laws prevented that.
The group has a problem with a state law that bars citizen organizations from paying for ads that mention the name of a political candidate within 30 days of an election.
The ads are prohibited even if they don't advocate the defeat or election of a candidate and simply discuss the elected officials voting record on issues like abortion or bioethics.
Ohio Right to Life sued to overturn the provision and Judge George C. Smith upheld the group's free speech rights.

Director Mike Gonidakis told LifeNews.com that this ruling is good news for other groups that want to exercise their First Amendment rights as well.
"This is not just about Ohio Right to Life," he said. "This ruling affects every advocacy group in the state. Gagging everybody for thirty days prior to the election, when the public is just beginning to pay attention to the issues involved is depriving everyone of their First Amendment rights to free speech."
"Like any advocacy organization, we must be free to inform individuals about life issues, regardless of when an election is scheduled," he said.

Ohio Right to Life, represented by attorney Bill Todd from Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan, & Aronoff argued in court filings that the Ohio state law barring it from running advertisements mentioning candidates' names close to an election is impermissible in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision last summer in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life.
In that case, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that political speech can only be regulated if the advertisement contains "express advocacy" or "is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate."
Ohio Right to Life's challenge to the disclosure requirements were not addressed by the Supreme Court in the WRTL case

"Our mission is to promote and protect life in Ohio 365 days a year. We strongly believe that the American political system functions best when serious, issue-driven groups such as ours are free to participate in the robust debate of political issues that is, and should be the hallmark of our nation." Gonidakis said.
Ohio Right to Life filed suit in May against the Ohio Elections Commission and the Ohio Secretary of State to prevent them from enforcing the law. ORTL filed the suit in the U.S District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
Ohio lawmakers included the ad ban in a campaign finance bill the legislature approved in December 2004.

Related web sites:Ohio Right to Life - http://www.ohiolife.org/


___________________________________


From http://lifenews.com/nat4290.html


Joe Biden Attacks Sarah Palin on Abortion, Calls Her "Backwards Step for Women"

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
September 9, 2008

addthis_pub = 'sertelt';

Email RSS Printer
yahooBuzzArticleId = window.location.href;


Buzz up!


Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In a potential preview of the lone debate between the vice-presidential hopefuls that will take place this fall, pro-abortion candidate Joe Biden is attacking Sarah Palin on abortion. In an interview, Biden said it would be a "backwards step for women" if Palin becomes the first female Vice President.

During a campaign stop in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, a local television reporter asked Biden, "Do you think, if she does win, that would be a step forward for women."
Biden, a Delaware senator who is Barack Obama's running mate, disagreed and pointed to Palin's pro-life views on abortion as the reason why.
"Well look, I think the issue is what does Sarah Palin think? What does she believe?" he said.
"I assume she thinks and agrees with the same [pro-life] policies that George Bush and John McCain think," Biden added. "And that's obviously a backward step for women."
Dorinda Bordlee, a prominent attorney who is the senior counsel of the Bioethics Defense Fund, told LifeNews.com she was flabbergasted by Biden's remarks.
She said she is not surprised that a man like Joe Biden, who has a long pro-abortion voting record, would attack Palin.

By saying pro-life policies are a "backward step for women," Biden is apparently "completely unaware of the mountain of evidence showing abortion's traumatic impact on women's physical and psychological health," she explained.
Bordlee also said "the American public is witnessing the clash of cultures in how we view motherhood."

"With women like Speaker Nancy Pelosi advocating for the position that women need abortion to succeed, other women like Sarah Palin who show by the example of their lives that motherhood and a vocation can be integrated without resorting to abortion," she said.
Republican National Committee spokeswoman Amber Wilkerson also responded to the comments."The only person taking a step backward is Joe Biden, whose appalling and arrogant statements are better suited for the back rooms of his old boys club," she told The Hill newspaper in reply."Sarah Palin’s nomination as the Republican vice presidential nominee is an historic opportunity to break the highest glass ceiling," she said. "While John McCain and Sarah Palin continue to press their message of change, Joe Biden should stop these sorts of old-style attacks."Biden's comments come on the heels of him misrepresenting his pro-abortion position in a weekend interview with "Meet the Press."The senator said he opposes taxpayer funding of abortions, yet voted on numerous occasions to put taxpayer funds towards abortions in various direct and indirect circumstances.Related web sites:Bioethics Defense Fund - http://www.bdfund.org/



________________________



http://lifenews.com/nat4287.html (YouTube Blocks More Videos on Racist Planned Parenthood Abortion Donations)

Psychologists: APA Deceptive on How Abortion Adversely Affects Women, Men (http://lifenews.com/nat4289.html)




__________________________________


Other News:


http://www.prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2008/09/judge_judy_refu.php

http://www.prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2008/09/obamas_mom_was.php





http://lifenews.com/bio2566.html

No comments: