For the abortion industry in TN less information is better....

Save One Founder and Executive Director, Sheila Harper, is interviewed about her thoughts on the viewing of an ultrasound and her personal experience  with abortion.   She articulates the issue well to this Channel 2 reporter.

 However, due  to the disastrous ruling of  our  TN  Supreme Court in 2000, in a law suit brought by ACLU and Planned Parenthood against  the state , commonsense regulations voted into law by our elected bipartisan legislators were thrown out . In order to correct this egregious ruling a constitutional amendment called SJR 127 which states   that our state constitution,  originally written in 1796, did not speak to  issue of abortion. It further states that our elected legislators have the right and duty to enact regulations around abortion which is legal through the US Supreme Court decision of 1973. I know sounds so commonsense as to be ridiculous,  but the strange ruling of 2000 found that TN has a greater right to abortion than was  found in the   US Supreme Court decision known as Roe Vs. Wade. Read the constitution and try to find the word abortion.  All that to say..... in 2014, Tennesseans must pass this amendment  during the Gubernatorial  election so we can enact regulations voted on by our elected legislators such as informed consent, reflection periods etc.

However, Harper and Senator Jim Tracy are discussing a bill that would  then give women important information before they make a decision that is final. Watch the abortion industry object loudly using talking  points like privacy that do not address the fact that they really object to women have medically accurate information including the viewing of their ultrasound  and a time to consider this step before making a life altering decision.  It adds up to lost revenue and abortions are a very lucrative profession.




WKRN, Nashville News, Nashville Weather and Sports

RH Reality fails to fact check own work. Ed Henry is from AL not TN and has wrong pix....just the beginning of their errors.....

Oh this is priceless... the Google alert brings up a story about abortion in TN....so I click on the story  from RH Reality  Check and find it so full of errors as to be embarrassing. Fact check over there...not too much! And I thought that was the place  that says you should go for "fact based" information.


Well this story is about 'TN legislator Ed Henry 'who is now pro life stating that he regrets the abortion 20 years ago he agreed to with his  girlfriend.  Horrors that someone could regret their abortion decision and a man at that. He is now pro life. But back to my point. There is no TN legislator by that name and the pictures shown there is of the Fox News man Ed Henry. Well I did some checking .....something RH needs to consider doing  and Ed Henry is a legislator in the state of AL....close to TN but whole different state and he is not the news reporter.


So then I read the rest of the story denigrating TN and see further misrepresentations....nice way of saying.....lies. They quote SJR 127 and say the purpose is to have a constitutional ban on abortion. This is the way the abortion industry intends to spin the constitutional amendment that is necessary to restore  abortion restrictions voted into place by a bi partisan majority in the House and Senate such as informed consent, waiting periods and that late term abortions be performed in hospitals as opposed to unlicensed, uninspected and unregulated abortion mills. These restrictions were taken away when the ACLU and Planned Parenthood sued the state of TN and per the dissenting judge the only way to bring back them back  in pro life TN is to have a constitutional amendment. This is not a constitutional ban on abortions....but hey what are a  few facts   errors here and there in the abortion for profit industry.

As to the other factual errors... the ban on abortion in insurance coverage  should say using tax payer money to pay for abortions.  Small detail, I know.

And TN already has an anti coercion bill....do you object to that? Do you support coercion??

 But stating the abortion docs should have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals...they got that one right. It is a pending bill at this time.  Radical idea isn't it that the doc performing a surgical procedure on you  should have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in the event of complications.  Totally unnecessary I guess when you can just ship the injured woman off in a taxi to the nearest ER room for them to handle cause the busy doc has paying patients waiting......


As I am typing this...RH Reality realizes a portion of their sloppy reporting.... they change the pix of Ed Henry to the real Ed Henry...but I have the first screen shot saved. Maybe Fox's Ed Henry called and complained...hey, not me. We will see when the correct the rest of the errors....

Bad morning reporter Robin???

**********************************************************************************

Ed Henry. [img src]

Tennessee lawmaker Ed Henry is working hard to pass anti-choice legislation in the state.  His reason?  To atone for an abortion that he "allowed" his girlfriend to have 20 years earlier.
Via The Times Daily:

“I murdered my first child,” Henry, a freshman Republican, told a crowd at an anti-abortion rally outside the Statehouse.
Henry, 41, said he went with his girlfriend, whom he didn’t name, when she had the abortion.
He said they had made the decision to abort together, but today he said he places most of the responsibility on himself.
“There was discussion and talk about it, but I do feel a heavy burden from the decision,” he said.
And it was his experience and regret years later that have made him an anti-abortion advocate, he said.

Tennessee is working on a constitutional ban on abortion, wants to mandate that all abortion providers to have hospital privileges, and is fighting to block insurance coverage for safe abortion care in the state. If they follow the example of other states, it's only a matter of time before an "anti-coercion" bill gets introduced.
When that happens, how much time does Henry think the person who coerces a woman into an abortion should serve in jail?  And would he be willing to serve as an example?  After all, he does say, "I didn’t have the right to do what I did... The law says it is OK, but I did not have the right.”

Follow Robin Marty on Twitter, @robinmarty

. . . . . . . . . .

Jezebel: TN can "suck" with the best of them...

Ahhh the wordsmith and the mounting hysteria from dear Jezebel. Thanks for the shout out for TN.

"Not to be overshadowed once again by its taller, skinnier sister Mississippi or its more popular cousin Ohio, Tennessee is reminding the rest of America that it, too, can suck with the best of them.

Supporters of the word jambalaya of a constitutional amendment, called SJR 127, say that it will simply give lawmakers the power they require to appropriately regulate abortions. Detractors call bullshit, saying it opens the door for an abortion ban and allows Tennessee politicians to crawl up in everyone's uterus and have a look around. Pro lifers are, predictably, overjoyed."

 Now what has her so upset? The audacity that the TN voters will have the opportunity in 2014 to vote on whether their elected legislators,  answerable to the public will have the right to put restrictions around abortion such as informed consent, waiting periods, and late term abortions done  in hospitals . What? Isn't that already in place?

History lesson....it was. 

These restrictions were voted into place by the bipartisan elected legislators. But then what do they know?? Enter the ACLU and Planned Parenthood who never met an abortion they did not like. They decided that the liberal judges on the state supreme court might  friend them and friend them they did. So the ACLU and PP sued saying that any restrictions around their fave  action....abortion ...might be an undue burden on the woman and their guess was right...the judges agreed.! 

They said that the state constitution written in the 1800's held a right to abortion in TN.  Out with the regulations.... but the public spoke again through their elected bi partisan legislators and said that the people of TN deserved a say so here. Now amending the constitution is a laborious project and many friends of the abortion industry fought against this coming up for a vote in the state legislature. But persistence pays off and a funny thing happened to those die hards. They were voted out of office or had a swift conversion experience.


So yes, Jezebel has heard the alarm from PP and ACLU.....yikes if  the people vote...could it be??
Better get innuendo and razz matazz going  here speaking in  lofty terms like "bullshit"  and calling names...whatever!!

We can't let   things such as informed consent happen in TN. Imagine, just imagine,  if women knew facts and then considered them....imagine if late term abortions were only done in hospitals?  Oh the sound of silence in those  cash registers at PP??  

FOTAI ......Friends of the Abortion Industry....you must stand with us. 

JEZEBEL WHERE ARE YOU?

pix from Jezebel

TN: Out of state $$ will pour in to help defeat pro life amendment in 2014....

Chicago Now  posts this as one to watch about SJR 127 now going to the ballot in TN in 2014.

"This could shape up as a major battle between supporters of infanticide and pro-lifers in 2014. Pro-abortion forces will likely flood the Volunteer State with out-of-state money to defeat a referendum that may appear on the 2014 ballot allowing citizens to decide whether or not their state constitution really does have a special right protecting abortion."

TN: stirring debate to pass constitutional amendment....10 years in the making

Listen to the debate on the House floor yesterday before passing SJR 127  by 76-18. Special interest and thanks to Reps. Dunn, Williams and Holt for their outspoken and unashamed witness for life.  Rep. Maggart did an excellent job of holding the line against  attempts to attach another hostile amendment that would invalidate this joint resolution in our current liberal activist  court.

I took special delight having watched this battle over the past 10 years to remember those who railed against life ( only talking  of abortion in the case of rape which accounts for less than 1% of abortions) and having any regulations around abortion in TN. As a result were not longer there in the legislature.  The people spoke...

I smiled when Rep. Holt stood up and said this is why I am here. Many became active and ran for office and defeated those who stood with the abortion industry year after year. Elections matter and how dare we not get involved when issues such as this are on the line. 

This was a bipartisan vote...Rep Charlie Curtis (D) who stood in  front with the House sponsor Debra Maggart (R)  and never wavered or buckled under the cause for life even against his own party....correctly called the final vote tally. 

Many people say they are pro life but few are willing to stand for life when they are opposed by their own party. Thank you Rep. Curtis 

Now on to the educational war. I am happy that some media are finally understanding the issue and reporting it correctly. Many have a long way to go especially in the print media. One newscaster asked how we were going to educate the people before the 2014 election on this issue when we are underfunded against the abortion lobby. Well we have the grassroots support and the hearts and minds of Tennesseans on this issue. One Democratic leader jokingly said after the vote that Right to Life now can lay off half their staff. Yes, I answered all of us volunteers can get laid off! 

But the fight remains...we must educate the voters against the well funded abortion industry what this constitutional amendment means and why they need to support it in 2014.   I cannot help remember that this all started because Planned Parenthood and the ACLU sued the state to remove all restrictions around abortion. They publicly have stated that they brought this fight because they correctly gauged that there was a liberal activist court that would side with them and give TN the most liberal abortion laws in the union. No informed consent, no waiting periods, no instance that late term abortions be done in hospitals......how could   we remain silent....

NRL:Tennesseans to decide in 2014 whether State Constitution guarantees a right to abortion

By Dave Andrusko

After more than a decade of work by pro-life Tennesseans, Senate Joint Resolution 127 will be on the November 2014 statewide ballot. SJR 127 returns authority for abortion regulation to the people of Tennessee and their state legislators and reads as follows:
”Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”

SJR 127 is necessary because of a radical 4-1 ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court in 2000 which wrongly claimed as “fundamental right to abortion” in the Tennessee Constitution.  As a result, common sense pro-life protections were immediately stripped from state law books including informed consent for women considering abortion, a 48 hour waiting period and requirements that second trimester abortions be performed in equipped and regulated hospitals rather than abortion facilities.

This 2000 ruling was subsequently used to justify striking down the Tennessee law which had required licensure, inspection and regulation of abortion facilities the same as other outpatient surgical facilities.
“The (state) Supreme Court’s decision, even though the word abortion is not in the constitution, found it in there after 200 years. We’re putting the constitution back to where it was before the liberal Supreme Court found abortion in the constitution,” said Rep. Bill Dunn, R-Knoxville.

Without legislative passage of SJR 127  now—and public approval in 2014— pro-life Tennesseans will continue to be unable to pass pro-life protections being enacted by other states around the nation.  For example, without SJR 127 there can be no required ultrasound provisions for abortion vulnerable mothers, no ‘women’s right to know’ laws, no meaningful regulation of abortion facilities in Tennessee.
Additionally, existing protections in Tennessee such as parental consent and ban on use of tax dollars are also at risk of being struck down as violating Tennessee’s judge-created “fundamental right to abortion.”

Part of the reason the fight went on so long is that “Tennessee’s amendment process requires a resolution to win approval by majority votes in one two-year term of the state legislature, then by two-thirds majorities of both legislative chambers in the following two-year term before it can be sent to a statewide referendum at the next gubernatorial election,” according to  Richard Locker, a reporter for the Memphis Commercial Appeal.
“It won Senate approval earlier this year and passed the House today on a bipartisan 76-18 vote – 10 more votes than required in the 99-member House,” he added.
SJR 127 must win voter approval by a majority of those voting in the governor’s election on the same ballot to become part of the Constitution.

TN: SJR 127 one step closer to a public vote...

 Cross Posted at National Right to Life

Just as they did in 2001, 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2009, members of Tennessee’s state Senate overwhelmingly passed SJR 127, a pro-life resolution calling for a public vote to undo a radical pro-abortion ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court in 2000 which established a so-called ‘right to abortion’ in the Tennessee Constitution.
As a result of the 2000 ruling in Planned Parenthood of Middle Tennessee v. Sundquist, common sense protections were immediately stripped from state law books including informed consent for women considering abortion, a 48 hour waiting period and a requirement that second and third trimester abortions be performed in regulated hospitals rather than out-patient abortion facilities.
Subsequently the 2000 ruling was also used as precedent to strike state law requiring the inspection, regulation and licensure of abortion facilities in Tennessee.
“Tennessee’s pro-life senators, led by Senator Mae Beavers, deserve great credit for staying the course and keeping the focus for more than a decade on restoring common sense protections which were stripped away by activist state court judges,” said Brian Harris, president of Tennessee Right to Life. “Tennessee is a pro-life state and it’s only appropriate that the people of Tennessee—not a handful of judges—decide what protections will be enacted for women and children in our state,” said Harris.
 Here are a few added details, according to the Tennessee Commercial Appeal newspaper.
* A two-thirds vote in the state Senate was required. Supporters secured 3/4ths–24-8.
* If the state House approves the resolution by the required 2/3rds majority, as is expected, the resolution will be on the November 2014 general election ballot.
* The language of the resolution reads, “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”
* In its 4-1 decision, the state Supreme Court found that “the Tennessee Constitution contains a stronger right to privacy and abortion than the U.S. Constitution and that the restrictions lawmakers had previously imposed violated those rights.” The “restrictions” are, as noted by Tennessee RTL, commonsense limitations.

TN:Senator Beavers: SJR 127 pro life amendment passes Senate 24-8

Congratulations to Senator Mae Beavers (R) Wilson County, TN for successfully passing SJR 127 24-8 . Now on to the House and finally the ballot on 2014. This is what the ACLU and the abortion industry feared....allowing the people to vote. SJR 127 would state that our state constitution written in the 1800's did not speak to the issue of abortion. It would once again allow our elected legislators instead of judges who do not answer to anyone to make regulations around the issue of abortion.

Thank you Senator Beavers.

TN:Senator Roy Herron loses fight against important pro life amendment

"Be Not Confused. Be Not Misled." 

This senator is NOT PRO LIFE. I am so sick of his story telling. Instead of being a stand up person who admits  they are pro choice he pretends to be pro life and only interested in changing the language of SJR 127 .It has taken 11 years to get this far so his his amendment   to change the language would  make this amendment have to start  all over again. That is his real agenda. As a lawyer, he knows that his  language  would not pass legal scrutiny unless the constiution is changed. 

He always tells the story of his wife's pregnancy with twins. He has been forced to change it since he started inferring that his wife's life was in danger when she was carrying the twins.  He admitted to me when I confronted him on the issue that she was not in danger but the twins lives that was in danger.  Tonight he said that the doctor twice advised abortion because the twins might not make it. Wow! You think your twins might die so you decide to kill them first!! 

Senator Herron, the storyteller, goes off on tangents talking about high risk pregnancies and girls being raped and he knows full well that this has nothing to do with SJR 127 but that is the way he operates....telling stories until you forget what the question is in the first place.

Senator Roy Herron, be not confused, be not misled. This is a pro abortion senator from Dresden.

TN: Once SJR 127 passes the legislature...the PR battle begins

Tennessean features a story on SJR 127 which is being voted on in the state legislature this week.  After 11 years, it is expected to pass but then it must be put on the ballot in 2014 for the voters. The amendment is meant to correct a ruling by 5 judges in 2000 that found that our state constitution approved in 1870 gave our citizens such a broad right to abortion that commonsense restrictions around abortion such as waiting periods and informed consent and that second and third trimester abortions be performed in hospitals must be thrown out.
Because of this ruling by activist unelected  judges, free standing abortion mills such as The W omen's Center in Nashville could operate without being licensed as an ambulatory surgical treatment center and go without inspection and regulations  all these years. Every time the Health Dept. tried to act on that the ACLU would go to court for them and have them back up and running by the end of the business day. The judges were sympathetic to the abortion industry and said since no one had determined how many abortions  were needed to meet that requirement then they were not out of compliance. They never took up the issue of how many abortions would trigger that requirement. To this day unsuspecting women enter thinking that it is inspected and licensed to perform surgical procedures as an ambulatory surgical treatment facility.
The article in the Tennessean is pretty straightforward and accurate which I applaud since the paper has not be shy about showing their bias toward the abortion industry.

"The amendment is meant to reverse a 2000 ruling in which the Tennessee Supreme Court found that the state constitution's right to privacy affords greater protections for abortion access than the U.S. Constitution.The amendment says explicitly that abortion is not protected by the state constitution. "Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion," the amendment says. "The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother."

SJR 127 is expected to pass this week and then the PR battle begins. Already the abortion industry has their friendlies and employees commenting with inaccurate things meant to confuse and scare the public. 

Tennesseans Respond to 2000 Abortion Decision with Increased Pro-Life Majorities at Legislature, SJR 127

OR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 21, 2011   10:00 a.m. CST Contact: Brian Harris 615.298.5433

Tennesseans Respond to 2000 Abortion Decision with Increased Pro-Life Majorities at Legislature, SJR 127 (Nashville)  A decade after the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that the Tennessee Constitution contains a "fundamental right to abortion," pro-life Tennesseans continue to respond with efforts to overturn the Court's 2001 decision.  And while much of the struggle has focused on legislative passage of SJR 127, the election of candidates supportive of the resolution has also been a key objective for pro-life leaders.  According to Tennessee Right to Life, one effect of the Court's abortion ruling is a significantly altered legislative landscape since the time of the Court's ruling in 2000. "With each defeat of SJR 127, pro-life advocates made clear that we would remember in November," said Brian Harris, president of Tennessee Right to Life.  "Opposition has proven to be our friend in helping to strengthen the Legislature's pro-life majorities," said Harris.  "With each set back our numbers increased while those opposing SJR 127 continue to be defeated," Unlike efforts in some other states, the proposed amendment to the state Constitution does not seek to criminalize abortion. Instead, the language nullifies the pro-abortion-rights ruling of the state Supreme Court and makes the Constitution neutral once again on the matter of abortion. If passed this session and approved by voters in 2014, SJR 127 would return authority for abortion regulation to elected legislators who could enact any number of pro-life policies---or none. Having passed the state Senate 5 times since 2001, the resolution was routinely defeated each time in hostile state House sub-committees.  Then in 2009, newly-elected Speaker Kent Williams made passage of SJR 127 a public priority, clearing the way for easy bi-partisan passage, 77-21. Since 2001, the struggle to pass SJR 127 has made the issue a litmus test for the election of many state lawmakers, contributing to the defeat of some who actively opposed the pro-life measure and the election of many more who pledged to support both the pro-life movement and the measure. "When we started the push for SJR 127 in 2001, we had just a handful of legislators that we could realistically count on to do what was needed to help the unborn," said Harris.  "But today the tide has turned and now it's our opponents who have only a handful willing to promote the pro-abortion cause,"  Harris said.  "SJR 127 demonstrates so well what can happen if you stand your ground, focus your resources and refuse to give up or go away."

Commercial Appeal's Ricard Locker ...most accurate on pro life SJR 127.

 Today is a good day in TN regardless of snowfall and school closings. The 107th Tennessee General Assembly  begins its session. This is a big year for pro life advocates as SJR 127 will certainly come up for a vote. We also welcome the most pro life list of legislators. May they not forget why they won election and be  swayed by all the highly paid lobbyists for the abortion industry roaming the halls. The reporters will also be roaming looking for a good sound bite. It is frustrating that no matter how much you try to explain it to them, they can't get it right. Is it because the misinformation is deemed more newsworthy? I hope not. 






Family Action Council /TN  points out some of the misinformation in their email blast today ....

"Yesterday’s Chattanooga Times Free Press reported on SJR 127, saying it “would strip the Tennessee Constitution of any language construed to protect the right to an abortion.” The reporter, who is a friend and actually a good reporter as far as I’m concerned, sort of got it right. He rightly noted that the “right to abortion” in Tennessee’s constitution was a consequence of judicial construction. There is, in fact, no language in the state constitution regarding abortion."

I don't know how many times this particular reporter has been given the correct language and explanation of SJR 127. Every time I see it, I write and correct him.   Fowler goes on to The Scene, a liberal rag  who like the umpire who does not call it like he sees it but sees it like he calls it.

"Of course, the November 11, 2010, edition of the Nashville Scene takes the prize for inaccuracy and hyperbole by saying SJR 127 “would amend the state constitution to strip abortion rights and force women to have the babies of even their rapist.”

Life News: Tennessee Abortion Amendment Gets Boost From 2010 Election

Tennessee Abortion Amendment Gets Boost From 2010 Election

by Steven Ertelt | 
Washington, DC | 
LifeNews.com | 11/9/10
7:13 PM

The amendment pro-life groups have fought for to limit the reach of a pro-abortion state Supreme Court ruling received a boost last week after legislative gains in the 2010 state elections.

The amendment is necessary because the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled 4-1 in 2000 that the state constitution allows unlimited abortions. It is necessary, pro-life advocates say, to be able to pass laws to limit and reduce abortions.

The ruling claimed the Tennessee Constitution contains a fundamental abortion right even broader than Roe v. Wade or the federal constitution and it resulted in the striking down of numerous pro-life Tennessee laws that were helping women and limiting abortions.

“Simply put, passage of pro-life SJR 127 was a key issue in many state House races across Tennessee, especially in rural areas where pro-life candidates defeated longtime incumbents,” Tennessee Right to Life president Brian Harris told LifeNews.com. “In a battle that began in 2001, many of these incumbents initially opposed SJR 127 but had recently begun to vote in favor of the pro-life resolution in order to diffuse a powerful campaign issue.”

He said some of the legislators who were defeated were those who backed the amendment but used every procedural and amendment tool in their arsenal to weaken or kill it.

Only candidates pledging to actively support passage of the resolution were endorsed by Tennessee Right to Life PAC and 73 of 81 endorsed candidates won their races. That includes a number of sincere pro-life Democrats who have assisted since 2000 in helping to move the resolution forward for a public vote, Harris said.

If passed by the Tennessee state House and state Senate in the upcoming session, SJR 127 would be placed on the ballot for approval by Tennesseans during the next gubernatorial election in 2014. Proposed amendments in Tennessee must be passed by two consecutive general assemblies, the second time by a two-thirds supermajority.