Teachers Saving Children^® Inc. - National

Editor’s Note: The following information was found in the New Riegel Right to Life June 2004 Newsletter and was originally taken from the April 2004 American Life League publication.

During an election year, political types will say almost anything to convince the electorate that they are doing the best they can for all the people. Here are a few of the comments political candidates typically make about abortion, along with some suggestions for responding to those statements.

THEY SAY: I am personally opposed to abortion, but can’t impose my view on others.

WE SAY: Excuse me, but I think you are confused. We are talking about an abortion, which results in the death of a person. We are not discussing a view, but rather a crime. Would you tell us that you personally oppose owning slaves, but would not mind if others did?

THEY SAY: The government has no right to interfere with a personal choice such as whether or not to have an abortion.

WE SAY: The government has a defining role to play in society, especially with regard to defending and protecting the innocent. Therefore, the government has a moral responsibility to make sure that every child who is conceived is protected from criminal acts like abortion that will result in a violent death. What if I asked you about bank robbery? Would you tell me that a citizen has a personal choice to make and the government should not have laws to punish the individual who “chooses” to rob a bank?

THEY SAY: The right to an abortion is the law of the land. I can’t change that.

WE SAY: When the law of the land contradicts logic, reason and the natural law, elected officials have an obligation to change that law. If the law of the land allowed segregation, would you support it? If the law of the land allowed employers to deny jobs to the disabled, would you support it? Abortion kills people; how can you not oppose a law that permits such barbarism to continue?

THEY SAY: Sure, I’m pro-life; I only favor abortion in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is threatened.

WE SAY: Every time an abortion occurs, a child dies. If the father of that child is a criminal, prosecute him – not the baby, who will wind up dead. And when the life of the mother is alleged to be threatened because of her baby, we all know that ethical, moral doctors act to save both patients; they never intend to kill one of them. So if you really want people to support you because you are consistent in your public policy positions, then please be consistent when it comes to abortion.

Politics is often defined as the art of compromise. But we all know that in matters of life and death, there is no room for negotiation. To concede that even one baby’s life may be taken is to agree that killing the innocent is sometimes permissible. Help your local, state, and federal politicians see the facts. Talk to them. Write to them. Pray for them. Vote consistently for life.

Source: Vote November 2nd! By Bradley Mattes, Executive Director of Life Issues Institute, October 4, 2004.

As the election nears, remember only 537 votes in Florida gave George Bush the edge over Al Gore. History demonstrates there have been other close presidential races.

1796 – John Adams beats Thomas Jefferson by only a few hundred votes. 1800 – Jefferson wins New York by only a few hundred votes forcing the election to be decided by the House of Representatives who finally declared Jefferson President. 1824 – Again four candidates divided the electorate in such small margins that the House of Representatives is forced to decide the election. 1880 – James Garfield wins by only 10,000 votes, in an election where 9 million voted. 1884 – Grove Cleveland wins by only 29,000 votes. 1916 – Woodrow Wilson wins re-election by only 3,000 votes in California. 1948 – Harry Truman goes to bed thinking he lost the election, only to wake up the next morning to the news he had won the election by 2 million votes. 1960 – Kennedy beats Nixon by only 15,000 votes.

There is no doubt; this year’s election will have a profound impact on you and your family. Politicians, from your local school board to the White House, hold immense power. But YOU decide whether or not they take office. Please take the time to exercise your privilege and responsibility to vote.

On Monday, July 5, 2004, the delegates to the National Education Association Representative Assembly voted by secret ballot on the following Presidential Recommendation. “Should the National Education Association recommend to its members the election of John F. Kerry as the President of the United States?” The results: Yes – 7,390 (86.50%); No – 1,153 (13.50%).

The question to many is how does the NEA select political candidates for recommendation to its members. In an article published in the May/June 2004 issue of Ohio Schools (the magazine of the Ohio Education Association), this question was answered. The following is an excerpt from that article.

“The Association – at all levels – recommends to its members candidates who will work with educators to develop commonsense solutions to the challenges in America’s classrooms, schools, and communities. The Association seeks candidates who understand that leadership is "more than memorable slogans and that you can’t have reform without resources."

The NEA Fund Council’s recommendations for federal candidates are based on support for issues affecting children and public education contained in the NEA Legislative Program, which is adopted each year by the NEA Representative Assembly. Issues on the questionnaire included support for needed changes in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; child nutrition, health, and child care; funding for education; and federal policies affecting teachers and other education employees, such as wages, hours, and working conditions.

The NEA Presidential recommendation process involves the NEA’s Fund for Children and Political Education Council, the NEA Board of Directors, state affiliates and delegates to the Representative Assembly. It includes two phases: the primary recommendation and the general election recommendation.

Last May [2003], the FCPE Council adopted a candidate questionnaire. In July [2003], the Council adopted a list of viable candidates. "Viable" means a candidate for the nomination of a major party; a major party is one that received at [least] 30 percent of the votes in the previous presidential election.

Candidates are sent the approved candidate questionnaire and must return it by a given deadline. Those candidates who complete and return the questionnaire are asked to participate in a personal interview with the NEA President, in his role as chair of the FCPE Council. For the 2004 election cycle, interviews were completed before the October 2, 2003 Council meeting.

The NEA President determines the "acceptability" of candidates. Acceptability is defined as completion of the questionnaire, participation in the interview, and support for a majority of the NEA’s positions as indicated by the answers in the questionnaire and interview.

In October 2003, President Weaver recommended a list of acceptable candidates…Each state affiliate must concur with NEA’s recommendation before NEA can act in their state on behalf of any candidate in pursuit of the nomination. A state affiliate can concur with none, any, or all of the acceptable candidates. If a state concurs with "none," NEA cannot act for any candidate in that state.

The President of the NEA recommends to the Representative Assembly a candidate to be elected to the Presidency. The NEA RA must take final action to recommend the election of a candidate for the Presidency. Recommendation requires a 58 percent approval of the delegates to Representative Assembly.”

This complicated, lengthy, political process is why it is so important for each grassroots member of the NEA to consider getting involved by becoming a delegate representative to the State Affiliate RAs and/or to the NEA RA. If one does not feel led to be a delegate, then please take the time to get involved by becoming educated about the delegate candidates and VOTING! Remember, one vote does make a difference – no matter what election is taking place.

More than 150,000 people used WeVoteProLife.com during the 2002 midterm elections to find out how candidates stood on pro-life issues. Now, the Internet’s only comprehensive pro-life voting guide web site is back.