ELECTION 2012 GUAM: ESPERANSA STRONGLY OPPOSES THESE CANDIDATES

The Esperansa Project is a community group organized to effect pro-life legislation wherever possible. If you do not wish to receive emails from this group please unsubscribe at the link at the bottom of this email.

November 5, 2012; 3:30PM

 

RE: ELECTION 2012 - ESPERANSA STRONGLY OPPOSES THESE CANDIDATES

Dear Friend of the Unborn:

Thank you for your patience. The Governor's call for a special session to vote on Bill 52-31 (informed consent for abortion), and questions arising from amended language in Section 4 of the bill, demanded that we take extra care in what we have to say about the candidates for the 2012 senatorial seats.

In the end, the vote - and the complications which followed - requires us to address incumbents and non-incumbents separately. And, among the incumbents, it is imperative that we further distinguish three categories: 1) Strongly Oppose, 2) Strongly Endorse, 3) You Decide. 

Because we do not take the STRONGLY OPPOSE category lightly, and because we take seriously our obligation to thoroughly substantiate our positions, we are addressing - in this email - only the STRONGLY OPPOSE category of candidates since the explanation is quite lengthy. A separate email addressing non-incumbents and the other two categories of incumbents is forthcoming in a few hours.

Also, it is critical that voters understand that Esperansa does not wish to engage in a simple black and white overview of who is pro-life and who is not. Those labels mean nothing to us. What matters is how each candidate responds to legislation in matters involving unborn life and NOT what they personally believe or feel.

ESPERANSA STRONGLY OPPOSES THE FOLLOWING CANDIDATES:

Senator Ben Pangelinan

Senator Tom Ada

Senator Judith Won Pat

Senator Aline Yamashita

We STRONGLY OPPOSE these candidates not just because they voted against Bill 52, but because of the wider implications of such a vote.  Our explanation follows.

*****

Let us recall that the purpose of Bill 52 is to protect the well-being of women by ensuring that all women contemplating an abortion receive complete and accurate information material to her decision whether to have an abortion.  Toward that end, Bill 52 requires abortion providers to apprise women regarding:

1. The probable gestational age and anatomical characteristics of the unborn child at the time the abortion is to be performed;
2. The risks associated with abortion and childbirth;
3. The availability of public assistance for prenatal care, childbirth, and neonatal care; 
4. The availability of public medical insurance and family support for qualifying families; and
5. The liability of fathers to assist in the support of the child, and the legal process for determining paternity. 

In the seminal 1992 U.S. Supreme Court case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the lead opinion said this about informed consent legislation like Bill 52:

The U.S. Supreme Court "recognize[s] a substantial government interest justifying a requirement that a woman be apprised of the health risks of abortion and childbirth. It cannot be questioned that psychological well-being is a facet of health.Nor can it be doubted that most women considering an abortion would deem the impact on the fetus relevant, if not dispositive, to the decision. In attempting to ensure that a woman apprehend the full consequences of her decision, the State furthers the legitimate purpose of reducing the risk that a woman may elect an abortion, only to discover later, with devastating psychological consequences, that her decision was not fully informed."

Casey, 505 US 833, 882 (1992) (emphasis added).  This is very powerful language from the highest court in the country and it recognizes that informed consent legislation like Bill 52 plays a legitimate and, indeed, vital role in safeguarding the health of women.  

This decision also recognizes a very real and tragic phenomenon: that some women who undergo abortion do so without fully understanding the full implications of abortion - including the fact that abortion kills a human life - or without knowing all of the options available to her.  Some of these women only learn later what they should have been apprised of before they had an abortion, and suffer terribly as a result.  This, of course, is exactly what Bill 52 is designed to address.  

So, the Casey decision must have been penned by the Court's then arch-conservatives: Justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, right?  Nope.  The decision was written by three stalwart supporters of abortion: Justices Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter.  This should not come as a surprise.  Although these three justices are "pro-choice," they also recognize that no choice is freely made when it is not fully informed.  When a woman is kept in the dark about her options, any choice she makes is illusory.

So, where does that put Senators Pangelinan, (Tom) Ada, Won Pat and Yamashita?    It puts them at the far extreme of the pro-abortion spectrum, in the company of the abortion providers themselves.  Like the abortion providers, Senators Pangelinan, (Tom) Ada, Won Pat and Yamashita know that once fully informed some women will choose not to undergo an abortion.  It is not surprising, then, that abortion providers oppose informed consent legislation: it's bad for business.  The fewer unborn children they kill, the less money abortion providers make.  

What is surprising, however, (indeed astounding), is that Senators Pangelinan, (Tom) Ada, Won Pat and Yamashita share the position of the abortion providers.   They oppose Bill 52 because it mandates that women receive complete and accurate information regarding the decision whether to undergo an abortion.  As such, they are not merely "pro-choice" but represent an extreme view that supports and promotes abortion at all costs; and which puts the interests of the pro-abortion movement above the interests of women to be fully informed before they make an irrevocable and life altering decision.

For this reason, we strongly encourage you not to vote for Senators Pangelinan, (Tom) Ada, Won Pat and Yamashita and to share this message with as many people as possible from now until the time polls close on Tuesday. 

 The Esperansa Project