Unborn Lives Matter
God values the Life and Dignity of the Unborn. When will MN get on board?
Born alive act
Most Minnesotans agree; Unwanted Children deserve basic human rights!
Every individual has the inherent right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. In America we have a constitution that upholds these God-given rights. So then why in MN are we denying these inherent and constitutional rights to children who survived a botched abortion? Does the fact their existence was unwanted somehow make them subhuman!? Why was language stripped from MN statute last session that denies these babies “Life-Saving Care”!? Rep. Knutson(R) attempted to right this wrong the other week with her bill HF 24. It failed by 1 vote down party lines. Every Democrat Legislator voted against it even though most Democrat voters in MN are in support of life saving care. If our legislators are not voting for the values and interests of Minnesotans, who are they representing?
Read more here – House Democrats vote against bill to restore protections for infants who survive botched abortions
Pregnancy resource centers
What ever happened to Choice?
While pro-abortion facilities receive millions of taxpayer funds (planned parenthood alone receives 24million), crisis-pregnancy centers and maternity homes qualify for ZERO funding. Why is the state only funding one option for women? Whatever happened to “choice”? Why aren’t women given the support, they need during an unplanned pregnancy? Many women want to keep their child, they simple feel unable to do so. If MN tax dollars are going to be spent on pregnancy outcomes, shouldn’t we support the mother’s ability to choose life? Why is termination the only choice given? For years the argument we kept hearing was “pro-choice”? As the laws currently stands, MN is only pro-abortion. Women deserve better. We deserve the option to keep our children.
Read more here – Minnesota House Democrats vote down bill to restore funding for pregnancy resource centers
Wild Rice Act
Does Wild Rice have Inherent worth?
A bill making the rounds at the Capitol that would increase environmental protections for uncultivated wild rice across the state also includes a provision that would make it the “policy of the state to recognize the inherent right of uncultivated wild rice to exist and thrive in Minnesota.” Multiple Indigenous testifiers advocated for wild rice and promoted the plant’s religious significance to the natives of the area by using words like “family”, “alive”, and “inherent” right to life. Verbiage matters and giving a plant an “inherent right to live” sets a dangerous precedent. Especially when the same “inherent right to life” is denied to humans growing in the womb. Wesenberg said that while he supports the major tenet of the bill to provide greater protection of wild rice from invasive species and pesticides, he won’t support a bill “that gives a plant an inherent right over people.” An amendment was offered to switch the word “inherent” to the word “important”. Ultimately, the bill did not move forward but was laid on the table unchanged for a possible inclusion in an omnibus bill. This means that if people do not want the words “inherent right” attributed to wild rice they will need to be watchful of the language in upcoming Enviromental omnibus bills. One testifier from an Indigenous Tribe outside of Cloquet claimed “white supremacy” was at fault for the controversy that prevented the bill from passing out of committee.
Read more here – Legislators debate whether state law should recognize ‘inherent right’ of wild rice to ‘exist and thrive’
Comments are closed