Also known as Right to Life Advocates, founded in 1974, net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational and Pro-Life purposes. Life Advocates supports positive, pro-life solutions to human problems as alternatives to abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, or other deliberate destruction of human beings. We have been involved in the legislative process from the beginning, promoting issues and legislation protecting the innocent unborn, as well as other important issues affecting families.
Statement of Purpose
WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF-EVIDENT:
That all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among which is...
THE RIGHT TO LIFE;
AND That the very existence of human life conveys a supreme value that is absolute and unsurrenderable, regardless of: size, age, degree of development, physical or mental competence, state of health, condition of dependency, or any relative values such as wantedness or usefulness, or political, religious, social, financial, or racial characteristics or conditions;
AND That human life begins at the moment of union of the mother's ovum and the father's sperm and is one continuum and inviolable until natural death unquestionably has occurred.
The right to life of each human being shall be equally preserved and protected by every other human being in the society and by the society as a whole. If doubt exists whether a human being exists and is alive, then because of that possibility that a human life does exist, it shall be assumed that there is a human life until all doubt can be dismissed, otherwise the full rights of a human being shall be preserved and protected.
No relative value judgment shall be exercised favoring or denying one human life relative to another, so that attack upon human life is allowed.
Pursuant to these principles, we, live human beings, join in the defense of the RIGHT TO LIFE of all human beings, so that, and we, may share the liberty and pursuit of happiness we all so cherish.
To this end, LIFE ADVOCATES support positive pro-life solutions to human problems as alternatives to abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, or other deliberate destruction of human beings. We seek to form our society in such a way that any such deliberate and violent action will remain an unspeakable crime.
Nick Cannon says Planned Parenthood engaging in 'modern day eugenics'
November 29, 2016
Nick Cannon spoke out against Planned Parenthood, saying the reproductive health organization promotes “population control”
October 19, 2016
- Ruling Halts Transgender Bathroom Policies
Judge Reaffirms Ruling Halting U.S. Guidelines for School Transgender Bathroom Policies
Miriam Rozen, Texas Lawyer
The Texas federal judge who previously blocked a nationwide mandate by President Barack Obama's administration to allow transgender public school students to use bathroom facilities matching their gender identities reaffirmed his ruling this week.
In his order, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor of the Northern District of Texas also addressed clarifications that federal agencies, which are defendants in the case filed by Texas and other states, had sought.
O'Connor said his preliminary injunction did not apply to the federal agencies' core missions to combat discrimination based on race, national origin or disabilities.
O'Connor also said his preliminary injunction is limited to the issue of access to "intimate facilities" in the schools. He said the federal agencies may still offer "textual analysis" of sex discrimination laws in other contexts.
O'Connor also ordered both the plaintiff states and the federal agencies to brief him by the end of October on additional issues, including questions about whether his injunction implicates Title VII in any manner—specifically, where school employees and staff may share "intimate facilities" with students.
In their lawsuit, Texas and the other plaintiff states alleged that the initiative to allow transgender student to use bathrooms matching their identified gender, launched by the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Education, ran afoul of Title IX of the U.S. Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in public education.
In August when he issued his first injunction in the case, O'Connor, who splits his time between the Wichita Falls and Fort Worth division of the Northern District of Texas, where the plaintiffs filed for the injunction, cited Section 106.33 of Title IX to reach a conclusion that federal law contemplated that bathrooms in public education should be divided by sex. That section, the judge ruled, requires that "a recipient may provide separate toilet, locker room, and shower facilities on the basis of sex, but such facilities provided of one sex shall be comparable to such facilities provided for students of the other sex."
The government argued that Title IX is ambiguous in its application to transgender students and that the new regulation should be given deference unless the agencies' own interpretation of the regulation is clearly erroneous.
But O'Connor found that Title IX in not ambiguous when it comes to separating bathrooms by sex