ABSTINENCE EDUCATORS UNDER ATTACK 
In a release issued on April 13, Project Reality, the leader in Abstinence Education since 1985, responded to much-publicized criticism of programs that teach youngsters that abstinence from sexual activity prior to marriage is the only way to absolutely avoid a crisis pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, or emotional turmoil.

"A much touted report released by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., costing taxpayers more than six million dollars, that reported little to no significant results on students participating in four small programs, is being used to discredit abstinence education programs across the country.

" 'This is a sign of government waste at its worst,' stated Kathleen M. Sullivan, founder of Project Reality, which declined to take part in the Mathematica study nearly ten years ago, when questions arose about possible flaws in study design, questionnaires and cost effectiveness. 'Time has shown that our instinct not to participate in this study was correct,' Mrs. Sullivan concluded.

"Several questions are being raised by abstinence educators about the validity of the Mathematica study, including:

• Studying children as young as 3rd grade-not the average age for abstinence programs and/or sexual activity.

• Researching merely four programs-a very small sample of the 900 federally funded abstinence education programs.

• Choosing control groups from the same schools as the program intervention students. This carries a high likelihood of contamination between the control group and the intervention group.

  The number of students studied-1,209 in the program and 848 in the control group-a very small sample size for spending more than six million dollars.

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins told LifeNews.com, "The four programs that Mathematica evaluated (beginning in 1999) have already been revised and improved, and they are by no means representative of abstinence education as a whole." "They also include no high school component-so one logical conclusion is that to achieve the greatest effectiveness, programs must be intensive and long-term, so that the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to reject sex before marriage are constantly reinforced-particularly in the pivotal high school years," he said.

WHERE IS FRED THOMPSON ON THE RIGHT TO LIFE? 
The answer is, we don't know. What we do know is the following:

• "On abortion, both Thompson and Cooper (Thompson's Democrat opponent in the 1994 U.S. Senate race) are pro-choice. But Thompson favors parental notification, Cooper voted against it." (National Review, 6/27/94)

• Although Thompson says he's pro-choice, his voting record on abortion issues (which includes opposing Henry Foster's nomination for surgeon general) has earned him high marks from both the Christian Coalition and the National Right to Life Committee. He has also won the backing of the tobacco industry and the NRA. (Washington Monthly, 12/1/96)

Click here to read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/03/12/87865.aspx

National Right to Life Committee's voting records for the 105th, 106th and 107th sessions of Congress show that, on the votes NRLC scored, he voted to restrict or regulate the practice of abortion every time. He did not earn a 100% rating from NRLC because he voted for the McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform measure. (http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/home/)

But, voting to restrict or regulate abortion does not necessarily mean he believes that every innocent human life is entitled to protection under the law from conception until natural death. We do not know where Fred Thompson stands on the right to life of the human embryo. Nor do we know whether he justifies abortion for babies conceived through rape or incest.

Before pro-lifers jump on the Fred Thompson band wagon, and it appears that some are doing so without performing their due diligence, they and we need the answers to these questions. The fine pro-life candidates who are already in the race for the 2008 Republican nomination-Senator Sam Brownback, Congressman Duncan Hunter, Congressman Tom Tancredo, and Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee-should expect no less of pro-life Republican primary voters.

GIULIANI TELLS IOWANS TO "GET BEYOND" ABORTION 
Rudy Giuliani, in an interview with the Des Moines Register last weekend, said regarding abortion, "Our party has to get beyond issues like that." "Our party is going to grow and we are going to win in 2008 if we're a party characterized by what we're for, not if we're a party that's known for what we're against.

Mr. Giuliani has, throughout his political career, displayed a hardness of heart toward the fate of babies waiting to be born that is rare among Republican politicians. The Republican Party is FOR protecting innocent babies from being torn from their mother's wombs and brutally killed. The Republican Party is FOR protecting the taxpayers from complicity in abortion through their tax dollars. The Republican Party is FOR protecting under the law, every innocent human life from conception until natural death. The Republican Party is FOR the appointment of judges who respect innocent human life.

Rudolph Giuliani is AGAINST all of the pro-life principles which the Republican Party Platform has stood for since the first Republican National Convention after the Roe v. Wade decision in 1976.

Please see the April 16, 2007 Newsday column by Raymond J. Keating, "Conservatives Should Abort Rudy's Bid."