Mexico’s foreign ministry late Friday protested Texas Governor Rick Perry’s deployment of National Guard troops to the southern US border to halt the surge of child migrants.

Mexico “reiterates, in a firm and categorical way, its rejection of this measure,” read a statement from the foreign ministry.

“No circumstance at all or change in border security exists that justifies this measure taken by the state.”

The troop deployment “does not contribute in any way to solving the immigration problem,” and is inconsistent with US-Mexico talks aimed at “building a modern, prosperous and safe border,” the statement read.

On Thursday Perry deployed some 1,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico.

Read More: http://news.yahoo.com


Read more at http://minutemennews.com/2014/08/mexico-protests-texas-national-guard-troops-us-border/#T0SwpjLxqeMzjsO7.99

When the Supreme Court handed down its decision on Roe v. Wade, we all knew it was a disaster for children in the womb, and 41 years later there are nearly 56 million abortions to prove it.

But a recent Alabama Supreme Court case brings to light just how hypocritical the courts have been in dealing with the abortion issue.

Alabama (like most states) has statutes on their books that prohibit recklessly endangering a child's life.

So it made perfect sense when Alabama state prosecutors charged meth addict Amanda Kimbrough, 32, for willingly placing her unborn child in danger by abusing methamphetamines during her pregnancy.

Tragically, the little boy, Tim Jr., was born 15 weeks prematurely and died just 19 minutes after his birth.

Then, in what is clearly a precedent setting decision, the Alabama Supreme Court held that the unborn child was a person -- and that endangerment laws which protect children, must also protect unborn children.

Obviously Kimbrough did not use common sense, nor self-control, and was found guilty of carelessly destroying the little life in her womb.

So while I heartily applaud the Alabama courts for their clear-sightedness in affirming the personhood of the preborn, I can't help but fume at the senseless hypocrisy that reigns from our highest Court.

Because of the perverted Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, it is considered a constitutional right for a woman to intentionally have an abortionist kill her unborn child at any time up until birth -- either surgically or with the abortion drug RU-486.

But if a woman recklessly uses drugs that kill her unborn child, even inadvertently, she's arrested.

Under this twisted logic, if a woman just asks an abortionist for the deadly RU-486 cocktail, as opposed to taking meth on her own, she'd have a get out of jail free card.

Obviously, their so-called reasoning is absurd but until you and I ultimately succeed in our crusade to overturn Roe v. Wade, this is what the unborn will face.

So it's vital you and I keep up the fight.

For Life,

Martin Fox, President
National Pro-Life Alliance