March 25, 2015

BREAKING: Jill Stanek, pro-lifers arrested at pro-life sit-in

The planned sit-in/prayer vigil at Speaker John Boehner’s office today has culminated in the arrest of eight pro-life leaders, including Rev. Pat Mahoney and our own Jill Stanek.

Here is the speech that Jill gave just before she was arrested. Please be in prayer for these leaders, who were attempting to give voice to preborn children:



Click here for the full article.

Kansas Legislature Approves Groundbreaking Dismemberment Abortion Ban

The Kansas House of Representatives today approved, on a voice vote, the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act, groundbreaking legislation that will prohibit brutal dilation & evacuation (D&E) dismemberment abortions in the state. The state Senate previously approved the bill, 31-9, in February. Pro-life Governor Sam Brownback (R) is expected to sign the bill, making Kansas the first state in the nation to enact the National Right to Life model legislation.

Sponsored by state Sen. Garrett Love (R-Montezuma), the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act has been the top state legislative priority for National Right to Life and its affiliate, Kansans for Life (KFL). In announcing the bill at a press conference in January, KFL Legislative Director Kathy Ostrowski observed, “With the discussion about, and passage of this bill, the public will see that dismemberment abortions brutally – and unacceptably – rip apart small human beings who have all of their internal organs and who have perfectly formed fingers and toes.”

Click here to read the full article.

March 19, 2015

Abortion provider: There’s more to abortion than ‘blood and tissue’

Merle Hoffman is the founder and owner of an abortion clinic. She wrote about witnessing her first few abortions:

What I saw a running through those vacuum tubes when I first started my work was only blood and tissue, unformed and messy. It was easy to imagine the fetus as a bunch of cells that one could define as one wished.

But even in the beginning I had an inkling that this mentality was the easy way out, that it didn’t go far enough to do justice to the experience of abortion.

Even though Hoffman intended to make a living providing abortions, the quote reveals she knew that dismissing the fetus as a “bunch of cells” is dishonest.

Click here to read the full article.

Premature baby dies and comes back to life after parents’ life-saving touch

After giving birth, the couple learned they had both a daughter and a son, and the doctor asked them if they had a name for the boy, which they did: Jamie. Kate says: […] we noticed the dynamic in the room was quite strange. […] He [the doctor] sat on the edge of the bed and said, ‘Jamie didn’t make it. We’ve lost him.’

Kate instinctively grabbed her son and put him skin to skin against her chest so he could hear her heartbeat. She quickly instructed David to take off his shirt and get in the bed with them so that Jamie could have as much body heat as possible. There they stayed, skin to skin, telling their son about his twin sister Emily, and asking him to look after her. They cried as they told him about the plans they had for him and about his extended family.

The newborn lifted his head. Then he grabbed his father’s finger, and he opened his eyes. Jamie made it known to his parents and the medical team that he was most definitely alive. Everyone in the room was shocked and amazed at the miracle unfolding before them.

Click here for the complete article.

Mother helplessly watches her baby die as hospital staff refuse to save him

Riley Goodger was only 22 weeks and three days along when his mother, Emma Jones, went into labor in December of 2013. His older brother, Tyler, had been stillborn in 2012, so his mother, Emma Jones, was understandably frightened and heartbroken to be going into pre-term labor.

Riley weighed only 480 grams, but he was breathing independently. He had a fighting chance, but according to Wales Online, the medical team refused to treat him because Riley was born eight days before the existing abortion cut-off.

"He wasn’t crying, but I could see he was breathing – and his heart was beating through his chest wall. But no care could be provided for him even though he was living" stated Emma Jones.

Click here for the complete article.

Pro-choice and atheist, woman nevertheless felt remorse over her abortion

One woman shared her abortion story in the journal America:

“A terrible, raw guilt had festered in me for many years. Ever since the day I had walked into a trendy women’s health clinic and filled out the paperwork for what I believed was a simple medical procedure. At the time I was an ardent feminist as well as an atheist. I had studied ethics in graduate school and was fully versed in all the philosophical arguments for and against this particular procedure. I firmly believed that abortion was morally acceptable if performed in the early stages of a pregnancy. I firmly believed that a woman’s rights took precedence over the rights of the fetus."

"I began having flashbacks in which I relived the experience over and over. Each time, I saw myself walking into the clinic. I saw myself climbing up on the table. I felt the crushing pain. I saw the woman standing beside me holding my hand. Wracked with guilt and selfloathing, I wept. How could I have ended my child’s life?"

Click here for the full article.

'Justified' Actor Nick Searcy to Direct 'Gosnell' Abortion Crime Drama

With each milestone in its development, the Gosnell movie makes it harder and harder for the media to ignore the name of “America's biggest serial killer.”  FX’s Justified star Nick Searcy will direct Gosnell, a crime drama telling what the media refused to – the story of convicted Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell. The Hollywood Reporter broke the story March 18 and detailed how Searcy felt “both excited and humbled” to voice the “story that many in Hollywood were unwilling to tell.”

Kermit Gosnell was convicted May 2013 of first-degree murder of three babies (while the Grand Jury Report, The Hollywood Reporter noted, “alleges Gosnell killed hundreds of infants by sticking scissors into their necks”). The trial, in which witnesses described baby abortion survivors “swimming" in toilets “to get out,” attracted a mere 12 – 15 reporters. Only after 56 days, multiple letters from members of the House of Representatives and a public outcry, did all three broadcast networks report on Gosnell.

Click here for the full article.

Company wins 'final victory' against HHS mandate

The March 16 permanent injunction from U.S. District Judge John Kane for the District of Colorado said the plaintiffs in the case were protected by the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

“This final victory, a permanent injunction protecting us from the abortion-pill, contraception and sterilization mandate, has taught our family that we have been right to put God first, and be proactive to protect our right to live and work according to our faith. Spiritual treasures come before business tools.” William Newland, a co-owner of Hercules Industries, stated.

Click here to read the full article.

Planned Parenthood official: women get “less than sympathetic treatment”

A Planned Parenthood state official, who did not want to give his name, admitted that some women who go to Planned Parenthood are treated poorly. In a 2013 pro-abortion book, he says:

We try to make very sure that everyone seen in our clinics – for any service, not just for abortions – is treated with kindness and courtesy. But the reality is that there is no law that can guarantee sympathetic behavior. There are all sorts of reasons today why women get less than sympathetic treatment: patient overload, job-related stress and the necessity of hiring office staff who may not be fully “in sync” with the right to choose, to name just three.

Abby Johnson wrote an article in which she noted that Planned Parenthood will hire just about anyone because they are so desperate for employees to work there.

Click here to read the entire article.

ACTION ALERT - UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child - ACTION ALERT

HR 147 (RATIFY CONVENTION ON CHILD RIGHTS)

Sponsor: Mary E. Flowers

This bill urges President Obama to submit the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child to the U.S. Senate for its advice and consent without delay, and further calls on the U.S. Senate to move swiftly to approve the Convention.


However, under this resolution, children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions without parental knowledge or consent.

References: -Katie Hatziavramidis, Parental Involvement Laws for Abortion in the United States and the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child: Can International Law Secure the Right to Choose for Minors?, 16 Tex. J. Women & L. 185, 202-203 (Spring 2007):

“The unmistakable trend in the United States is to consistently increase anti-choice legislation, particularly with respect to minors. Ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child by the United States holds a strong possibility of assisting minors who seek abortions without parental interference.  [*203]  The Convention may offer the best hope for securing adolescent reproductive freedoms on a global level. If enough diplomatic pressure were exerted on the United States to compel it to ratify the treaty, the CRC could provide significant improvements in the outlook for reproductive freedom for minors.”

Paragraph 3, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Columbia, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 42nd sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/COL/CO/3 (2006): “The Committee notes with appreciation…decisions of the Constitutional Court on…the partial decriminalization of abortion.”



Paragraph 55, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Chile, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 44th sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/CHL/CO/3 (2007): “The Committee…is concerned over the high rate of teenage pregnancies, the criminalization of the termination of pregnancies in all circumstances….”

This bill is currently in the Youth & Young Adults committee.  The hearing is scheduled for March 19th at 11:00 am. 

ACTION ALERT!  

Fill out a witness slip in opposition of this the bill before the hearing convenes March 19, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.


Remember to check the boxes for "Opponent," "Record of Appearance Only," Enter "Illinois Federation for Right to Life" for the Agency field and "Citizen" for the Title Field. Make sure to "Agree to Terms" before submitting. Click here to fill out a witness slip for this bill.

Please contact as many of the committee members as you can and let them know that you OPPOSE HR 147, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.


Chairperson: Laura Fine (217) 782-4194
Vice-Chairperson: Deborah Conroy (217) 782-8158
Republican Spokesperson: C.D. Davidsmeyer (217) 782-1840
Member: Adam Brown (217) 782-8398
Member: Terri Bryant (217) 782-0387
Member: Tom Demmer (217) 782-0535
Member: Mary E. Flowers (217) 782-4207
Member: Robyn Gabel (217) 782-8052
Member: Frances Ann Hurley (217) 782-8200
Member: Jeanne M Ives (217) 558-1037
Member: Natalie A. Manley (217) 782-3316
Member: Martin J. Moylan (217) 782-8007

Click here for more information on the bill.

Click here for the full text of the bill.

March 18, 2015

Legislative UPDATE


Health Care Right of Conscience Act - UPDATE

SB1564

Sponsor: Senator Biss

This bill amends the Health Care Right of Conscience Act:  provides that notwithstanding any other law, a health care facility, or any physician or health care personnel working in the facility, may refuse to permit, perform, assist in, counsel about, suggest, recommend, refer for, or participate in health care services because of a conscience-based objection.    

This bill now undermines Healthcare Right of Conscience by requiring pro-life facilities to refer pro-abort services to other facilities thus violating their morals or beliefs.

From the bill text:

Amends the Health Care Right of Conscience Act. Makes changes in the Section concerning findings and policy. Defines "access to care and information protocols" and "material information". Provides that notwithstanding any other law, a health care facility, or any physician or health care personnel working in the facility, may refuse to permit, perform, assist in, counsel about, suggest, recommend, refer for, or participate in health care services because of a conscience-based objection only if the refusal occurs in accordance with written access to care and information protocols designed to ensure that (1) the patient receives material information in a timely fashion; and (2) the refusal will not impair the patient's health by causing delay of or inability to access the refused health care service. Provides that nothing in the Act shall be construed to prevent a health care facility from requiring that physicians or health care personnel working in the facility comply with access to care and information protocols.

This amendment requires a written referral to a facility that will complete the refused services including abortion, contraceptives and family planning.

From the bill text:

...a written document that contains the names of and contact information for health care facilities, physicians, or health care personnel that can provide the patient the particular form of health care service refused...

"Health care" is defined as any phase of patient care, including but not limited to, testing; diagnosis; prognosis; ancillary research; instructions; family planningcounsellingreferrals, or any other advice in connection with the use or procurement of contraceptives and sterilization or abortion procedures; medication; or surgery or other care or treatment rendered by a physician or physicians, nurses, paraprofessionals or health care facility, intended for the physical, emotional, and mental well-being of persons...

This bill passed out of the Judiciary Committee with votes of 7 yea to 3 nay and is on the Senate Floor for a second hearing on March 19th.

We will report the roll call as soon as it become available.

Click here for more information on this bill.

Click here for the full bill text.

___________________________________________________

Public Aid for Abortions - UPDATE

HB4013

Sponsor: Sara Feigenholtz

This bill amends the State Employees Group Insurance Act of 1971 and removes a provision prohibiting the non-contributory portion of a health-benefits program from including the expenses of obtaining an abortion, induced miscarriage or induced premature birth.  This bill removes all restrictions on tax payer funding of abortions.

This bill passed out of the Human Services Committee with 8 voting yea and 6 nay, on March 18th and on the House Floor for a 2nd debate.

We will report the roll call as soon as it become available.

Click here for more information on this bill.

___________________________________________________

Click here for more information on these and other bills.

March 17, 2015

'Choose Life' Banner Banned in NYC St. Patrick's Day Parade


The Children First Foundation, a pro-adoption group that applied to march in the 2015 St. Patrick's Day Parade, will not be marching today in the world's oldest and largest parade because it was blocked, stonewalled and officially rejected by the NYC St. Patrick's Day Parade Committee. Why? That is an important and serious question that the parade organizers should be asked to answer.

Following the Press Conference in September that introduced Cardinal Dolan as the 2015 Grand Marshal and explained the "change of policy," the Wall Street Journal clearly reported that a pro-life group would also "march with a banner."

Dennis Saffran, in a well-documented article entitled "Parade Blarney" published in City Journal, the nation's premier urban-policy magazine, (www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0313ds.html) chronicles the parade organizers' obvious shenanigans that led to the "exclusion" of a pro-life banner while allowing the "inclusion" of a gay banner in the 2015 St. Patrick's Day Parade in New York City.

In addition, Bill Donohue, President of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, also carefully explained why he withdrew his own organization in protest from the 2015 Parade last September: "My reasons for withdrawing from the parade have nothing to do with Cardinal Dolan or with gays. It has to do with being betrayed by the parade committee. They not only told me one thing and did another, they decided to include a gay group that is neither Catholic nor Irish while stiffing pro-life Catholics. This is as stunning as it is indefensible."

History will now report that in 2015 there was "no room in the parade" for an organization dedicated to helping pregnant women. Fortunately, the Church of the Holy Innocents, extended a warm welcome to The Children First Foundation and to their banned "Choose Life" banner at their historic church at 128 West 37th Street, close to the parade route between Broadway and 7th Avenue.

Contact: Dr. Elizabeth Rex, President,
Source: The Children First Foundation

March 13, 2015

U.S. Senate Dems Block Anti-Human Trafficking Bill Over Abortion

A previously bipartisan U.S. Senate bill meant to combat human trafficking is now being blocked by Democrats over an abortion funding provision.

Senate Democrats have threatened to block Senate Bill 178 over a provision added by Republicans regarding abortion funding.

“Republicans cast this as a routine extension of the so-called Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of federal funds for abortions except in limited circumstances,” reported Fox News.

“But Democrats said the legislation would mark a significant expansion since it applies to personal funds paid in fines.”

Also called the Justice for Trafficking Victims Act, S. 178 was introduced by Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas in January.

Meant as a bill to combat human trafficking, S. 178 accrued over 30 cosponsors from both parties in the weeks leading up to this week’s planned vote.

“The bill imposes an additional penalty of $5,000 on any non-indigent person or entity convicted of a crime involving: (1) peonage, slavery, or trafficking in persons; (2) sexual abuse; (3) sexual exploitation and other abuse of children; (4) transportation for illegal sexual activity; or (5) human smuggling in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act,” read S. 178’s summary.

“The bill expands the definition of ‘child abuse’ under the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 to include human trafficking and the production of child pornography and expands criminal sanctions to include persons who patronize or solicit children for commercial sex acts (buyers).”

Regarding the Hyde Amendment addition, Democrat U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois announced his introduction of an amendment to remove the anti-abortion funding language.

“This language paves the way for political leaders in the future to interfere even more with a woman’s basic personal health decisions,” stated U.S. Sen. Durbin.

In response, Republican Majority leader Sen. Mitch McConnell has announced that the Senate must vote on S. 178 with its language or else he will hold up the vote for Loretta Lynch.

A nominee for U.S. Attorney General, Lynch is expected to replace the outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder and has been widely complimented for her legal experience.

“To get their vote on Lynch, Democrats will have to get off of the trafficking bill. And, so far, Republicans aren’t showing any willingness to remove the controversial abortion language,” reported the National Journal.

Written by Michael Gryboski
Sources: Fox NewsNational JournalChristianPost.comIllinois Family Action

National Survey of Prolife Pregnancy Centers Shows Major Influence of Ultrasound on a Mother’s Choice for Life

The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), a national legal network of prolife pregnancy centers, has unveiled the results of a survey of its medical members indicating the powerful and effective impact of ultrasound upon an abortion-minded patient empowering her to choose life.

NIFLA has a membership of more than 1,350 pregnancy resource centers, of which 1050 currently operate as medical clinics providing ultrasound confirmation of pregnancy to patients who are abortion-minded or abortion-vulnerable. NIFLA’s medical clinics were asked to report the number of ultrasounds provided in 2013 to such abortion-at-risk patients and what percentage of such patients decided against abortion and for life.

Four-hundred and ten (410) of NIFLA’s medical membership (less than one-half) reported providing 75,318 ultrasound confirmations of pregnancy in 2013 on patients identified as either abortion-minded or abortion-vulnerable. Of these abortion at risk patients, 58,634 chose to carry to term, indicating that 78% of those mothers who saw an ultrasound image of their unborn child before deciding about abortion chose life.

When asked whether ultrasound confirmation of pregnancy has a positive impact upon a mother considering abortion to choose life 83.5% said “Absolutely,” 15.76% said “More than likely,” and 0.74% said, “Only a small impact.”

“These results show conclusively what we have known for many years. When a prolife pregnancy center becomes a medical clinic and provides ultrasound confirmation of pregnancy the vast majority of patients receiving such services will choose life,” said attorney Thomas Glessner, President of NIFLA.

“Planned Parenthood has tried over the years to downplay the significance of ultrasound examinations for a pregnant mother considering abortion,” continued Glessner. “However, the results of this survey, which is the largest national sampling to date on this issue, conclusively show that when a mother considering abortion sees an ultrasound image of her baby she will, more than likely choose life.”

Glessner also noted that the sampling was from less than one-half of NIFLA’s current medical membership. NIFLA will be conducting this survey on an annual basis.

Source: National Institute of Family and Life Advocates Press Release

Touchdown! Notre Dame scores big on HHS mandate at Supreme Court

In a potentially groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court nullified a federal court ruling against the University of Notre Dame on the HHS contraception mandate and sent it back for reconsideration by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

The university is “gratified” by the decision, said vice president of public affairs and communications, Paul J. Browne. They had requested the case be remanded by the Court in light of the Hobby Lobby decision last June.

“Notre Dame continues to challenge the federal mandate as an infringement on our fundamental right to the free exercise of our Catholic faith,” Browne said.

Notre Dame is one of well over 100 non-profit institutions to sue the federal government over a mandate requiring that employers provide health care plans covering contraception, sterilization and some drugs that can cause early abortions.

After the initial mandate was announced, hundreds of organizations, churches, and business across the country voiced their religious objection. The government subsequently developed an “accommodation,” under which non-profit employers who religiously objected to offering such coverage could send a notice of objection to a third party who would then offer the coverage.

Notre Dame and other plaintiffs have argued that they would still be violating their religious convictions by cooperating in such a way with the contraception coverage, which they believe to be immoral.

The university’s request for an injunction offering protection from the mandate was initially denied, and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling last February. The university then appealed its case to the Supreme Court.

The contraception mandate “violated our religious beliefs by requiring Notre Dame’s participation in a regulatory scheme to provide abortion-inducing products, contraceptives, and sterilization,” Browne stated.

Last June, the Supreme Court issued a major ruling on the contraception mandate, saying that the federal regulation cannot be applied to “closely-held corporations” – including arts and crafts retailer Hobby Lobby – if their owners have religious objections to it.

Now, the Supreme Court is instructing the appeals court to reconsider Notre Dame's case, taking into account the Hobby Lobby ruling in support of religious freedom.

Some observers said the Court’s Monday decision could foreshadow this religious freedom protection being reinforced more broadly for other religious employers as well.

The Becket Fund, which supported the university in a “friend of the court” brief, called Monday’s ruling “a major blow” to the mandate and a “strong signal” that the Court will uphold the religious freedom of institutions like Notre Dame in similar cases.

The ruling is all the more important because the university was the only non-profit organization without legal protection from the mandate, the Becket Fund added. The government was using the Seventh Circuit’s denial of an injunction to argue against other non-profit organizations who were suing, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor.

Source: CNA/EWTN News

Pro-lifers stand against 'incompatible with life' diagnosis

Charlotte Lozier Institute has endorsed a pro-life initiative before the United Nations in hopes of countering a common misdiagnosis that often ends in the murder of an unborn child.

In recent years, upwards of 90 percent of babies with developmental problems in the womb have been aborted based on medical advice and diagnostic tests. Today the Charlotte Lozier Institute is joining a global initiative - sponsored by Ireland-based Every Life Counts - that urges scientists and medical professionals who support life to combat an in utero diagnosis that is medically inaccurate.

"For years there's been this phrase used by certain doctors – 'incompatible with life' – especially when someone is diagnosed in the womb with something like Down Syndrome or other kinds of genetic or physiologic conditions. And that is frankly just a misdiagnosis; [it's] medically inaccurate," shares Dr. David Prentice of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the education and research arm of the Susan B. Anthony List.

Prentice calls it "a biased judgment call" – yet week after week there are reports of such children born alive, normal, or close to normal and Down Syndrome children living happy lives, some able to support themselves.

"What Charlotte Lozier Institute wants to do is to support an effort at the U.N. called the Geneva Declaration on Perinatal Care," Prentice continues. "The idea is that it would get rid of this biased term of 'incompatible with life' to describe those unborn children who might have a life-limiting condition."

The Geneva Declaration on Perinatal Care calls for "an end to the use of this medically meaningless term [incompatible with life] which can cause great upset to the parents of children who are a given life-limiting diagnosis but who very often live for minutes, days, hours even weeks after birth and bring much joy to their families."

Written by Charlie Butts  
Source: OneNewsNow.com

March 12, 2015

Medical Personnel’s Religious Freedoms Threatened by Illinois Senate Bill

Illinois doctors, nurses and medical personnel could be forced to make ethical choices between serving God and obeying the State with a bill being considered in the Illinois Senate.

Imagine for an instance that you’re a neurologist, and a patient comes to you for help with painful, paralyzing, never-ending headaches. You do everything you can to help him, but after months of experimental drug concoctions and nutritional experiments, the headaches worsen. Depressed and distraught, the patient decides he wants to end it all. He wants you to help him end his agony once and for all.

As a doctor, you’ve been trained and have sworn to “Do No Harm,” as Greek philosopher Hippocrates taught. Your pastor, church and the Scriptures say it is a mortal sin to end or assist with ending another human life.

But suppose that the state says that you must ignore your conscience or moral standards and deliver to the patient exactly what he wants. Your conscience and your religious beliefs are irrelevant. Or, it’s possible that a doctor refusing to assist with something as radical as suicide could be the basis for a lawsuit.

That’s what could happen with doctors, pharmacists, any medical personnel if SB 1564, State Senator Daniel Biss’ (D-Chicago) amendment to Illinois’ Health Care Right of Conscience Act, become law, says First Amendment attorney Thomas Brechja.

The proposal stipulates that a medical facility or physician must have an established protocol in place, printed to distribute to patients in response to any condition that the physician may find the patient seeking.

The legislation does not state that the protocol must include only legal recourses.

The idea of such a scenario may seem impossible to imagine, but that’s what Senator Biss’ plan in SB 1564 would set into place, Attorney Brechja said in an interview.

Even delaying the treatment by one day beyond what the patient demands could imperil an objecting doctor’s practice.

“If you’re impairing the patient’s health by delaying his or her access to a suicide pill, [for example], that may be ‘Brave New World,’ but we’re already living in ‘Brave New World,’” Brechja said. “Who knows what some court somewhere is going to decide. With this bill, you’ve certainly started down that path, and into the abyss.”

Once the law says a person’s conscience must yield to state or federal law, there’s no prediction where that may lead, Brechja said.

While Illinois’ Religious Freedom Restoration Act allows citizens to act upon their religious beliefs, Biss’ law would supersede the state’s RFRA.

Nationwide, some states’ conscience clauses explicitly cover abortion, contraception, sterilization, and the withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining treatments.

Some clauses cover local conditions. For example in Oregon, a conscience clause describes a physician’s right of refusal concerning physician-assisted suicide, which is legal in that state.

Biss’ proposal contradicts the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, Brechja said, the first part of which says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”

The legislation would overrule the religious beliefs of American citizens that practice medicine and encumber their constitutionally-guaranteed free exercise of religion.

The medical personnel would be required to have on hand printed information that can be immediately distributed to the patient with referrals to the desired service.

“This is dangerous legislation,” Brechja said.

Take Action!

Currently this bill is postponed in Judiciary Committee

You can contact the members of the Judiciary Committee and tell them to OPPOSE this bill.

Click here for information on the members of the Judiciary Committee

Click here for more information on this bill and many others.

Written by: Fran Eaton

Sources: Illinois Review, Illinois Family Institute
Legislative alert by Illinois Federation for Right to Life

ACTION ALERTS


Women’s Health and Protection Act - ACTION ALERT! 

HB 3274

Sponsor: Representative Sheri Jesiel

Requires the Department of Public Health to annually conduct at least one unannounced inspection of each pregnancy termination specialty center. Contains provisions requiring the notification of patients if the Department finds a violation of the Act that could threaten patients' health.
This bill is scheduled for a hearing the Human Services Committee on March 18, 2015 at 8:00 a.m.

ACTION ALERT!  

Fill out a witness slip in support the bill before the hearing convenes March 18, 2015 at 8:00 a.m.
Remember to check the boxes for "Proponent," "Record of Appearance Only," Enter "Illinois Federation for Right to Life" for the Agency field and "Citizen" for the Title Field. Make sure to "Agree to Terms" before submitting.  Click here to fill out a witness slip for this bill.

Please contact as many of the committee members as you can and let them know that you SUPPORT HB 3274, the Women’s Health and Protection Act.

Robyn Gabel (Chairperson) (217) 782-8052
Litesa E. Wallace (Vice Chairperson) (217) 782-3167
Patricia R. Bellock (217) 782-1448
Carol Ammons (217) 558-1009
Jaime M. Andrade, Jr. (217) 782-8117
Kelly M. Cassidy (217) 782-8088
Tom Demmer (217) 782-0535
Laura Fine (217) 782-4194
Mary E. Flowers (217) 782-4207
Norine Hammond (217) 782-0416
Sheri L Jesiel (217) 782-8151
Cynthia Soto (217) 782-0150
Brian W. Stewart (217) 782-8186
Michael Unes (217) 782-8152

Click here for more information on this bill.
_______________________________________


Women’s Health Defense and Pain Capable Act - ACTION ALERT! 

HB 3561

Sponsor: Representative Terri Bryant

This bill amends the Illinois Abortion Law of 1975. It provides that except in the case of a medical emergency, no physician or person shall knowingly perform, induce, or attempt to perform an abortion upon a pregnant woman when the probable gestational age of her unborn child has been determined to be at least 20 weeks.

ACTION ALERT!  

Fill out a witness slip in support the bill before the hearing convenes March 18, 2015 at 8:00 a.m.
Remember to check the boxes for "Proponent," "Record of Appearance Only," Enter "Illinois Federation for Right to Life" for the Agency field and "Citizen" for the Title Field. Make sure to "Agree to Terms" before submitting.   Click here for fill out a witness slip for this bill.

Please contact as many of the committee members as you can and let them know that you SUPPORT HB 3561, the Women’s Health Defense and Pain Capable Act.

Robyn Gabel (Chairperson) (217) 782-8052
Litesa E. Wallace (Vice Chairperson) (217) 782-3167
Patricia R. Bellock (217) 782-1448
Carol Ammons (217) 558-1009
Jaime M. Andrade, Jr. (217) 782-8117
Kelly M. Cassidy (217) 782-8088
Tom Demmer (217) 782-0535
Laura Fine (217) 782-4194
Mary E. Flowers (217) 782-4207
Norine Hammond (217) 782-0416
Sheri L Jesiel (217) 782-8151
Cynthia Soto (217) 782-0150
Brian W. Stewart (217) 782-8186
Michael Unes (217) 782-8152

Click here for more information on this bill.
_______________________________________

March 10, 2015

Want to Elect a Pro-Life President? Here’s what NOT to do

Elect-a-Pro-Life-Presidentre
The pro-life movement is united in its goal of electing a pro-life president in 2016. The Obama presidency brought us two new pro-abortion Supreme Court justices, a healthcare law that expands abortion and threatens the vulnerable, and vows to veto pro-life legislation, including a bill that would protect unborn babies 20 weeks and older, from painful late abortions. We cannot afford four, let alone eight, more years of a president that does not value the right to life.
To achieve our goal, we have to be strategic. Here are six ways we can actually defeat a pro-life candidate. We cannot make these mistakes in 2016.
1) Fall in love with your candidate.
Pro-life advocates should get involved in campaigns. Their active participation and volunteer activities can help a pro-life candidate build a strong campaign. It also puts the pro-life advocate in contact with the candidate so that if he/she wins, a relationship can be built and strengthened. Too often, however, pro-life advocates get so excited about their candidate that if he/she loses to another pro-life candidate (especially in a primary), the pro-life grassroots person doesn’t support the pro-life candidate who won–and won’t volunteer in the campaign or work to get others to vote for that candidate. Pro-life candidates need the active support of all pro-lifers and, all too often, without that full support, a pro-abortion candidate wins.
2) Believe that your candidate is the only “real” pro-life candidate in the race and bash other pro-life candidates.
In a primary where there are several pro-life candidates, pro-life individuals select the candidate they think is best. Unfortunately, some pro-lifers will attack other pro-life candidates as not being “prolife enough.” If, for example, another candidate has a lengthy pro-life voting record, they will pick out one or two votes and attack him as not being “really” pro-life. By doing this, the pro-lifer demoralizes other pro-lifers and weakens enthusiasm for the pro-life candidate who does win the primary. The pro-abortion candidate will, of course, take advantage of this. Because some pro-lifers have attacked the successful pro-life candidate, the pro-abortion candidate will use that in pro-life circles to hold down support for his opponent. Ironically, at the same time, the pro-abortion candidate will be going to other voters, attacking the pro-life candidate who won as a “radical pro-life extremist.”
3) Support a really nice candidate who is pro-life but has no chance of winning.
Millions of unborn children’s lives are at stake. That’s why the viability of a candidate must be considered when we go to the polls. There are some wonderful pro-life candidates who may even be active in right-to-life organizations, who decide to run for office. However, if they can’t gain enough support to be a viable candidate, they need to be encouraged to step aside for a candidate who can actually win and take action to protect unborn children.
4) Expect the candidate to sound like a Right to Life chapter chairman.
People who are not directly involved in the pro-life movement are not going to be as articulate or well-versed on all the pro-life issues. They may not know every detail of unborn development or understand the ins and outs of the Mexico City Policy. Unless there has been some prior discussion with active pro-life advocates, some candidates may not realize that there are certain words that will be interpreted differently by the pro-life community that he intended. Just because the wrong word comes out of his/her mouth doesn’t necessarily make the candidate a phony. Sometimes a truly pro-life candidate can be tripped up by the media, be confused, ill-informed, misquoted, or quoted out of context. Give him or her a chance to explain what they really believe. They will do what’s right when they’re elected. Words are nice, action is better.
5) Expect the candidate to always make abortion the major issue in the campaign.
A 2014 post-election poll by The Polling Company/Woman Trend found that 23% of voters said abortion affected their vote and chose the pro-life candidate. Just 16% said abortion affected their vote and picked the pro-abortion candidate. While it is a distinct advantage for candidates to be pro-life and does make a difference in the outcome of an election, it also means that a large majority of the voters had other issues that were more important to them. In order to win, a candidate has to focus on many issues that will appeal to a broad variety of voters. It is the job of the right-to-life movement to inform the pro-life community about the candidate’s position on abortion. It is the candidate’s job to reach a cross-section of voters on a broad range of issues. When abortion is discussed in the campaign, the candidate must clearly and directly articulate his/her pro-life position. However, to expect the candidate to always make abortion the major issue in the campaign can be a sure way to lose an election.
6) Vote for a third-party or independent candidate who has no chance of winning.
When a general election is between a pro-life candidate and a pro-abortion candidate representing established parties, there will be times when a third-party or independent candidate will get into the race, claiming to be the “real” pro-lifer. He will attack the pro-life candidate who has a real chance of winning and get other pro-lifers to do the same. This is a sure strategy to elect the pro-abortion candidate. Pro-lifers who support the third-party or independent candidate, to the detriment of the pro-life candidate who could win, may feel like they have not compromised their principles. But if they succeed in indirectly helping to elect a candidate who will allow the killing of unborn babies to continue, they have compromised away something far more important ““ children’s lives.
The 2016 presidential election is an important moment for our movement. Let’s not squander this opportunity. The lives of unborn babies and their mothers hang in the balance.
By Andrew Bair, NRL News Today
Editor’s note. This appeared on page six of the March digital edition of National Right to Life News. You can read this story—and the entire 39 page issue—at www.nrlc.org/uploads/NRLNews/NRLNewsMarch2015.pdf.

March 6, 2015

Abortion contributing to Chicago’s “fiscal free fall” and Rahm’s collapse


From the Investors.com article, “Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago nears fiscal free fall,” March 2:
In progressive Chicago… Moody’s has cut its credit rating to two grades above “junk.”…
The steady financial decline of the nation’s third-largest city prompted us recently to say that Chicago was well on its way to becoming the next Detroit….
[P]rospects aren’t good, as people – particularly high-income individuals and businesses – flee the city’s high taxes and stiff regulations….
People are leaving in droves, voting the only way they can in a one-party town – with their feet.
From 2000 to 2009, Chicago’s population shrank by 200,000 – the only one of the nation’s 15 largest cities to lose people. The city now has 145,000 fewer school-age children than it had more than a decade ago, according to district data, forcing the closure of about 100 schools since 2001.
Those school closures are playing a part in the embarrassing run-off election Mayor Rahm EmanuelPresident Obama’s former chief-of-staff, is facing, and which he may lose:
Emanuel recently emerged from the Windy City’s mayoral primary with just 45% of the vote against four opponents, forcing Chicago’s first-ever mayoral runoff. A poll taken.. Feb. 28 showed Emanuel leading second-place primary finisher Jesus “Chuy” Garcia by a slim 42.9% to 38.5% margin.
About those school closures, from the New York Times, yesterday:
The sky-blue paint has begun to peel on the three-story building that was onceAnthony Overton Elementary [pictured below]. Window air-conditioners are speckled with rust. Doors where children used to rush in and out are sealed with plywood.
The empty shell of this school on Chicago’s largely black South Side stands as a reminder of one of Rahm Emanuel’s defining acts as mayor: overseeing the closing of nearly 50 public schools deemed underperforming, underutilized or both. It was the largest closing of schools in memory, with many of them in black or Latinoneighborhoods….
“It hurts,” said Earvin Wade, 55, who lives across the street. “You used to have a lot of kids there, families around. It was at the heart of our neighborhood. Now it’s nothing but an eyesore.”…
[I]n the end, it may be the education agenda that [Emanuel] proudly, defiantly and swiftly carried out that threatens his political future.
Population shrinkage and closing schools may in part be blamed on people “flee[ing] the city,” but an equally obvious reason for the decline is abortion.
Between 1995 and 2013, the dates for which Illinois county abortion breakdowns are available, a staggering 486,743 children were aborted in Cook County, accounting for 55.8% of the 872,631 abortions committed in Illinois during those 19 years.
Those are just the past two decades, with the two decades of legalized abortion before that likely the same.
The children aborted in 1973 would have been having their own children during the 1990s, so the number of lost people is compounded beyond what we see.
It is tragic that black and Hispanic neighborhoods in Chicago are blighted by empty schools. But the people themselves killed off the students. Blacks and Hispanics have a much higher rate of abortion than whites. According to Guttmacher, five times as many blacks as whites get abortions, and two times as many Hispanics as whites.
And abortion is just one social ill contributing to Chicago’s demise.
“In Chicago, 51% of children live in single-parent homes,” notes the Chicago Tribune.
Had Democrats in charge of the city since 1931 embraced conservative social values and encouraged premarital abstinence and stronger two-parent married families, the children allowed to live would not be “underperforming” in school to the extent that they are, along with being the victims of other societal plagues.
Such as murder, which unstable homes contribute to. Quoting Pew Research:
In terms of raw number of murders, Chicago has long been at or near the top of U.S. cities, according to FBI crime statistics. In 2012, it had 500 murders, the most of any city in the country; Chicago has been among the top three cities with the most murders since 1985.
Will the people wake up? But politicians aren’t the answer. They’re part of the problem.
Churches with their theological act together are really Chicago’s only hope.
[HT gerfingerpoken on Twitter for Investors.com article; top photo via Politico; bottom photo via New York Times]
By Jill Stanek, JillStanek.com