GOP House Leader Asks Obama: ‘What Happened to that Abortion Executive Order?’

    
     House Republican Leader John Boehner
     with Nancy Pelosi and President Obama

In a meeting with President Obama last week, House Republican Leader John Boehner asked for an update about the implementation of the president's Executive Order (EO), which purports to block abortion funding in the federal health care bill.

That EO, which was offered by Obama during 11th hour negotiations prior to the final vote on ObamaCare, proved to be the carrot that convinced Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak and his cadre of pro-life Democrats to cast their crucial votes in favor of the controversial legislation.

But as Boehner staffer Kevin Boland explained on Boehner's official blog last week: "Abortion opponents widely viewed the EO as a disingenuous maneuver made by the Administration in the final hours of the health care fight to buy off 'pro-life' Democrats instead of passing the anti-abortion Stupak amendment, which would have prevented federal subsidies for abortion under ObamaCare."

In fact, the EO was almost universally condemned by pro-life groups as woefully inadequate. Such sentiments were confirmed when Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards issued a statement saying that the abortion-related executive order was merely a "symbolic gesture," and celebrating the passage of the health bill.

Now, however, there are concerns that whatever meaningful provisions the order does contain may not be implemented in a timely fashion, or at all.

In his meeting with Obama Boehner pointed out that in a recent "progress report" about the implementation of the health care bill, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, made no mention of the order.

According to Michael Steel, spokesman for Boehner's office, "The president indicated that he would provide some kind of an update on the implementation of the executive order."

However, said Steel, according to Citizenlink, "There is no indication that they are moving in any way to implement the executive order in an effective way or a meaningful way."

"What I fear is that the effect is as we suspected at the time, that there is no effect at all of this executive order."

Boehner had once before asked for an update on the EO, in a May 13 letter to Sebelius. In that letter Boehner asked: "Has the Department provided guidance to states to implement the president's Executive Order on abortions?  When does the Administration expect to issue the directive on abortions?  Will the new federal high-risk pools touted by the Administration also ensure that abortions will not be covered?"

Bohner pointed out to Sebelius that, "Millions of Americans care deeply about this aspect of the new law and its implementation, and no progress report is complete without detailed information about it."

Thus far there has been no response to that letter.

Contact: John Jalsevac
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Congressional battleground over military abortions

A pro-life member of Congress vows to fight tax-paid abortions at military facilities.

    
     Congressman Chris Smith (R-New Jersey)

An amendment to the Senate version of the Annual Department of Defense Authorization bill would permit the abortions, which have been banned since former President Clinton signed it into law in 1996. Congressman Chris Smith (R-New Jersey) told Fox News there will be a fight if the bill reaches the House with the amendment intact.
 
Rep. Chris Smith (R-New Jersey)"So we will stand very firm -- and I welcome the fight," says Smith. "If they want to bring it, I do believe that there will be an overwhelming vote to keep our military hospitals as nurturing centers, not abortion mills."
 
And certainly not on the taxpayers' dime, he adds. "When we hire abortionists, when we provide operating rooms and recovery rooms and nurses -- all of whom would participate in the killing of that child and the wounding of that mother by way of abortion -- that is facilitation, that is public funding," he explains.
 
Smith believes the House will not approve the bill if it authorizes abortions on military bases and other facilities. The Senate is to consider the measure this summer.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: June 16, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Radio ad urges Florida to stop Governor Crist

    
     Florida Governor Charlie Crist

Following Governor Charlie Crist's veto of a bill which would require ultrasounds to prior to first trimester abortions, the Political Action Committee (PAC) of the Family Research Council (FRC) has launched a statewide radio campaign urging Floridians to stop Crist.

Last week, Gov. Crist, who recently left his party and removed the pro-life section of his website, vetoed a bill requiring an ultrasound to be performed before all first trimester abortions.

"This bill places an inappropriate burden on women seeking to terminate a pregnancy," Gov. Crist stated in his veto announcement.

"Individuals hold strong personal views on the issue of life, as do I," he continued. "However, personal views should not result in laws that unwisely expand the role of government and coerce people to obtain medical tests or procedures that are not medically necessary."Women would have had the option to opt out of viewing the images of their live child prior to the abortion.

The bill also would have allowed Florida to opt out of using federal funds for abortion under the new health care law.

The FRC Action PAC ad, which will air across Florida on 74 stations beginning next week, describes Crist's recent actions: "Governor Charlie Crist used to claim to be pro-life," it says. "Now he's just pro-Crist. Since leaving his party he's decided he'd rather be pro-abortion, removing the pro-life section from his website and vetoing a bill that would allow women to see an ultrasound of their child before having an abortion."

Source: CNA
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

UN officials promote "right to abortion" this week at Human Rights Council

    
     Navanethem Pillay the High Commissioner
     on Human Rights

Pat Buckley, SPUC's chief lobbyist at the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva, is appealing to church leaders and pro-life groups worldwide to oppose an extreme, "ideologically driven" pro-abortion report produced by Navanethem Pillay (pictured), the High Commissioner on Human Rights, and "bounced through" the HRC this week. Pat warns:

    "This report is being bounced through the United Nations forums, blatantly ignoring any evidence which disputes its conclusions and deliberately avoiding debate. The clear intention of the powers-that be is to use this ideologically-driven report's findings to influence the Millennium Development Goals Review later this year at the UN in New York."

In a carefully stage-managed and one-sided debate in Geneva this week, both the Holy See and the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), the only pro-life NGO present at the Session, were excluded from making an intervention. SPUC's planned intervention can be found here. Pat explains:

    "The preparation of the report and the subsequent debate were meticulously stage-managed this week in Geneva, to the exclusion of myself, on behalf of SPUC, and, more significantly, to the exclusion of the Holy See.

    "The debate was carefully handled by limiting the time available for it. This resulted in the Holy See being excluded from making an intervention and it eliminated the only pro-life NGO voice present at the session, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. Nevertheless two pro-abortion NGO's, Amnesty International and the Centre for Reproductive Rights, representing a large group of pro abortion organizations such as International Planned Parenthood (IPPF) and IPAS, were given space to be heard.

    "In the end, the lone opposition to the anti-life agenda, the Egyptian delegate, was very criticical of the inaccurate statistics and the push for the creation of a 'right' to abortion.

    "Events in Geneva this week are the latest in international political manoeuvres to declare a human right to abortion, something which has eluded the pro-abortion lobby since their defeat at the 1994 UN conference on population and development, in Cairo.

    "This week's pro-abortion report arose from a resolution approved in 2009, which called for the High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare 'a thematic study on preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and human rights'. Following approval of the resolution the thematic study was then elevated to be a joint report of both the High Commissioner and the UN Secretary General. The subsequent report and Monday's one-sided debate are a prelude to the review of the Millennium Development Goals due to take place in September in New York - when, I've no doubt, this report will be back on the agenda."

Prior to preparation of her report the High Commissioner invited submissions from interested parties. However, despite the fact that a number of pro-life organizations made detailed submissions setting out the real causes of maternal death (and how high levels of maternal mortality in developing countries can be reduced without recourse to abortion) the High Commissioner's report cites so called "unsafe abortion" as one of the major causes of maternal mortality. It was based on the World Health Organisation statistics, which have have been shown to be wildly inaccurate; and, once prepared, the report was carefully handled to sidestep any possibility of the flawed statistics being exposed or criticized in a resolution, thus undermining the report's credibility.  See the link above to Pat Buckley's planned intervention which exposes the evidential flaws in Navanethem Pillay's report.

Contact: John Smeaton
Source: SPUC BLog
Publish Date: June 16, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Coming soon (already here?): Taxpayer funded telemed abortion systems

   
    The telemedicine system

The New York Times reported on June 8:

    So far only Planned Parenthood clinics in IA use this [RU-486 telemed abortion] method, but around the country, abortion providers have begun asking how they might replicate the concept.

I don't necessarily believe it's true that RU-486 telemed abortions are confined to IA at this point. Adding fuel to my fire is the article below that Pro-Life WI has dug up, posted by The Business Journal of Milwaukee on July 10, 2009....

Takeaways: The telemedicine system has been in place at WI Planned Parenthoods and paid for with tax dollars for 2 years, the same length of time PP of the Heartland has been committing telemed abortions.

Wide scale PP collusion on telemed abortions for quite awhile is not only possible but probable. I expect many more PPs around the country have been girding for them with government grants, funding telemed systems under the guise of needing them to dispense birth control pills.

terri huyck ceo pp wi.jpgFurthermore, Teri Huyck, the new CEO of PP of WI, is definitely one not to be trusted if she says WI PPs haven't started committing telemed abortions. Huyck was instrumental in the Aurora PP cover-up.

Here are key excerpts from that BJM story:

    Since there aren't enough primary care physicians or nurse practitioners to get to all of the patients, Planned Parenthood of WI is bringing the patients to them.

    The organization, which provides health care to about 70k men and women a year at 28 clinics across the state, has begun investing in telemedicine, a high-tech way for the patient and clinician to communicate via video phone....

    PP clinics, particularly those in rural areas, are often staffed by people who do not have a medical license. Those employees are not allowed to do patient assessments so patients are turned away if there isn't a licensed clinician working that particular day.

    Delaying a visit could result in a patient's condition getting worse or a delay in getting birth control, which could result in an unintended pregnancy, Burnett said.

    The video phones, which are the size of a laptop computer, are at 10 PP locations - Racine, Delavan, Waukesha, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Portage, 2 clinics in Madison and clinics in Milwaukee on Mitchell Street and WI Avenue....

    The 10 locations were chosen because they are the organization's Title 10 clinics, which means they receive funding from the federal government. PP's other centers are either state-funded or self-sustaining.

    A federal grant paid for the video phones, which cost $15,000 each, including the infrastructure needed to operate the phone.

    The video phones are used by clinicians to do consultations with patients and to order medication. If a patient needs immediate medical attention and a clinician cannot get to them, they are referred to the emergency room, Burnett said....

    PP of WI piloted the telemedicine program in March 2008 at 3 clinics..... The equipment for the pilot project was paid for with a grant from the Public Service Commission of WI.

    PP is looking for additional grants to pay for phones in the remaining 18 clinics, since the clinician shortage is expected to worsen, Burnett said....

    While there are no specific regulations with telemedicine,...

Pro-Life WI has confirmed there are no WI statutes in place that would prohibit the WI abortion industry from committing telemed abortions. Pro-Life WI is currently working with the Alliance Defense Fund to learn whether WI PPs are and have been committing telemed RU-486 abortions.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: June 16, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Does IVF Promote Objectification of Unborn Life?

    

One of the things about our current cultural milieu that  has always puzzled me is the drive to create an absolute fundamental right to procreate–and the concomitant push to permit an absolute and fundamental right to destroy unborn life.  (You know how it goes: Today, the child is wanted so it is a baby. Tomorrow, the child isn't wanted so its a fetus, not yet human life.)  And when both IVF and abortion are coupled in the same pregnancy, it really makes my head spin.  A new study in the  UK shows that this happens more than previously thought.  From the story:

    Data released under the Freedom of Information Act has shown that an average of 80 abortions are carried out in England and Wales a year on women who have undergone IVF treatment. Doctors have said they are surprised at the figures considering the expense and difficulty that many couples go through when having fertility treatment.  However critics said women were treating babies like 'designer goods'.

    Some women said they were pressured into IVF by their partners and others said they aborted their pregnancy after their relationship broke down. Around half of the abortions are carried out for women aged between 18 and 34, who are less likely to suffer complications in their pregnancies or conceive babies with abnormalities, raising the question that they may have had abortions for 'social reasons'. Prof Bill Ledger, a member of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which regulates fertility treatment, said: "I had no idea there were so many post-IVF abortions and each one is a tragedy."

    The figures were released by the HFEA and show that in some of the cases the fertility treatment had been funded by the NHS. Selective reductions, where some of the foetuses in a multiple pregnancy are terminated to reduce the risk to the children and mother, are included in the figures. Ann Furedi, head of the BPAS, formerly known as the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, said it was likely that every doctor carrying out abortions had treated at least one woman who had IVF treatment only to change her mind when it was successful. She said: "For infertile people, overcoming the problem becomes a goal in itself."

So, we see IVF leading, at least in some cases, to objectification of the life created, as it furthers the contemporary sense of entitlement: I want to be pregnant–make it so!  I don't want to be pregnant, make it not so!

I once heard a Canadian bioethicist give a lecture urging women with multiple IVF-created fetuses to undergo "selective reduction"–boy, talk about a euphemism!–to, he said, "turn triplets into twins."   Such sophistry!  Aborting one sibling triplet doesn't magically transform the surviving babies into twins.  It means they are triplets and one sibling is dead.  How must that feel?  There but for the location of the forceps go I.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY

U.S. Hospitals Secretly Promote Black Market Trading of Harvested Organs for Transplants

    
     Black Market of Organs

Many hospitals in the United States are tacitly participating in the illegal organ transplant industry by not scrutinizing potential donors too closely, experts worry. The purchase or sale of organs is illegal in most countries, including the United States, but a chronic shortage of organs for transplant has led to a thriving international black market. Typically, poor donors (usually from Third World countries) are paid several thousand dollars for organs that are then resold for upwards of $100,000 to rich recipients, usually from the First World. The arrests of 44 U.S. residents on organ trafficking charges in July marks the first documented case of the practice in the United States, and has raised concerns that hospitals here might be encouraging it.
Click here for the entire article.


Baby Killers at FDA Want New French Abortion Pill With RU-486 Ingredient Approved

    
     ellaOne (R) the French
     Abortion Pill

The pill called ellaOne is already available overseas in at least 22 other countries. It is now being offered by the French to the US. Now the Food and Drug Administration are considering making it available in the United States. Those who oppose the acceptance of this new form of birth control argue its similarities to abortion. The pill (ellaOne) contains an ingredient, RU-486, that is chemically the same as the abortion pill. The new pill will allow users to take up to five days after intercourse. The current morning after pill, Plan B, is only available for use for up to two days after intercourse.
Click here for the entire article.


Women Who Had Abortions to Be Tested for Hepatitis C

    
     Sandra Sunkel-Lozell

Almost 30 New Zealand women will be tested for Hepatitis C after potentially being exposed to the infection at a Melbourne abortion clinic. Earlier this month 44 women in Australia tested positive to the infection after being treated by James Latham Peters, an anaesthetist at a Croydon abortion clinic, Australia's Department of Human Services revealed. Dr Peters, a widower and father of two teenage children, has a history of drug abuse and received a suspended jail sentence in 1996 for writing around 100 stolen pethidine prescriptions for himself and his late wife Julia.
Click here for the entire article.


Nicaragua again Rejects Foreign Pressure to Legalize Abortion

    
     Republic of Nicaragua Flag

Nicaragua, one of the few countries in the world to maintain a total ban on abortion, has again rejected pressure by foreign powers to liberalize its pro-life legislation.

A report from proceedings at the UN's Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva reveals that 11 countries called for Nicarague to legalize abortion. Delegate Carlos Robelo, however, flatly refused to bow under pressure.

Instead, reports Pat Buckley, the UN consultant for the UK-based Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), Robelo told the HRC that Nicaragua would not reverse its pro-life legislation to allow "therapeutic abortions" and maintained that the law as it stands expresses the will of the country's people.
Click here for the entire article.


UK Eugenicists Want Population Reduction

    
     Mass Population

A growing number of scientists are going where politicians fear to tread by calling for a wider public debate on the sensitive issue of the global human population, which is set to rise from the present 6.8 billion to perhaps 9 billion by 2050. Lord Rees, the president of the Royal Society, brought the subject up in his excellent Reith Lectures; Sir David Attenborough has become a champion of those who believe population has been relegated as an environmental issue; and more recently Professor Aubrey Manning, presenter of the BBC's Earth Story, has stated that the sheer number of humans on the planet is the greatest menace the world faces.
Click here for the entire article.


Planned Parenthood forces us into RU-486 complicity

    
     Planned Parenthood Sign

The FDA has not updated its adverse events for RU-486 abortions or given a congressional report for over four years – and RU-486 has only been legal in the U. S. for nine and a half years.

So we can guess the number of complications has doubled, particularly given RU-486's increased popularity, since the FDA reported in May 2006 that 950 adverse events had been reported:

    Approximately one-quarter of the 950 patients were hospitalized. The most frequently reported event of interest in the case reports was blood loss requiring a transfusion. The next most frequently reported events were infection and ectopic pregnancy. ...
Click here for the entire article.

Urgent: Call Congress To Oppose DISCLOSE Act

The U.S. House of Representatives may vote within days on the so-called "DISCLOSE Act," legislation that would place sweeping new restrictions on the ability of incorporated groups, including pro-life organizations, to communicate with the public about the actions of federal lawmakers.
 
According to press reports, the House Democratic leadership has agreed to add a narrow "carve out" that will effectively exempt the National Rifle Association (NRA) from some of the key restrictions in the bill, in return for which the NRA has agreed that it "will not be involved in final consideration of the House bill."
 
In a June 15 letter to House members, (click here, click here for the PDF), NRLC reiterated its strong opposition to the bill, which it called "pernicious, unprincipled, and unconstitutional legislation."  Regarding the proposed carve out, "With respect to the National Right to Life Committee, this amendment is not only worthless, but adds insult to injury," the letter said, adding that NRLC's congressional scorecard will describe a vote for the bill as a vote for "a blatant political attack on the First Amendment rights of NRLC, our state affiliates, and our members and donors."
 
For more details on the danger posed by the "DISCLOSE Act," see the article posted below...

    

 
Press reports indicate that the House Democratic leadership now plans to force a House floor vote on the bill as early as Thursday, June 17.  Please act immediately.  Click the image of the telephone above and enter your zip code into the "Call Now" box.  Then telephone the office of the lawmaker who represents you in the House, using the number you will be shown.  Use the suggested talking points to deliver the message that you are strongly opposed to this bill.  (You don't have to use all of the suggestions -- the important thing is to get the main point across.)

Obama and Top Hill Democrats Push New Bill to Restrict NRLC Communications to the Public

WASHINGTON (June 11, 2010)—President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders are pushing hard for quick enactment of a bill that would place extensive new legal restrictions on the ability of corporations–including incorporated nonprofit citizen groups such as NRLC–to communicate with the public about the actions of federal lawmakers.

NRLC is strongly opposed to the bill, viewing it as a blatant political attack on the constitutional rights of the organization and of its members and donors.

The bill, called the "DISCLOSE Act," was crafted in response to the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, handed down on January 21, 2010. In that case, the Supreme Court invalidated federal laws and regulations that had prevented an incorporated group called Citizens United from buying TV ads to promote a movie critical of Hillary Clinton while she was running for president. By a 5–4 vote, the Court ruled that the First Amendment protects the right of corporations to spend money on ads or other communications that criticize or praise those who hold or seek federal office.

In previous arguments before the Court, the Obama Administration, represented by the office of Solicitor General Elena Kagan, had argued that the government could prohibit a corporation from disseminating even a book if it contained material that opposed a federal candidate.

The White House and top congressional Democrats have sharply criticized the decision. In his January 27 State of the Union address, which was attended by six Supreme Court justices, President Obama denounced the ruling, saying that it would "open the floodgates for special interests–including foreign corporations–to spend without limit in our elections. ... And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems."

Democratic lawmakers then moved rapidly to craft legislation that is intended to make it as difficult as possible for corporations (including nonprofit, issueoriented corporations such as NRLC) to spend money to communicate with the public about the actions of federal officeholders, while leaving considerably more latitude for labor unions–generally allies of the dominant liberal wing of the Democrats–to take advantage of the Court's ruling. They made clear their determination to try to put the new restrictions into effect as quickly as possible, in order to mute outside organizations as much as possible before the November elections.

The legislation, dubbed the "DISCLOSE Act," was introduced in April by Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (the arm of the Democratic Party chiefly responsible for helping elect Democrats to the House), and by Senator Charles Schumer (DNY), who is a top contender to become the leader of Senate Democrats if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nv.) loses his re-election campaign in November. The respective bill numbers are H.R. 5175 and S. 3295.

Schumer said that the bill would "make [corporations] think twice" before getting involved in election-related speech. "The deterrent effect should not be underestimated," he said. Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Ma.), who voted for the bill at a May 20 committee meeting, said, "I hope it chills out all–not one side, all sides. I have no problem whatsoever keeping everybody out. If I could keep all outside entities out, I would."

But Bradley Smith, chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics and a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission, commented in an essay in the June 7 edition of National Review: "That Congress would respond to a Supreme Court decision affirming corporations' freedom of speech by restricting that freedom to an even greater extent than it did before the decision is remarkable. The attempt is unlikely to withstand judicial challenge, but, as Senator Schumer made clear early on, he believes the courts won't have time to rule on the constitutionality of the act before the 2010 election is over."

After quick hearings, a House committee approved the 90-page bill on a party-line vote on May 20. House Democratic leaders had hoped to pass the bill through the House the following week, but they were forced to postpone action due to vigorous lobbying against the bill by an array of organizations, including NRLC, the Family Research Council, the NRA, and the Chamber of Commerce.

At NRL News deadline on June 11, House Democratic leaders remained firm in their determination to push the bill through the House before the end of June, in order to allow time for the Senate to also pass the bill before the start of the traditional congressional recess in August. (See "Take Action Now," at the end of this article.) If the House passes the bill, then "this is going to be a priority" for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nv.) as well, Van Hollen told Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper.

On May 27, NRLC sent House members a strongly worded, fourpage letter opposing the bill, signed by Executive Director David N. O'Steen, Ph.D., and Legislative Director Douglas Johnson, expressing strong objections to the legislation.

"There is very little in this bill, despite the pretenses [that it merely advances "disclosure"], that is actually intended to provide useful or necessary information to the public," the letter said. "The overriding purpose is precisely the opposite: To discourage, as much as possible, disfavored groups (such as NRLC) from communicating about officeholders, by exposing citizens who support such efforts to harassment and intimidation, and by smothering organizations in layer on layer of record keeping and reporting requirements, all backed by the threat of civil and criminal sanctions."

"Enactment of such a law is not a curb on corruption, but itself a type of corruption–a corruption of the lawmaking power, by which incumbent lawmakers employ the threat of criminal sanctions, among other deterrents, to reduce the amount of private speech regarding the actions of the lawmakers themselves," the letter charged.

The letter also noted that those pushing the bill "hope to ram this legislation into law—including a specific provision making it effective 30 days after enactment, without any interpretative regulations from the Federal Elections Commission—to set up legal minefields that they hope will, for at least a year or more, deter disfavored organizations from effectively communicating with the public about the public policy agenda of the current Administration and of the dominant faction of the majority party of the current Congress."

NRLC also advised lawmakers that key roll call votes on the legislation will be included in NRLC's congressional scorecard for the current Congress.

Click here to read the entire NRLC letter of May 27th.

On June 10, Roll Call reported that Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC), a cosponsor of the bill, had proposed that it be amended to exempt certain nonprofit corporations (known as "501c4 corporations"), such as NRLC, from some of the bill's provisions, in an attempt to reduce opposition to the measure. But the article also quoted a prominent backer of the bill, Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center, as rejecting such an exemption, saying, "It becomes the loophole that eats the whole purpose and intent of the legislation."

Source: NRLC
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Abortionist at Center of Late-Term Abortion Plan Retreats to Harvard

    
     Abortionist Caryn Dutton

Abortionist Caryn Dutton is leaving the University of Wisconsin and Planned Parenthood Wisconsin to take a job at Harvard University, according to documents uncovered by Pro-Life Wisconsin and the Alliance Defense Fund.  Her departure means that Madison Surgery Center is, for the moment, left without an abortionist to help implement their plans to provide late-term abortions at the Madison Surgery Center.

"Caryn Dutton was central to plans to provide late-term abortions at the Madison Surgery Center," Virginia Zignego of Pro-Life Wisconsin told LifeSiteNews (LSN).  "[The University of Wisconsin] is saying her departure will mean a change in who provides the service - but from what we know, they don't have anybody else ... who is willing to perform late-term abortions."

Dutton also performs abortions at the local Planned Parenthood clinic in Madison.

Madison Surgery Center (MSC), a joint partnership between Meriter Hospital, the University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, and the University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation, had voted to allow late-term abortions at a February 2009 meeting.

Documents obtained by Pro-Life Wisconsin and the Alliance Defense Fund by the Freedom of Information Act raised serious concerns that the late-term abortions were meant to provide the school's medical researchers with newly-harvested fetal body parts for experimentation.

After a barrage of pro-life outrage from across the country, the Attorney General of Wisconsin said that the University of Wisconsin would abandon the plan.  But shortly afterwards, University of Wisconsin Health reaffirmed its dedication to providing late-term abortions.

According to some the continued dedication of the University of Wisconsin to abortion is of dubious legality.  Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Kevin Potter wrote on May 25 to State Auditor Janice Mueller, telling her that the University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics Authority may be violating state law by paying resident physicians while they are being trained as abortionists at the Madison Planned Parenthood.

Wisconsin law states that with only a few exceptions no state funds shall be used for performing abortions.  The University of Wisconsin received approximately $457 million from the state of Wisconsin in the fiscal year 2009-2010.

Nevertheless, amid the heavy opposition of pro-lifers and some staff, the plans for late-term abortions at MSC have never been implemented.

"Its great that a Planned Parenthood abortionist is no longer on UW staff," Zignego told LSN.  Four other UW doctors, however, remain under contract with Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin to provide abortion services.

Pro-Life Wisconsin and the Alliance Defense Fund also recently uncovered documents showing that UW intentionally obfuscated their own statements regarding where and when they would try to offer abortions.  Beth Fultz, director of corporate communications for UW health, said of one statement: "Here's the vaguer than vague version 2."

"UW no longer upholds its famous dictum, 'The University of Wisconsin should ever encourage that continual and fearless sifting and winnowing by which the truth alone can be found,'" said Zignego, who is a UW graduate. "UW instead aims to obfuscate, slice and dice the truth with the blood of the unborn."

Contact: James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 14, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Young woman chooses baby's life over her own

    
     Martha Motley, Jovan with his son,
     and mother Esmeralda Abreu

The story of Benny Abreu, a young woman from the Dominican Republic, has moved Floridians because of her testimony to motherly love. The Florida woman suffered from serious heart problems and preferred to die rather than abort the baby she was carrying.

Abreu, 25, graduated from Florida Central University at the beginning of May and decided to continue with her pregnancy, knowing that her serious heart condition could lead to complications.

According to Florida's La Prensa newspaper, she never considered the possibility of abortion and saw her pregnancy as a blessing.

"The doctor told her she had to abort if she wanted to survive, but she told him no, that she could not kill her baby and that she was going to continue with her pregnancy," said Martha Motley, the baby's grandmother.

On May 17, Abreu gave birth to her son but her condition worsened. She was transferred to Shands Hospital in Gainesville, which specializes in cardiology, where she died on May 30.

"I knew that she had a medical condition with her heart. I even took her to the doctor on several occasions, but it never entered my mind that she was going to die," said Jovan Toliver, the baby's father. "They (the doctors) said the baby should be delivered early and that she might suffer a little, but I never expected this to happen."

Toliver added, "I have lost a part of me, but the only thing that sustains me is knowing that she never would have wanted me to leave her baby alone and for this reason I have to be strong."

"She was very courageous and never doubted having her baby, even though as a result she had to pay the highest price," Motley, who is Toliver's mother, told reporters. "I know that now she is in God's hands and when she looks down she will see that the best part of her is with us and she'll know that we will always take care of him."

Source: CNA
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Abortion Recovery Group Unveils Billboard Aimed at Interstate Summer Traffic

    
     A new billboard by Silent No More Minnesota

Today Silent No More Minnesota, whose mission is to reach out to those wounded by abortion, unveiled a new billboard, scheduled for launch July 1 for 3 months on I94 in Albertville, MN....

Timing and location were chosen to take advantage of heavy summer Interstate traffic at a site near MN's largest outlet shopping mall, which is in Albertville.

The billboard, which reads, "Abortion Hurts, There is Hope and Healing," will be the 1st of its kind in MN.

SNM MN president Ann Marie Cosgrove stated in a press release that the billboard has multiple purposes: to bring awareness to those hurting from abortion, especially the unchurched, who may not ever hear a message of hope and healing; to educate the public that abortion causes pain, which also gives the abortion vulnerable pause to reconsider; and to soften hearts of those who think poorly of post-abortive mothers.

Ann Marie would love to keep the billboard up an additional 3 months for those who find their summer flings produced more than fond memories and for college students trekking to and from school.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: June 14, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

National Secular Society finds ultrasound image of unborn child "horrifying"

National Secular Society finds ultrasound image of unborn child "horrifying"

    
     Image from the new advertisig campaign

Last week the new advertisig campaign being launched this year by a coalition of Protestant Churches was reported. The adverts will show an ultrasound image of an unborn baby with a halo around his head, with the accompanying words: "He's on His way. Christmas starts with Christ."

I was asked by Ruth Gledhill, religious correspondent for The Times, to provide a comment. I said: "This advertisement sends a powerful message to everyone in Britain where 570 babies are killed every day in the womb, 365 days a year, under the Abortion Act. Whenever we kill an unborn child in an abortion, we are killing Jesus."

Ruth Gledhill's article also included a comment from Terry Sanderson, of the National Secular Society, who criticised the image. Mr Sanderson said: "At first glance it looks like a poster for a horror film — perhaps The Omen VI: He's Coming to Get You."

Mr Sanderson's comments are particularly puzzling because this is an ultrasound image, much like those shown to the majority of expectant parents. These images are now an ordinary part of our lives and I am reliably informed that they are even sometimes posted on social networking sites such as 'facebook'.

I am inclined to ask Mr Sanderson: what is it about the image of an unborn child that you find so horrifying?

Contact: John Smeaton
Source: SPUC Blog
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Personhood Nevada Denied Right to Circulate Petition

Personhood Nevada Denied Right to Circulate Petition

    

Personhood Nevada, through many legal battles, has been denied the right to circulate their prolife petition in the state. The ACLU joined forces with Planned Parenthood, tying the petition up in court and disallowing the many ready and willing Nevada volunteers their right to circulate the petition.

"We have several issues at the heart of this matter," explained Keith Mason, co-founder of Personhood USA. "First, we have judicial activists ruling against the petition, despite the fact that nearly similar language has been approved in other states. Second, we have the anti-personhood media reporting that we failed to get the required signatures -- when in fact, Personhood Nevada was not allowed to get even ONE signature. This is clearly a case of big money versus the rights of the citizens -- but we're preparing to try again, even stronger than before."

The people's voice in Nevada has been silenced by those who profit from abortion the most -- Planned Parenthood, with over one billion dollars in profit in recent years. Planned Parenthood, in conjunction with the ACLU, are fighting against the rights of Nevada citizens to circulate a petition for a constitutional amendment.

The one-sentence proposed state constitutional amendment states, "In the great state of Nevada, the term 'person' applies to every human being."

James T. Russell, District Judge of Carson City, ruled on January 8, 2010 that the one-sentence amendment was a myriad of subjects. Personhood Nevada appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court, but a ruling has yet to be handed down.

"We have volunteer petition circulators who have been waiting for months," added Olaf Vancura, President of Personhood Nevada. "Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and the liberal courts have stifled our ability to engage in free speech, legally maneuvering until me miss our statutory deadline, and keeping us from exercising our constitutional rights as Americans and Nevadans. We are determined that no matter how long it takes, we will not be silenced. The personhood petition will be approved, and we will protect all human life in the state of Nevada."

Contact: Olaf Vancura and Keith Mason
Source: Personhood Nevada
Publish Date: June 15, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Louisiana Passes Opt-Out Bill Voiding ObamaCare’s Abortion Mandate

    
     Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal

The Louisiana State House successfully has passed a measure that will make "the Bayou State" the fourth in the nation to opt-out of the abortion mandates of the recently enacted national health care reform.

Democrats and Republicans in the state Senate approved HB 1247,  the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act, authored by Representative Frank Hoffman (R-West Monroe), by an overwhelming majority of 28 – 3 on Monday.

H.R. 1247 prohibits abortion coverage by health insurers in the state-run health insurance exchange that is scheduled to go into effect in 2014 as part of President Barack Obama's health care reform law. A provision of the national law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, gives states the explicit right to ban health insurance companies receiving public subsidies under the state health exchange, from providing abortion coverage.

The Louisiana measure has just one exception for insurance companies, permitting abortion in cases where mother's life is in danger from "a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury" including "a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself." The law does not permit the killing of unborn children conceived in situations of rape and incest.

The Senate made some changes to the House bill, and therefore the state's House of Representatives is expected to hold a vote within the next few days to approve the amended bill.

The bill's original form as passed by the House would have banned all health insurance providers in Louisiana from offering policies and plans that would pay for abortions. However the Senate committee amended the bill to apply to only those health insurers participating in the state exchanges mandated by the federal health care reform.

In a telephone interview, Benjamin Clapper, Executive Director of Louisiana Right to Life Federation, said that while the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, which amended the House bill, did not allow them to ban private health insurers from providing coverage for abortions, he was not aware of any insurers that cover abortions in Louisiana anyway.

"It won't change much right now, but we certainly would have preferred that and the abortion opt out," he said. "But the committee did not allow us to do that."

Clapper said that the Bioethics Defense Fund did the heavy lifting of drafting the opt-out legislation, but the model opt-out legislation from the National Right to Life Committee gave them the idea of also banning abortion coverage by private insurers.

After the Senate's changes have been approved by the House, the bill will be sent to the desk of Gov. Bobby Jindal, who is expected to sign the measure.

In a separate statement, Clapper praised the Louisiana legislature for taking the opt-out bill over "its final major hurdle," saying that state lawmakers representing the will of the people of Louisiana, "have resoundingly sent a message to our nation that abortion is not health care."

"Once HB 1247 has been stamped by the House and signed by the Governor, we will be at least the 4th state to opt out of abortion subsidies since the President signed his national health care reform bill into law three short months ago on March 23rd," said Clapper. "We have helped initiate a growing state-by-state movement declaring that health care reform should not be used to expand abortion."

Lawmakers in Arizona, Mississippi, and Tennessee have enacted similar opt-out language for their respective states. Missouri legislators have also passed their own opt-out bill, which is awaiting their governor's signature. Opt-out language was passed by lawmakers in Oklahoma and Florida, but then vetoed by their respective governors.

Oklahoma's Gov. Brad Henry delayed his veto of his state's opt-out bill to the point where the legislature had no time to mount another veto override effort and conclude pressing budgetary matters before the end of the legislative session. Gov. Charlie Crist, who scrubbed the pro-life section of his independent campaign for governor, also vetoed opt-out legislation that also would have required women to receive an ultrasound before going in for an abortion.

Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 14,2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY

Pro-Life Anti-Constitution Rally Bombed in Kenya

    
     Kenya

A June 13th rally organized by pro-life and religious groups in the Kenyan capital Nairobi was bombed twice, killing six people and injuring more than 100. The police have not identified any motive for the attack, and are offering a reward of half a million shillings for information leading to arrests.

"Any person with information regarding the incident is advised and requested to report to the nearest police or administrative office," said Police Commissioner Mathew Iteere, according to Capital News.
Click here for the entire article.


Lawyer Withdraws From Abortion Clinic Threat Case

    
     Dr. Warren Hern

A lawyer for a man who has twice backed out on proposed plea deals over a threat to a Colorado abortion clinic is asking to withdraw from the case. Weeks after Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller was slain last year, Donald Hertz of Spokane, Wash., was accused of calling Dr. Warren Hern's clinic in Boulder, Colo., and threatening to kill members of Hern's family. Hertz's lawyer Dustin Deissner says in documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Denver that Hertz has "cognitive limitations," and he doesn't know if Hertz still intends to plead guilty. Deissner says he's not experienced in criminal trial practice if Hertz goes to trial and that Hertz can't afford to pay Deissner as the case drags on.
Click here for the entire article.


Montgomery Abortion Clinic Agrees To Close

    
     Beacon Women's Center

The Beacon Women's Center, one of seven clinics in Alabama permitted to perform abortions, is closing after state health inspectors found violations in procedures and care of patients. Under an agreement with the state health department, the Montgomery clinic gave up its license, ceased performing abortions and is closing operations this week. Rick Harris, who oversees provider standards for the state health department, said Monday the clinic was cited for numerous violations when patient complaints were checked out. In one instance, 17 abortions were performed without sedation because the key to the medicine cabinet was not on site.
Click here for the entire article.


Pro-Life Group Files Suit Aganist City and Birmingham Police

    
     Birmingham Police

The Life Legal Defense Foundation has filed a lawsuit against the City of Birmingham Alabama and several Birmingham police officers for the outrageous civil rights violations perpetrated against nine young people who were unlawfully arrested in February last year. The team of pro-life activists spent more than 14 hours in jail for simply holding signs and handing out literature on a public sidewalk in front of a local high school.
Click here for the entire article.


Expert urges Mexicans to support candidates committed to life

    
     Mexican Pro-Life Vote

The spokeswoman of the Institute for the Formation of Family Values in Mexico, Claudia Simental Flores, called on Mexicans last week to vote for candidates "who see public office as an opportunity for real service to their constituents," including the protection of life from the moment of conception. In an article published in El Grafico, Flores criticized Mexico City official, Leticia Bonifaz, who said there was a lack of "political will" for the legalization of abortion at the national level.
Click here for the entire article.


Billboards promoting abortion by 'Catholic' group in Mexico taken down

    
     City of Queretaro

Officials in the Mexican city of Queretaro decided this week to take down five ads that were placed on billboards around the city as part of a campaign by "Catholics for a Free Choice" (CFC) attempting to assert that abortion is not punishable by excommunication.

Bishop Felipe Arizmendi of San Cristobal de Las Casas warned that CFC has a biased interpretation of canon 1323 of the Code of Canon Law, which "contains a series of mitigating factors that exonerate not the sin but the penalty imposed by ecclesial legislation."
Click here for the entire article. 

Florida Governor Vetoes Pro-Life Bill

 
    
     Florida Gov. Charlie Crist

Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed an ultrasound bill today that would have allowed abortion-minded women in Florida the chance to see an image of their preborn child.  HB 1143 would have also banned taxpayer funding of abortion.  This is the fourth time an ultrasound bill has been defeated.

More than 63,000 people contacted the governor's office in the days leading up to the veto, with 36,104 of them asking him to please sign the measure.

John Stemberger, president and general counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council, said the move speaks volumes about Crist's duplicity and lack of trustworthiness.

"He has lost all credibility as a public official," he said in a statement.  "With this veto he demonstrates to Floridians that his representations on policy issues mean little to nothing.  Even his often-stated commitment as a populist for 'the people' is apparently meaningless, as the majority of Floridians are pro-life and support the bill as evidenced by the overwhelming show of support."

This week, Crist's website was purged of all mentions of his stand on life issues.  The Republican is running for the U.S. Senate as an independent.

"He has now gone full circle from being 'pro-choice' in his original U.S. Senate bid," said Stemberger, "to being 'pro-life' in his bid for governor and now he has clearly defined himself as pro-abortion once again."

Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Terri Schiavo's foundation sued by Michael Schiavo

    
     Banner for the Terri Schindler Foundation

Over 5 years after the very public, tragic and court-ordered execution of Terri Schindler Schiavo, the Schindler family still fights Terri's husband who sought and secured legal permission to murder his disabled wife by dehydration. Michael Schiavo, Terri's former husband, accuses Terri's family of trying to exploit her saga by raising money for the foundation named after her, and the media has been too happy to accommodate his platform and buttress his attacks.

Started while Terri was still alive as Terri's Fight, the foundation assists other disabled members of our society who may be deprived of their legal rights and medical care. The organization is run by Terri's mother, Mary Schindler, her brother, Bobby Schindler, who serves as the spokesman for the organization, and Terri's sister, Suzanne Schindler Vitadamo. The Schindler family began the foundation to defray the legal expenses and the costs of providing Terri the rehabilitative treatment and medical care of which Michael barbarically deprived her to thwart her recovery.

Following Terri's painful involuntary euthanasia death in 2005, the Schindler family changed the name to the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, and the organization has only has raised a modest amount of money, less than 6 figures, to support disabled people like her. Through the foundation, www.TerrisFight.org, Terri's family has fielded countless calls from Texans due to the draconian Texas Advance Directives Act (Chapter 166.046 of the Health and Safety Code). The foundation has assisted TX Right to Life in our efforts to protect the disabled from the denial and withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment.

Michael Schiavo claims that a court document gives him rights to the name Terri Schiavo, and he alleges that no one can use her name without his permission. His attorney has written to the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, instructing Terri's family to cease and desist using her name. Peculiarly, the man who denied Terri rehabilitative treatment because he wanted the money left for her medical care to himself, is now accusing Terri's family of profiteering with her name.

Ironically, Michael attempted to profit politically from Terri's death, by starting a political action committee, called Terri's PAC, to oppose "Bible-thumping politicians" who fought to protect her life. Eventually, the FEC closed down his PAC after repeated fines for late reports and violation of reporting guidelines.

No member of the Schindler is making any money of Terri's name, and Bobby's annual salary is under $40k. All the honorariums and fees earned as an international spokesman for the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation are paid to the foundation. Suzanne has not been paid any wages for over a year, and Terri's mom will not take any money for the endless hours she spends at the foundation office helping families.

Despite a 2008 exemplary audit by the IRS, the foundation and family still fend off such attacks. The media, and even Fox's "Family Guy," spin the story of the foundation's work, ignoring the facts and the low level of finances at issue in Schiavo's recent "wolf" cry.

At another level, TX Right to Life and the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation remind these irresponsible journalists, Michael Schiavo, and the rest of the world of their limitations and mortality. They may pray that they never have to live "like that," but organizations like ours will defend them from legal execution when other journalists pontificate about their diminished quality of life.

Source: Texas Right to Life via Pro-Life Blogs
Publish Date: June 14, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Woman sues Church of Scientology for forced abortions, human trafficking

    
     Church of Scientology

There have been allegations made against the Church of Scientology for forcing its workers to get abortions.

On June 13 the St. Petersburg Times published findings of a significant investigation it conducted.

claire headley.jpgThe exposé includes information about a federal lawsuit filed in January 2009 by former Scientology member Claire Headley, who alleges church leaders forced her to undergo 2 abortions and also violated human trafficking laws.

Clearwater, FL, is home to one of the church's "2 most important operations, its spiritual headquarters," according to The Times, the other being its "500-acre international management base in the desert 80 miles east of Los Angeles."...

     
     Headley with husband Marc and 1 of 2 sons.

Headley, who left the organization in 2005 with her husband Marc (both pictured above with 1 of their 2 sons), alleges pregnant mothers were forced to endure increased manual labor if holding out against abortion.

Headley's complaint also requests a permanent injunction against the church, "prohibiting Defendants and their agents for ordering and/or coercing abortions with respect to their employees." That would be good.

RealityBasedCommunity.com reports Headley's suit "comes well corroborated" with at least 4 affidavits or statements made since 1986 by other Scientology members making the same accusation. RBC.com concludes:

    Claire's claim would seem to have a decent chance of success at trial, assuming she can prove her allegations to a jury; but if history is an accurate indicator, Scientology will go to significant lengths to make sure it doesn't get that far. Miles to go before we sleep, but the vehicle is promising for a change.

The Times also included a sad video story featuring 2 women aside from Headley accusing the church of forcing them to abort...


Click here for the video.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanke.com
Publish Date: June 14, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Rep. Smith Vows to Oppose Military Abortions in Defense Bill

      
     Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)

Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) has vowed to block an amendment to the FY 2011 Department of Defense Authorization bill that would permit abortions in military medical facilities.  The amendment would destroy a ban on abortion in military facilities that has existed since 1996.

"Our military facilities should be a place of hope and healing, not intentional destruction of innocent human life," said Rep. Chris Smith (NJ-04). "This amendment will mean that as many as 260 military medical facilities worldwide will now be in the abortion business."

The outgoing, Blagojevich-appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) introduced the amendment in the Senate Armed Services Committee.  The committee voted 15-12 to include it in the bill on May 27, the same day that they voted to include a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy in the military. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) was the sole committee Democrat to vote against the bill.

Unlike the case of DADT, however, the version of the Defense Authorization bill passed last month by the House of Representatives does not contain language like that of the Burris Amendment.  Smith expects that the House will not accept the legislation if it returns from the Senate with the Burris amendment.

"We will stand very firm," said Smith. "I believe there will be an overwhelming vote in the House to keep our military hospitals as nurturing centers, not abortion mills."

In 2006, a similar amendment by Rep. Robert Andrews to allow abortion in overseas military facilities was defeated 237-191.

Some have defended the amendment on the grounds that it both requires women to pay for abortions with their own dollars and does not require doctors to perform them.

"It's only done on a voluntary basis by a doctor," said Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). "There's no requirement, in other words, that doctors in military hospitals perform the abortions, but it authorizes them [if] they are prepaid, no expense to the government."

NARAL, Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations argued similarly, stating that the Burris amendment would "simply repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own private dollars to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities."

As Rep. Smith told Fox News, however, such a bill would still amount to the subsidizing of abortion.

"When we hire abortionists, when we provide operation rooms and recovery rooms and nurses, all of whom would participate in the killing of that child and wounding of that mother by the way of abortion, that is facilitation, that is public funding," Smith said.

The 1996 ban, which contains exceptions in case of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother, had been put in place after President Clinton signed a memorandum permitting abortions at military facilities in 1993.  This memorandum was in turn upsetting a Reagan-era ban on abortions in military facilities.

The Senate is likely to vote on the Defense Authorization bill later this month.

Contact: James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 12, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Courageous Mom Refuses to Abort her Twins

    
     Missy Davert's Facebook Photo

This week it was reported that a recent episode of 'Facing Life Head On', the weekly US pro-lifeTV show, has been nominated for a regional Emmy award. The episode, 'Little Miracles', tells the story of Missy Davert, a woman only two feet, eleven inches tall, who successfully gave birth to twins. Missy also has a condition called osteogenesis imperfecta, brittle bone disease.

The episode is very moving. While pregnant Missy knew that as her children grew there was a high possibility that they would put her life at risk by interferring with her heart or lungs. Missy met with several doctors who advised her to abort at least one of her children. This was never an option that she was prepared to consider and she was greatly relieved when she met Dr Daniel Wechter, a specialist in crisis pregnancies, who committed to helping her through her pregancy.

Reflecting on her pregnancy Missy says:

    God gave us both of these beuatiful children. I look at them today and think: which one of them wouldn't have been here if we'd made that decision?

Her reflection evokes the beautiful testimony of Andrea Bocelli, the famous classical singer, whose mother was advised to have an abortion.

Missy and her husband Ken will be forever grateful to the incredible care they received from Dr Wechter during the course of their pregnancy. Dr Wechter is a fantastic example to doctors and other medical professionals, who are coming under increasing pressure to practice their profession according to the prevailing anti-life principles of our time.

Missy and Ken's children, Austin and Michaela, are now eleven years old. They share their mother's similar courageous embrace of life. Michaela and Austin are both honour-roll students and Austin uses his spare time to fly aeroplanes!

Click here to watch this remarkable story.

Contact: John Smeaton
Source: SPUC Blog
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Creators of "A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities" Win Two Bronze Telly Awards

    
     The Telly Award

Rucinski & Reetz Communication, LLC, creators of "A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities," has been notified by the 31st Annual Telly Awards that the company has been awarded two Bronze Telly Awards. One award is for scriptwriting and the other for video production. "A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities" is one of over 13,000 entries from all 50 states and countries.

Telly was founded in 1978, and honors outstanding TV and video productions. Annual Telly awards showcase the best work of the most respected advertising agencies, production companies, television stations, cable, and corporate video departments in the world.

"A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities" is a spectacularly breathtaking DVD which is available from the National Right to Life Educational Trust Fund.

While there have been many attempts over the years to convey the beauty of the unborn child's development, Infinite Possibilities immediately jumped to the front of the line.

Pam Rucinski not only wrote the script for the six-minute DVD, she also produced and directed.

"I filled a waste basket with script ideas before it dawned on me that I was trying to say too much," said Rucinski. "The next script took the form of a dance elegantly performed by mother and unborn child. I wanted viewers to lose themselves in the breathtaking moments of their first days of life."

Telly Award winners are in good company. Winners include prestigious names like Discovery, Harpo Studios (Oprah's studio), Warner Bros., The Weather Channel, Disney Destinations, PGA Tours just to name a few.

Rucinski & Reetz Communication has won four other Telly Awards over the years.

A Baby's First Months... Infinite Possibilities from Wisconsin Right to Life on Vimeo.

Click here to view the video.

Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: NRLC
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.