Abortion's Fundamental Deception

    
     Planned Parnenthood Lies

Thirty-seven years ago, the United States Supreme Court decriminalized an act that Planned Parenthood had spent years promoting as a backup to failed contraception. That act is abortion. The historical fact is that, during the 1960s, Planned Parenthood's campaign to make contraception acceptable took the position that contraception was not abortion. Why? Because lying served its political purposes. 

In one of its advertisements at the time, PP actually admitted, "An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun."  By telling the public that this was the major difference between contraception and abortion, PP sought to convince the public that, for this reason alone, contraception was better than abortion.

PP never bothered to point out that the contraception it promoted also could kill a preborn child. It did not have to—it just convinced the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology to change the biological facts.

In 1965, ACOG issued a bulletin stating "CONCEPTION is the implantation of the fertilized ovum." The lies just kept coming!

Good friend and Catholic columnist Joe Sobran wrote in "Legacy of Lies":

Early advocates of legal abortion agreed that abortion was a bad thing, but argued that legalization would make it easier to regulate. Then they adopted the agnostic line: "nobody can say" whether abortion is wrong -- it should be a matter of "individual conscience." Finally they switched to the position that abortion is a positive good, "a fundamental human[!] and constitutional right," which taxpayers, no matter what their consciences told them, should be forced to subsidize. The more abortions, the better. From pretending to want to minimize the frequency of abortion -- since "it happens anyway" -- they quickly moved to maximize it.
 
And so it goes, lie after lie. Refute one lie, and two others spring up in its place. It's as tiresome as it is futile to debate people who argue in such consistent bad faith.
 
The fact is that those who advocate the killing of the preborn child are the very same people who would deny that a preborn human being is a person. PP and its cronies are committed to deception, for if they were not, they would never defend an act that kills someone by claiming that it was something else entirely. If this sounds like double-talk to you, then you understand the fundamental problem with abortion … abortion is a lie.
 
Each day that abortion remains divorced from truth is another day the treachery continues. And it just keeps getting worse.
 
At a new PP facility in Colorado where RU-486 (mifepristone) abortions are available for $425 dollars each, we find the following on the PP Web site:

Abortion pill (medication abortion) is offered up to nine weeks after the start of your last menstrual period. If your last period was more than nine weeks ago, we can still help. Call us for a referral list of health care providers in your area that offer other abortion services.

From these few words, the depth of the abortion deception is clear.  Equating the taking of a life with "health care" tells the entire story about the level at which Planned Parenthood operates.

They will lie to your children in the classroom; they will deceive them in a school-based clinic, they will spirit them away to a place where surgical killing is done … and they will do it all with your tax dollars.

Isn't it time to stop the lies? If you think so, join us and make your voice heard.

Contact: Judie Brown
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: June 21, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

 

Dangerous to Abuse Darwinism To Justify Suicide Based on Human Unexceptionalism

    
      Darwin debate

I am not part of the Darwin debates generally, but it always fries me when some Darwinists abuse a theory of biological inception and change over time to promote dangerous shifts in human society and culture.  Now, over at Psychology Today, we are told that because life evolved, human exceptionalism is bunk, and hence, preventing suicide or opposing euthanasia is sometimes wrong.  From the blog post by Steve Stewart-Williams:

…Thus, the injunction against assisted suicide – like that against unassisted suicide – is commonly underwritten by the doctrine of human dignity. But the whole edifice starts to crumble once we bring Darwin into the picture. With the corrective lens of evolutionary theory, the view that human life is infinitely valuable suddenly seems like a vast and unjustified over-valuation of human life. This is because Darwin's theory undermines the traditional reasons for thinking human life might have infinite value: the image-of-God thesis and the rationality thesis (see my last post). But if human life is not supremely valuable after all, then there is no longer any reason to think that suicide or voluntary euthanasia is necessarily wrong under any or all circumstances. In fact, it starts to seem decidedly odd that we have elevated human life – i.e., pure biological continuation – so far above the quality of the life in question for the person living it. Why should life be considered valuable in and of itself, independently of the happiness of the individual living that life?

We've seen this nonsense often.  Human exceptionalism doesn't need religion, and it seems to me, is undeniable from a rational perspective.  But note the potential for tremendous harm here.  A publication involved with mental health is the forum for pushing an anti-anti suicide meme.  That's dangerous to despairing people and could very well undermine the important work of suicide prevention.  The author sees that, and tries weakly to combat the obvious consequence that would result from his advocacy:

Needless to say, we must be very cautious with this argument, especially when it comes to suicide. Most people who kill themselves have not thought their decision through properly, and if they'd managed to ride out the suicidal crisis, they would have had perfectly good and happy lives. Many suicidal individuals are severely depressed, and severe depression involves an unrealistically negative apprehension of the future and the hopelessness of one's situation. Rational suicides (suicides based on an accurate picture of one's situation and future prospects) are comparatively rare. Furthermore, in assessing the rightness or wrongness of suicide, we need to take into account its effects on those left behind, as suicide usually causes immeasurable grief and suffering to the victim's family and other loved ones. Nonetheless, after Darwin, it is difficult to maintain an absolute prohibition on suicide. There may be circumstances – rare and unhappy circumstances – in which suicide is a reasonable and ethically permissible course of action. In any case, this possibility cannot be ruled out on the grounds that human life is infinitely valuable.

That doesn't work at all because once suicide is validated, you can't expect suffering people to think–Charlie's suicide was rational, but mine wouldn't be.  And note the potential harm beyond assisted suicide:

Critics of euthanasia argue that it is immoral to take a person's life, even when that person is suffering and wishes to die with dignity. After Darwin, we might be more inclined to think that it is immoral to force people to keep on living when they would rather not. Here's something to think about. In many ways, we treat other animals abysmally. But if a horse or a dog or a cat is suffering terribly from a fatal injury or disease, or if it has limited prospects for quality of life in the future, most people agree that the humane thing to do is to put it out of its misery. Not to do so would be considered inhumane. However, because of the inflated value traditionally assigned to human life, we are less humane in our treatment of human beings who are suffering or have a painful terminal illness. This is an ironic exception to the general rule that the doctrine of human dignity secures better treatment for humans than for nonhumans.

Talk about a slippery slope! We euthanize animals because they are abandoned, because they become incontinent, because they are expensive, because they are vicious, because they cost too much for which to care, etc..  If humans are no different than animals–and if we really come to believe that–what will stop us from treating each other like we do animals–and even like animals do each other?  Think about it: We treat animals humanely because of human exceptionalism, not in spite of it. I mean, if all we are is meat on the hoof, why even adhere to a quality of life ethic?  Let's get onto serious social Darwinism and dominance by the powerful, and woe betide the weak that get in the way!

This is an important matter to ponder.  Stewart-Williams' post vividly illustrates the harm that would be caused by denying human exceptionalism, a cost that would be measured in the number of human casualties.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: June 21, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

 

Nevada Supreme Court Runs Out the Clock on Personhood Initiative

    
     Personhood Nevada

After sitting on the case for months, the Nevada State Supreme Court waited until the day after the Personhood Nevada deadline to now ask why they should have to decide the case at all.

On January 8, District Court Judge James Russell, in issuing an injunction keeping the personhood initiative off the ballot and preventing signature collection, ruled that the fourteen word amendment did not encompass a single subject.

The proposed amendment reads, "In the great state of Nevada, the term 'person' applies to every human being."

Personhood Nevada filed an appeal of Judge Russell's decision to the Nevada Supreme Court on February 12. Despite the timely manner of Personhood Nevada's appeal, the Nevada Supreme Court waited until the day after the deadline to issue its order.

The Court Order read, "It appears that the initiative's proponents may not have obtained sufficient signatures to place the measure on the ballot, thus rendering this appeal moot. This court's duty is to decide actual controversies, not to give opinions on moot questions."

Personhood Nevada was prohibited from collecting even one signature by Judge Russell's decision. The Nevada Supreme Court was aware of Judge Russell's decision, and its ramifications, one of which being that Personhood Nevada would be in violation of the law, and in contempt of court, for collecting even one signature.

"Clearly this is an offense to our 1st Amendment rights," stated Olaf Vancura, initiative sponsor. "The Court delayed their response for so long that they now have the audacity to try to avoid a decision altogether. When the appeal was filed, the petition was not moot. The court, by its own inaction, may now possibly find the issue moot. This is a gross obstruction of my rights, and those of our board and volunteers as both Americans and Nevadans! The Supreme Court needs to decide this case now; if they don't, we can expect the same injustices to repeat in 2012."

Continued Vancura, "The state legislature's small time window to gather petitions, coupled with the routing of all challenges through a single, activist district court, mean that it is nearly impossible for any citizen-led initiative to reach the ballot if challenged. Tragically in Nevada, the citizens' right to petition is now, for all practical purposes, defunct."

Contact: Olaf Vancura
Source: Personhood Nevada
Publish Date: June 18, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

 

Obstructed by the Supremes! Abortion justice in Kansas

Campaign pinpoints judiciary for delaying criminal case against Planned Parenthood

    
     The Kansas Supreme Court

A new campaign by Operation Rescue accuses the Kansas Supreme Court of obstructing justice by delaying action in a pending criminal case against Planned Parenthood.

The charge comes in a statement Operation Rescue President Troy Newman has prepared and posted on the organization's website. The statement also is being prepared for broadcast on a radio network that serves many parts of Kansas.

The organization says the statement exposes "how the Kansas Supreme Court's delay in ruling on issues related to 107 criminal charges against Planned Parenthood is obstructing justice, shaking confidence in the judicial system, and enabling abortionists to continue to flout the law."

In the presentation, Newman quotes former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger saying, "A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people …. [One thing] that could destroy the confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value."

How do the rules of the court affect the fight? Get "Betrayed by the Bench"

Newman cites the case against Planned Parenthood that has been pending for seven years, "with no end of delays in sight."

State Supreme Court Information Officer Ron Keefover said the court has no comment on the case.

"They are working on that case," he told WND today.

Operation Rescue has posted an online timeline revealing that the work began early in 2003 when Phill Kline, a former state attorney general, was sworn into office and began investigating Planned Parenthood and abortionist George Tiller for allegedly violating state abortion law by doing illegal late-term abortions and falsifying records.

It took three years before the documentation he sought for his investigation was turned over to him, but the case actually has been before the Kansas Supreme Court since late in 2004 when the two abortion businesses asked the justices to block subpoenas that sought their records that could document legal – or illegal – behavior.

There also have been fights over venue, custody of evidence, politics and elections during the course of the case.

And some unusual twists have developed: Kline was defeated in his bid for re-election by proabortion candidate Paul Morrison only days after obtaining the evidence he had sought years earlier. But Kline immediately was appointed district attorney in the county where Planned Parenthood operates, meaning he legally could continue his investigation.

Morrison then promptly issued a letter "clearing" Planned Parenthood of wrongdoing, which irritated Judge Richard Anderson, then involved in overseeing Kline's investigation.

Anderson responded that Morrison's statement was improper. Morrison shortly later was forced to resign amid allegations he was trying to use an illicit lover who worked in Kline's office to hinder Kline's work.

Kline filed 107 counts against Planned Parenthood in late 2007, including 23 felonies, all relating to allegedly illegal late-term abortions. But Morrison's replacement, Attorney General Stephen Six, who had been hand-picked for office by "radical abortion supporter" Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, then got a gag order on Anderson.

It wasn't until a year ago the Supreme Court finally heard oral arguments about Kline's subpoenas for evidence – a step in the criminal-prosecution process far short of a trial.

"Now, over a year has passed, a ruling has yet to be issued, and the case languishes in limbo. Judge Anderson remains gagged. Kline has since left office. The public outcry has died away. Planned Parenthood continues to operate as if they are above the law," Operation Rescue reported.

"It would take a book to fully tell the tale of governmental obstruction and corruption in this case," said Newman. "The worst thing about it is that the people involved in shielding Planned Parenthood from prosecution expect those of us who want the laws enforced to sit down, shut up and forget about it.

"If we don't, then we are subject to having our reputations attacked and destroyed, as they attempted to do to the original prosecutors in this case. We must keep this case in the public eye, and that is why Operation Rescue is taking to the radio waves and encouraging people to sign an online petition urging the Supreme Court to send Planned Parenthood to trial," he said.

"Delays in justice only encourage the lawbreakers to keep breaking the law," said Newman. "Even the Bible says in Ecclesiastes 8:11, 'Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.' We are seeing that fulfilled in this case. For the sake of the preservation of justice, our collective societal conscience and the lives of the innocent we cannot allow this case to be swept under the rug."

The charges against Planned Parenthood include 23 counts of making a false information, 26 misdemeanor counts of unlawful failure to maintain record, 29 misdemeanor counts of unlawful failure to determine viability for a late-term abortion and 29 misdemeanor counts of unlawful late-term abortion.

Operation Rescue's petition said the "inexplicable delay by the Kansas Supreme Court" has produced "an obstruction of the prosecution of 107 serious criminal charges and in so doing has placed the health and safety of women and their viable babies at unnecessary risk of suffering unlawful abortions."

"It's time to clear the logjam, put aside political obstructionism and allow this case to go forward to trial on its merits," Newman said.

Contact: Bob Unruh
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: June 19, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY

Baby Murdering Feds Sue Abortion Protester Under Unconstitutional FACE Act

The U.S. Justice Department has sued a San Antonio abortion protester under a little-used federal law that prohibits blocking access to reproductive health services. Juan Antonio Gaona often protests outside clinics that offer abortions. But the Justice Department says the 56-year-old crossed the line when he stepped inside a Planned Parenthood clinic and blocked entrance to the waiting room in April 2009. Gaona was sued Tuesday under a 1994 unconstitutional law that allegedly makes it "unlawful" for a person to use force, threats or physical obstruction to injure or intimidate a person seeking reproductive health services. The DOJ wants a restraining order and a $10,000 penalty. Gaona disputed the version of events in the government's case but told the San Antonio Express-News he has entered the clinic.
Click here for the entire article.


Pro-Life License Plates Available in Massachusetts

Massachusetts is now offering specialty pro-life license plates, thanks to the efforts of the Massachusetts Choose Life organization.

The plates have the words "Choose Life" written in black beneath the number, and an illustration of a mother cradling an infant beside the number.  They are available on the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles website.

There is an initial registration fee of $50 plus a special plate fee of $40 to order the plates.  Twenty-eight dollars of the special plate fee goes to Choose Life, Inc., which will distribute the funds to Crisis Pregnancy Centers.
Click here for the entire article.


Louisiana Doctors Who Perform Elective Abortions No Longer Covered Under State's Medical Malpractice Laws

The state Legislature has decided that doctors shouldn't be covered under medical malpractice laws when they are providing elective abortions. The Senate gave final passage with a 31-2 vote Friday to the bill by Rep. Robert Johnson, of Marksville. The measure would prohibit health care providers from receiving coverage under state and private Medical Malpractice Acts when performing an abortion of "an uncomplicated, viable pregnancy" that isn't required to save the life of the mother.
Click here for the entire article.


Protests Over Kenya Abortion Law

Kenyans take to the streets over draft constitution's approval of Islamic courts and abortion Kenya is in the throes of a political crisis. This time, it is over a controversial draft constitution about to be a subject of a national referendum. Those protesting are members of the Kenyan Christian communities. They are opposed to some proposals in the draft constitution which they think is against the interest of their faith.One such objectionable provision is on the recognition by the draft constitution of existing Islamic courts for Muslim groups who are in the minority in Kenya. The second is the legalisation of abortion under the draft constitution. The constitution allows termination of pregnancies on health grounds.The Christian groups say they would not have any of those positions in the Kenyan constitution.
Click here for the entire article.


Care Net on EllaOne: 'Not Just Another Morning-After Pill'

On June 17th, an advisory panel of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) made a recommendation that the FDA should approve EllaOne (Ulipristal), a new drug closely related to Mifiprex (Mifepristone, the RU-486 abortion pill). Like Mifiprex, EllaOne has the potential to cause the death and abortion of an established pregnancy growing in the womb. Care Net, a national network of more than 1,100 pregnancy resource centers, strongly recommends that EllaOne not be granted FDA approval. Its ability to destroy established pregnancies, as well as prevent implantation, makes it an embryocidal drug. FDA approval without making this clear to the public would violate the public trust.
Click here for the entire article.


Proof: Tax dollars going to abortions

Members of Congress have received requested information from the General Accounting Office on how abortion organizations spend federal tax dollars.

Former Colorado Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, who is now a spokesperson for the Susan B. Anthony List, takes a look at the pro-abortion groups.
 
"These individuals from these organizations say that they give choice to women," she remarks, "but when you look at these agencies that advocate for abortion or provide abortion, they received almost a billion dollars [in federal funds] from 2002 through 2009...."
Click here for the entire article.

Pregnancy Centers Fight Back Against NARAL Attacks

Pregnancy Centers Fight Back Against NARAL Attacks

    
     Peggy Hartshorn
 
Attacks against pregnancy help centers have been occurring since the 1980's, led by NARAL, the leading pro-abortion political force and ally of Planned Parenthood. In fact, for years, the pregnancy help movement has been brushing away the slander attacks like we fan away returning swarms of hornets. But, at the same time, we have been developing a much stronger network of centers and friends and we are now ready to fight back and even take the sting out of the pests! A good offense often makes for a great defense, and this one provides us all a few positive things to do.

NARAL's strategy is outlined in womensenews.org (12-2-09), a feminist newsletter. First, publish "studies" that show that centers "mislead" women. Second, identify "sympathetic lawmakers" who will pass legislation restricting the free speech of pregnancy help centers in order to close them down. No matter that the "studies" rely on "evidence" gathered only by NARAL members who act as fake clients and try to trip up the centers they visit. This is proving embarrassing for NARAL, however. When such a study was brought into hearings on a law to muzzle centers in Virginia, the expert witness for NARAL was forced to admit that their study contained "methodological flaws"! In hearings on a similar bill in Washington state, four of the six women who testified against our centers, upon close questioning by lawmakers, had to sheepishly admit that they were employed by either NARAL or Planned Parenthood! So, who is misleading whom?

Like a nightmarish game of "whack a mole" these attacks keep popping up. In three places now, restrictions on center advertizing have been rushed into place: Austin[Texas], Baltimore, and Montgomery County, Maryland. In case you missed it, two small pregnancy help centers in these targeted areas are suing to have the reputations of all our centers cleared! The Washington Post and Washington Times recently covered one of the lawsuits, just filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, close to Washington, D.C., by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of a small Spanish language center, Centro Tepeyac. The other suit has been filed by the Archdiocese of Baltimore on behalf of Baltimore's Center for Pregnancy Concerns. Yeah! We are not sitting still in this attempt at strangulation through regulation.

What do these proposed laws have in common? They all restrict the freedom of speech of our centers by requiring them to advertize what they do NOT provide. They must post disclaimers on their doors indicating that they do not provide or refer for contraceptives or abortions. One law even requires the size of the sign and that it be in English and Spanish. Another needs to say "Montgomery County Health Office encourages women who are or may be pregnant to consult with a licensed health care provider." All define fines to be levied if the required advertizing is not prominently displayed. Some have suggested "common ground": we will comply if Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics will post signs saying, "We do not provide professional counseling or after-care, medical or emotional. Once we kill your child, we don't know your name."

Why are the hornets attacking more furiously now than ever before? Over 2,000 plus pregnancy help centers and pregnancy help medical clinics and maternity homes means several thousand women every week no longer turn to abortion because they feel they have "no choice." The pregnancy help movement, fueled by Christian charity and equipped by the leadership training and support of Heartbeat International and our partners, and providing ultrasound proof of the humanity of the preborn, is lowering abortion sales and tilting the culture toward life. Therefore, in the eyes of NARAL and Planned Parenthood, we are now a threat. We must be stopped. (For the Family Research Council's excellent report on the effectiveness of pregnancy centers and our contribution to maternal and child health in the USA, see www.heartbeatinternational.org/apassiontoserve.)

You would think that before accusing our centers of deceiving and damaging women, NARAL would collect some real evidence, say, a few hundred affidavits from among the hundreds of thousands of women served over the past 40 years in the thousands of pregnancy help ministries across the land. If NARAL accusations were true, then there must be tens of thousands of women willing to testify that they went to pregnancy help centers and were damaged by the caring volunteers who gave them free pregnancy tests, or the nurses who provided them with ultrasounds and confirmed the presence of their own babies, alive and beautiful in their own bodies., Truth is, it is impossible to find mothers who will testify, "I came to this pregnancy help center and they deceived me into having this beautiful baby! My life is ruined!" We have one powerful, slander-busting weapon that abortion advocates do not have – precious BABIES with happy Mothers! NARAL's regulatory proposals are self-serving and insulting to women, who are fully able to determine who they seek help from and decide if it is offered in good faith. Using the powerful testimonies of our mothers and their babies, we intend to fight back.

We welcome your help and participation in defending and commending the pregnancy help movement.

Contact: Peggy Hartshorn
Source: Heartbeat International via NRLC
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Telemed Abortion Funding in Federal Stimulus Bill

Telemed Abortion Funding in Federal Stimulus Bill

    
     Telemed at Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin

Telemed quick hits: Of course it was in the federal stimulus bill; Planned Parenthoods in CA/UT up next; On guard MN

•Telemed funding is in the federal stimulus bill. From the Telemedicine Information Exchange, February 19, 2009:

Specific telemedicine spending in final stimulus bill: The recently passed $787 billion economic stimulation bill includes $19 billion for health information technology. Specific for telemedicine, it will provide... $1.5 billion for HRSA [Health Resources and Services Administration] to use to build or repair health centers and/or to purchase equipment, and $85 million for health IT and telehealth technologies within the Indian Health Service. In addition ot this, much of the other HIT money will most likely have telehealth applications....

•HRSA has given a grant to the following, although I'm not sure if this came before or after stimulus windfall:

... The [Association for Utah Community Health] Telehealth Program will... supply[ ] telehealth equipment and resources to all association members....

Members of theAUCH include... Planned Parenthood of UT, a Title X funded reproductive health organization....

Services to be provided include... videoconferencing....

Specific PP participants of the UT Telehealth Network include clinics located in Logan, Ogden, Park City, Salt Lake, South Jordan, St. George, UT Valley, and West Valley.

•In June 2009 Tides and the CA Endowment issued Health Information Technology Resources for Community Clinics re: the "unprecedented opportunity" due to "[n]ew funding for health information technology at the federal level...."

A couple telemedicine funds are mentioned. 9 CA PPs are listed as "community clinics": PP Golden Gate, PP Shasta Diablo, PP Los Angeles, PP Mar Monte, PP Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley, Six Rivers PP, PP of OCSB, PP of San Diego & Riverside Counties, and PP of Santa Barbara, Ventura and San Luis Obispo Counties.

    
     Planned Parenthood mission

•From the Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Riverside Counties 2008 Annual Report:

We continue to explore innovative ways to deliver medical services and enhance the overall experience of our patients, including telemedicine....

•Now that we know what we're looking for, and particularly given PP of Greater IA's Spring 2009 newsletter stating, "The telemedicine technology has expanded access to women from Iowa and bordering states," a 2009 report rementioned on PP of MN, ND, and SD's blog on June 9 is ominous.

It's 2009 Rural Women's Health Report is chock full of telemed buzz phrases. Following is a snippet. On guard, MN pro-lifers:

The obstacles faced by health care providers and patients in rural areas are vastly different from those in urban areas. Economic factors... and the isolation of living in remote areas all impact rural residents' ability to lead a healthy life.

See related news...

Wisconsin pro-lifers on the watch for 'telemed'

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: June 18, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Planned Parenthood's 850 facilities--"The most unsafe place for women and children today"

Planned Parenthood's 850 facilities--"The most unsafe place for women and children today"

The following are excerpts from the statement of Rep. Chris Smith at yesterday's press conference on GAO Report on Taxpayer Funding of Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations.

     
     Congressman Chris Smith
 
Planned Parenthood's founder Margaret Sanger said, "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

No one "kills it" more efficaciously and in such huge numbers–over 300,000 dead babies each year--as Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

In one of her books The Pivot of Civilization, Sanger devotes an entire chapter to what she calls--"The Cruelty of Charity"--and harshly condemns maternal healthcare as "stupid cruelty" that only "encourages the perpetuation of defectives, delinquents and dependents."

Sanger's anti-child, anti-human rights nightmare is today aggressively implemented by Planned Parenthood Federation of America with huge subsidies from U.S. taxpayers--$657 million according to GAO between 2002-2008 alone.

The most unsafe place for women and children today is Planned Parenthood's 850 facilities. At Planned Parenthood clinics, in 2007 alone, 305,000 babies were either dismembered, chemically poisoned or starved to death by RU486.

Since Obama's election, U.S. subsidies to the abortion industry at home and abroad, have significantly increased.

When Obama shredded the Mexico City Policy, he opened the floodgate of taxpayer funds to pro-abortion NGOs (i.e. International Planned Parenthood Federation) that perform and lobby for abortion worldwide. Making matters worse he increased funding available to those organizations by 50%--to $648,457 million.

It's time for Americans and especially Congress to take a second look and defund it; defund Planned Parenthood--Child Abuse Inc.
 
Contact: Congressman. Chris Smith
Source: NRLC
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Wisconsin pro-lifers on the watch for 'telemed'

Wisconsin pro-lifers on the watch for 'telemed'

Wisconsin pro-life groups are concerned over possible "telemed" abortions in that state.

    
     Tele-medicine

Iowa Planned Parenthoods are under scrutiny for tele-medicine abortions in which a woman or a girl seeking an abortion communicates via computer with a distant doctor. The doctor then remotely opens a drawer that contains RU-486 -- then the abortion is on.
 
Virginia Zignego of Pro-Life Wisconsin says there is a 100-percent chance that telemed abortions are occurring in her state. "There is no administrative law or code preventing it from happening," she laments, "and the Wisconsin Planned Parenthoods have a taxpayer-financed telemedicine system already set up that we know is dispensing birth-control pills" -- and "morning-after pills" as well.
 
The patient does not see a doctor in the telemed abortion. Zignego argues that approach is very dangerous.
 
"Mifepristone, which is used in RU-486, is a highly toxic substance," she notes. "It can cause death, and it has a number of health complications." The Food and Drug Administration lists 600 different complications reported after use of the drug.
 
There are no laws in Wisconsin to prohibit telemed abortions, so Zignego is hopeful the state legislature will get into action.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: June 18, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

IPPF Leads Push for Abortion Rights as UN Prepares for High-Level MDG Review

IPPF Leads Push for Abortion Rights as UN Prepares for High-Level MDG Review


    


The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) launched a new campaign this week called "A Promise is A Promise," demanding that states implement policies and programs to achieve the controversial Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target 5b on "universal access to reproductive health by 2015."

According to IPPF, "universal access to reproductive health refers to a full package of services including comprehensive sexuality education, access to contraception, maternity care, emergency obstetric care, and safe abortion services …"  The IPPF event was promoted as an UN-sponsored meeting to get input from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for the high level MDG Summit that will take place in the fall.  

IPPF Director-General Gill Greer said advocates "must make up for lost opportunity" and that "the universal access to reproductive health target is not optional."  Greer claimed that though "universal access to reproductive health" was not included in the MDGs in 2000, in 2005 states "recognized the missing link" to reproductive health.

UN member states have pointed out a number of times that no new targets, particularly, no new target on "reproductive health" was ever negotiated or agreed to by the General Assembly, the main decision-making body of the UN.  Prior to both the Millennium Summit in 2000 and the MGD five-year review in 2005, abortion activists pushed hard for a separate goal on reproductive health, but failed.  Since those failed attempts, activists have sought to link reproductive health to existing MDGs. In 2006, in the annex of a report published by then-Secretary-General Kofi Annan, a "new" target 5b on "universal access to reproductive health by 2015" appeared though this was never agreed to by the General Assembly.

Greer said IPPF would continue to argue for "safe, legal abortion" and that the organization would work to "ensure that these issues will not be forgotten again" at the MDG review in September.

In keeping with the organization's renewed focus on youth and adolescents, the IPPF panel featured Neha Sood from the Youth Coalition for Sexual and Reproductive Rights, who argued that "the MDGs cannot be achieved unless it is acknowledged that young people are sexual beings and have sexual and reproductive health need, and sexual and reproductive rights."

Sood said, "Legal barriers that hinder access to sexual and reproductive health services must be removed," including spousal or parental consent laws, inequitable age-of-consent laws, and the criminalization of sex work, HIV transmission and same-sex sexual activity."

IPPF's "Promise is a Promise" campaign brings together an all-star lineup of abortion advocates, including the Center for Reproductive Rights, Ipas, and the International Women's Health Coalition, among others, to push countries to commit to greater action and financial commitment for "reproductive health." Critics expect this and other similar campaigns to ramp up at the UN as UN member states negotiate MDG Summit outcome document over the coming weeks.

The MDG Summit is scheduled to take place at UN headquarters in New York from September 20-22.

Contact: Samantha Singson
Source: C-FAM
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Abortion May Increase Risk of Autoimmune Disease

Abortion May Increase Risk of Autoimmune Disease

    
     Brown University

Surgical abortion may increase the likelihood of certain autoimmune diseases, according to a new report by Dr. Ralph P. Miech of Brown University.

Fetal microchimerism - the transfer of fetal cells into the bloodstream of the mother, whence they may be grafted on to bone marrow or other tissues - is the key link between abortion and autoimmune disease, says Miech. 

The researcher pointed out that as the placenta is destroyed during a surgical abortion, there is an increased "fetal-to-maternal transfer of fetal ... cells." These fetal cells may persist in the mother's body for decades.

"Activation of hibernating fetal microchimeric cells," Dr. Miech writes, has "been postulated to result in the initiation of an autoimmune disease."

Autoimmune diseases occur when the body's immune system mistakenly attacks its own tissues and cells as if they were foreign.  Certain triggers, Dr. Miech states, may activate the "fetal microchimeric immune cells to attack the maternal host cells, resulting in an autoimmune disease," although these triggers "have not yet been definitely identified."

This would explain why women during their reproductive and post-reproductive years are more likely than men to develop many chronic autoimmune diseases.  According to Dr. Miech, such diseases have "had for decades an unexplainable increasing incidence."

"The consistently rising incidence of auto-immune diseases in women over the past four decades may be attributed to the increase in the utilization of abortion," he says.

Dr. Miech has also performed research linking the abortion drug RU 486 to a rare bacterial infection.

In that research, Dr. Miech showed that the anti-progesterone effects of Mifepristone cause changes in the cervix that allow C. sordellii, a common vaginal bacteria, to enter the cervical canal. C. sordellii thrives in this low-oxygen environment and derives nutrition from the decaying fetal tissue, leading to infection.

Contact: James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY

FDA's Advisory Panel Approves Another Baby Killing Drug
     
A federal advisory panel voted unanimously Thursday that federal drug regulators should approve a medicine that could help prevent pregnancy if taken as late as five days after unprotected sex. The pill, called ella, sprang from government labs and appears to be more effective than Plan B, a morning-after pill now available over the counter to women 18 and older that gradually loses efficacy after intercourse and can be taken, at latest, three days after sex. Ella, by contrast, works just as well on the fifth day as the first after sex. Ella blocks the effects of progesterone, a female hormone that spurs ovulation. It is a chemical relative to RU-486, the abortion pill, and some mystery remains over exactly how it works. That mystery spurred a fierce debate outside of the committee about whether it should be considered an abortion drug, a debate that prompted the posting of several uniformed police officers around the meeting room.
Click here for the entire article.


Michigan Bill Demands Abortionists Give Women Best Ultrasound Images

    
     Sen. Wayne Kuipers

A Michigan Senate Judiciary Committee is considering a bill to tighten up the state's informed consent laws. The bill would mandate that mothers seeking an abortion receive high quality images of their unborn babies from the best ultrasound equipment available at the abortion facility.

Sen. Wayne Kuipers (R-Holland) believes abortionists may be using out-of-date ultrasound equipment to comply with the letter of the law, while ignoring its intent: to provide women considering abortion with the best quality images of their unborn baby, before making an irreversible decision.
Click here for the entire article.


University pro-life group leader calls for Irish resistance to abortion
 
    
     University of Ireland

Maria Mahoney, of the National University of Ireland (NUI) Galway Life Society, in a letter to the Irish Independent today, has said everything that needs to be said about the international anti-life political pressures on Ireland right now and about the case against legalizing abortion. Maria writes:

Poll after poll confirms that women who 'chose' abortion felt that they had no choice.

In reaction to this fear and panic, it is vital to respond with love for the gifts of motherhood and human life.
Click here for the entire article.


Barrier Method: How a 42-Inch Fence Is Threatening Our Nation's Unborn

    
     Rev. Patrick Mahoney

On Tuesday, June 8, the Rev. Patrick Mahoney arrived at Planned Parenthood with the intention of going to jail over a fence. Two months earlier, the District had granted the organization a permit to build a 42-inch-high "wrought iron steel fence" around the front lawn of its clinic at 1108 16th St. NW. When Mahoney learned of the construction, he notified police, press, and fellow activists; marched onto the lawn; and knelt to pray in hopes of getting handcuffed. The new barrier, equipped with signs reading, "Private Property. No Trespassing. Violators Will be Prosecuted," is meant to keep the anti-choicers at a distance. But it also provides an opportunity for Mahoney to pursue his second-favorite activity involving the property in front of the clinic: litigation. Before Mahoney staged his public prayer, he brought in his go-to attorney, James Henderson of the American Center for Law & Justice. Henderson investigated the issue with city officials and uncovered city maps indicating that the 40 feet between Planned Parenthood's doorway and the 16th Street sidewalk is zoned as "public space."
Click here for the entire article.


Sight Restored to Blinded Patients using Their Own Adult Stem Cells

    

Italian scientists report that they have restored sight to patients blinded by chemical burns using the patient's own adult stem cells. The team treated 112 patients blinded in one or both eyes; some of whom had been blind for years. Adult stem cells were taken from the edge of a patient's eye and cultured on fibrin, then the cell layers transplanted onto the damaged eyes. The adult stem cells produced healthy corneas and functioning eyes. Some patients regained sight within two months, while for others with deeper injuries the process took a year before vision was restored. Patients were followed up to ten years after the transplant. After a single transplant, 69% of patients regained vision; in some cases a second transplant occurred, with a total success in 77% of patients and partial vision restoration in 13% of patients. The long-term restoration was an especially encouraging success of the study.
Click here for the entire article.

$1+ billion federal funding given to abortion advocacy groups over 7 years

    

Yesterday TX pro-life Republican Congressman Pete Olson (pictured at podium, right) held a press conference flanked by pro-life Congress stalwarts [Reps. Chris Smith (NJ), Paul Broun, M.D. (GA), Mary Fallin (OK), John Fleming, M.D. (LA), Trent Franks (AZ), Walter Jones (NC), Jim Jordan (OH), Joe Pitts (PA), Steve Scalise (LA), and Jean Schmidt (OH)], Lila Rose of Live Action; Ken Blackwell of Family Research Council, and Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America to announce the results of a Government Accountability Office audit detailing federal taxpayer dollars given to groups that advocate and/or commit abortions.

The audit was requested by 31 Republican lawmakers.

There is some discrepancy whether the final figure over the course of 7 years was "almost $1 billion in taxpayer dollars," as even Olsen wrote in his press statement, or over $1 billion. It's over. Here is the exact tally...

• Advocates for Youth: $8.7 Million (2002-09)
• Guttmacher Institute: $12.7 Million (2002-08)
• International Planned Parenthood Federation: $93.8 million (2002-09)
• Planned Parenthood Federation of America: $657.1 million (2002-08)
• Population Council of the United States: $284.3 million (2002-08)
• Sexuality Information & Education Council of the U.S.: $1.6 million (2002-09)

That equals $1,058,200,000. And it doesn't include state and local funding, which is massive.

For instance, the GAO report states PP got $657.1 million in direct federal funding over 7 years, which is almost $94 million a year. But PP stated in its most recent annual report, 2007-08, it received $349.6 million that year in "government grants and contracts." So the actual amount in total taxpayer funding is likely more than triple what the GAO found.

(BTW, PP is late making its 2008-09 annual report public. But it knew the GAO report was coming, so there is speculation it was waiting for the GAO results before posting its numbers... to make sure they jibe?)

According to the Houston Chronicle:

"Obviously there is no direct link between the taxpayers' money and women getting abortions because that would violate federal law," a congressional staffer said. "But this report helps track the offsets that we know are taking place at these organizations."...

PP of Houston and SE TX recently debuted a $26 million headquarters to help expand family planning services across the region.

Spokeswoman Rochelle Tafolla said... "None of the federal dollars received are used for abortion care."... PP affiliates in TX that provide abortion services "are required to be separately incorporated from the entity that provides family planning services," she said.

This is all a ruse, a shell game, as we saw as recently as yesterday, when I reported that PP of WI got $150k in federal grants 2 years ago through the Title X program to purchase 10 telemed machines, presumably to dispense birth control pills. Will PP have to give the $150k back if it starts using the telemed machines to dispense the RU-486 abortion cocktail? Good question but certainly no. Furthermore, the $150k PP of WI saved in this area freed it to spend $150k on abortion promotion.

Now you can understand more fully Rep. Mike Pence's legislation, which has 93 co-sponsors, "The Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act," which would prohibit Title X family planning funding to go to abortion providers.

Again, GAO's $1 billion figure only includes funds given directly to the selected organizations by HHS or USAID. It does not include state and local funding. It does not include funds HHS or USAID gave to another entity that then passed them on to PP, etc.

As the GAO report stated, its $1 billion figure "may understate the actual amount of federal funds the selected organizations and their affiliates spent." It represents the floor, not the ceiling.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Pence: GAO Report Confirms it is Time to Defund Planned Parenthood

"The time has come to deny any and all federal funding to Planned Parenthood by passing the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act."

    
     U.S. Congressman Mike Pence

U.S. Congressman Mike Pence today issued the following statement regarding the release of a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report revealing that the Planned Parenthood Federation of America received $657.1 million in taxpayer dollars from Fiscal Year 2002 to Fiscal Year 2009. The largest source of these funds ($342.1 million) was the Title X family planning program.

"It is morally wrong to end an unborn human life by abortion. But it is also morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use those funds to promote abortion.
"This report confirms that the largest abortion provider in America is being bankrolled by American taxpayers. In these tough economic times, there is simply no reason why taxpayer money should go to fund the activities of abortion providers and equip them with the resources they need to end innocent human life.

"We must stop providing taxpayer dollars to abortion providers through Title X. We must put an end to Americans unwillingly providing financial support to the abortion industry. The time has come to deny any and all federal funding to Planned Parenthood by passing the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act."

Background:

The Title X Family Planning program was enacted in 1970 as Title X of the Public Health Service Act. Title X is the only federal grant program that provides individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services.

Congressman Pence introduced The Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act (H.R. 614), a bill prohibiting the distribution of Title X family planning money to entities that use abortion as a method of family planning. The bi-partisan bill has 93 co-sponsors.

Originally, family planning services were not allowed to include abortions and currently federal dollars are not used directly for abortions. However, over the years, the subsidy of abortion providers under the umbrella of family planning has been gradually accepted.

Current law prohibits the use of Title X family planning funds "in programs where abortion is a method of family planning;" and current regulations require some form of separation between federally-funded family planning services and abortions. However, the current regulations do not contain a descriptive standard of what constitutes "separation." They only require the level of separation to be more than "mere bookkeeping."

When Title X money goes to clinics that provide both abortions and family planning services, even though the money cannot directly fund abortions, it is being used to offset operational costs with federal funds, freeing up money to promote and provide abortions.

Rep. Pence, Rep. Pete Olson (R-TX) and 29 other Members requested the GAO study, which can be accessed at http://gao.gov/products/GAO-10-533R.

Contact: Matt Lahr
Publish Date: June 16, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

CWA to Testify at FDA Hearing on Abortion Drug

    
     Wendy Wright

A Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory Committee will meet on Thursday, June 17, to discuss if Ella, a drug that is similar to the abortion drug RU-486, should be available in the U.S.  Ella blocks the hormone progesterone, interfering with the lining of the uterus so an embryo cannot implant or, if implanted, will not survive.

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), will testify at the hearing, making these points:

Ella operates in the same manner as the abortion drug RU-486 by blocking progesterone receptors.  This interferes with the uterine lining, impacting embryos that have not yet implanted and those that have implanted, aborting a pregnancy.
 
Women will take Ella thinking it's a morning-after pill, when in fact, it is an abortion pill.
 
If Ella is easy to access, women will be victims to it being slipped to them without their consent.  This has already happened numerous times with other abortion-causing drugs.  Drugs that can cause an abortion, while touted as giving women more control over their bodies, are just as easily used by men to exploit women.
 
Advocates for the morning-after pill claimed that it would dramatically reduce pregnancies and abortions.  Now they admit that's not true.  They also admit that morning-after pills are not as effective as previous studies -- which the FDA relied on -- claimed.
 
The same advocates claim that RU-486 is safe, but the families of the women who died from that drug will beg to differ.
 
Proponents excuse the selling of an ineffective drug to women who are not at risk of getting pregnant as a "woman's right."  In reality, what they cloak as a woman's "entitlement" is a facade to promote their own ideological crusade.
 
The FDA should not unleash Ella on unsuspecting women -- a drug promoted by activists with a history of overstating the efficacy of reproductive drugs while understating the overall risks to women.

Contact: Demi Bardsley
Source: Concerned Women for America
Publish Date: June 16, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Military abortion clinics "a sign of the times"?

    
     Cecile Richards

A couple weeks ago pro-abort Democrat US Sen. Roland Burris had introduced an amendment to the defense authorization bill that would force all military medical facilities to make privately financed abortions available.

The amendment passed in the Senate Armed Services Committee along party lines (except Ben Nelson) and is now headed toward a showdown on the Senate floor.

The defense authorization bill passed without any such amendment in the House, meaning if the abortion amendment remains intact, a House/Senate conference committee will decide its fate....

Keep an eye on the filibuster AZ Sen. John McCain is attempting to wage on the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal, also in the defense bill. The other side may attempt to compromise by dropping Burris's amendment as a bargaining chip... or not. Even if that happens, pro-lifers cannot support a defense bill containing DADT. If DADT remains, it would only be a matter of time before abortion on demand becomes a component of the military.

While the mood of the country is definitely swinging pro-life, as evidenced by recent polls and also a plethora of pro-life legislation introduced and passed on the state level, tone deaf pro-abort ideologues controlling the Congress and White House have been and will push abortion until the clock runs out on their possession of power, hopefully in November 2010. But a lot of damage can be done until then, as the military abortion amendment demonstrates.

Meanwhile the abortion industry behind the push puts on a happy false face. as this June 17 Politico article shows:

With a couple of quiet changes to long-standing rules, the military is on track to make 2010 a year in which its reproductive health policies are significantly liberalized.

In February, the military began requiring all of its hospitals to stock emergency contraceptives. And now, a Senate amendment to the defense authorization bill would authorize military hospitals to perform elective abortions.

"I do think it's a sign of the times," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "It's the recognition that reproductive health care for women is basic health care. The world has changed, and women play a larger role in the military. These are all very positive steps."

These shifts in military policy are particularly notable in light of the numerous anti-abortion provisions flying through state legislatures. Catalyzed by the health reform debate, anti-abortion advocates have just passed some of the most restrictive abortion laws in recent memory....

The federal government usually has little influence on reproductive health policy....

So it's rare to see much movement on abortion policy at the federal level. Anti-abortion advocates frame the shift toward more liberal reproductive rights within the military as driven by a Democratic Congress and a pro-abortion-rights administration.

"They're using the military as a wedge and a way to implement their agenda," Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, said of her opponents. "I see them being very craven in looking to use the military to put the stamp of approval of federal government on abortion."...

Current law, passed by congressional Republicans in 1995, bars any elective abortions at military hospitals....

To be sure, legislators have introduced similar amendments before, all of which have failed. But the proposal, sponsored by Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL), hits the floor in a markedly different atmosphere: It's the first to be proposed during the Obama administration and may avoid a heated debate, with most social activists focused on the "don't ask, don't tell" provision.

Abortion rights groups are confident that, this time around, the political landscape is amenable to a decision in their favor.

"In the Senate, things are good," said Richards.... "The good thing is, this amendment puts the issue squarely on the table: How can you prohibit women serving overseas from having the same rights as women in the United States?"

Anti-abortion-rights advocates like Americans United for Life have already begun laying groundwork for a campaign to keep the military abortion ban in place and lobbying legislators to vote down the amendment when it comes to the floor....

But privately, anti-abortion advocates admit they're uncertain whether they have the votes to stand in the way. "Our hope would be that the amendment is stripped on the Senate floor, but right now we don't have a majority of pro-life members," one anti-abortion advocate told Politico....

Activists on both sides of the issue expect a vote by the end of this month at the earliest and definitely before the summer recess.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Back Room Deals on DISCLOSE Act Threaten First Amendment Rights

 
The U.S. House is considering the DISCLOSE Act this week.

    
     U.S. House Democrats

H.R. 5175 is an attempt by Democrats to overturn a recent Supreme Court decision that found portions of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Law to be unconstitutional.  The bill would negatively affect grassroots organizations that inform voters on ballot issues.

Many groups had stood in opposition to the bill, including the National Rifle Association NRA, which fears it would be muzzled by the measure. Reports from Capitol Hill reveal the NRA has struck a deal with lawmakers to exclude the organization from compliance along with some corporations.

Ashley Horne, federal policy analyst with CitizenLink, said the move may hurt efforts to stop the legislation.

"It's pretty tough when a handful of groups break the line and carve out an exemption for themselves, leaving the rest of us hanging," she said. "The majority of groups like ours will definitely be hurt if this bill is enacted."

A letter from the National Right to Life Committee outlines the potential harm of the legislation.

"(The bill) has been carefully crafted to maximize short-term political benefits for the dominant faction of one political party," the statement reads, "while running roughshod over the First Amendment protections for political speech that have been clearly and forcefully articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court."

    
      Click here to view the related action alert.

Contact: Kim Trobee
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: June 16, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Gene-Engineered Adult Stem Cells to Fight HIV and a Promise for Lungs

Adult Stem Cells to Fight HIV

    
     HIV cell

Scientists at City of Hope in Duarte, California have shown that it may be possible to genetically engineer a patient's own adult stem cells to fight HIV. Four patients with AIDS received their own adult stem cells to treat lymphoma, including some of their cells that had been engineered with three genes to fight off HIV infection. One of the gene therapy targets was a protein receptor on immune cells (CCR5) that HIV binds to when infecting a cell, the idea being to prevent infection of the engineered stem cells. The other two engineered genes were designed to attack viral RNA that might make it into the cell, preventing production of viral protein.

While the dose of engineered stem cells was too low to produce an effect on the patients' viral load, the study showed no adverse effects from the procedure and that the cells survived, engrafted, and continued producing the engineered genes for up to two years after the transplant for three of the four patients.

A previous study had treated leukemia in an AIDS patient using donor adult stem cell transplant, in which the donor was selected specifically for lack of the CCR5 receptor on the donor stem cells. The patient recovered from the leukemia and also exhibited no sign of HIV.

The current study was published in Science Translational Medicine.

Promise for Lungs with Adult Stem Cells

    
     Lungs can become inflammed and scarred.

Australian researchers have published a breakthrough that shows promise of adult stem cell treatments for lung diseases. The team isolated human amnion epithelial cells (hAECs) from term placenta that have stem cell and anti-inflammatory properties. The cells were able to differentiate into lung-type cells, and when injected into mice with lung damage, the cells reduced inflammation and scarring in the lungs.

The study's lead researcher, Associate Professor Yuben Moodley, said:

"I would think that it may be pretty useful in patients who are on ventilators and have then developed inflammation from the ventilation and subsequent scarring, so in acute respiratory distress syndrome, as we call, it would be useful.

"It may be useful in patients with emphysema, patients with occupational lung diseases like asbestosis and probably in patients with severe asthma where there's a strong inflammatory component and scarring that may be treated."

Professor Moodley also noted that:

"Given that there are no ethical issues, that the cells are freely available from discarded placenta and that they could be easily grown and injected, it would be a near-term issue rather than a long-term issue."

The study is published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

Contact: David Prentice
Source: FRC Blog
Publish Date: June 17, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR THURSDAY

Naperville City Council Learns Abortion Clinics Allowed In City

    
     Naperville City Council

The topic came up for discussion at Tuesday night's meeting of the Naperville City Council when the council was asked to approve a minor text amendment in the city's zoning code consolidating the definition of medical clinic and medical office. The change was in semantics only — the terms are interchangeable in city code — but sparked confusion and debate among council members, who then learned that abortion clinics have the right to move in anywhere in Naperville.
Click here for the entire article.


Michigan Republican Wants Abortion Clinics to Have 'Better' Ultrasound Machines to Kill Babies With

    
     Pre-Abortion Ultrasound Test

Michigan lawmakers are set to consider a bill that would tighten the state law on pre-abortion ultrasound tests. A bill scheduled for discussion in a Senate committee would require the use of the most advanced equipment available at a facility when an ultrasound is shown. Doctors who order ultrasound imaging for women considering an abortion are required to give them the option to view the image under a 2006 law. Republican Sen. Wayne Kuipers of Holland says he introduced the new legislation because some facilities have used outdated equipment that intentionally produced grainy images instead of using their newest technology.
Click here for the entire article.


South Carolina legislators approve compromise on abortion bill

    

The South Carolina Legislature has approved a compromise on an abortion bill after House Republicans dropped a provision requiring women to make two trips to the clinic. It expands women's wait period from one hour to a day after receiving information on the procedure. But it no longer ties the clock to an ultrasound at the abortion clinic, as House GOP members insisted. The House and Senate voted late Wednesday to adopt the agreement.
Click here for the entire article.


Food and Depopulation: International Takeover by the UN

    

Most people think that the United Nations is a noble enterprise and they don't understand the history and malignant character of the UN. Christina Aguilera, Drew Barrymore and Sean Penn are probably unaware, even though they are UN Ambassadors to the World Food Program (WFP), that the intent of the UN is to implement one world government. The UN WFP, which spreads GMOs in poor countries, is just one tool used for advancing the goals of UN Agenda 21, the overarching blueprint for depopulation and total control.
Click here for the entire article.


It's not possible to practice IVF and respect human life
 
    
     Bhateri Devi

The mainstream media has noted a recent large scale study that suggests that babies born through IVF are more likely to have congenital disabilities. In particular the study suggests that children conceived thanks to IVF are more likely to experience heart problems and malformations of the uro-genital system.

On Monday, Bhateri Devi (pictured above), a 66 year old woman, become the oldest woman in the world to give birth to triplets. On the same day a 72 year old woman, who gave birth thanks to IVF treatment at 70, revealed she is dying and criticized her IVF center for not explaining the risks to women about having babies later in life.
Click here for the entire article.


Prince Charles' Population Control Speech Backfires with References to Chesterton, C.S. Lewis

    
     Prince Charles

The Prince of Wales has come under fire after using a speech on Islam and environmentalism as an opportunity to call for a reduction in the world's birth rate, especially among Muslims.

But what has drawn the ire of some commentators is that moments after making his controversial remarks, the prince went on to quote famed Christian writers C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton in support of the thesis of his address.
Click here for the entire article.