Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of The Illinois Federation for Right to Life. They are presented only for your information.
Community Outreach: Center Takes Steps To Assist Planned Parenthood to Target Hispanics for Population Reduction
Clinic outreach workers for Thomason Hospital Women's Health Center have been touring the area's closed Planned Parenthood offices in a large white RV since the longtime women's health service called it quits in El Paso on June 30. The workers' hope is that women who don't know where to go for medical services will find a new home and not neglect their health. They hope the large vehicle helps grab patients' attention. "We are going to different sites of Planned Parenthood to talk to patients and let them know we're here to help," said Lelia Onsurez, community health educator for Thomason Hospital Women's Health Centers. "They're not going to be left out in the cold." Planned Parenthood provided family planning and primary care services and services for people living with AIDS and HIV.
Click here for the full article.
Vandals Hit Oregon Pregnancy Support Center With Graffiti
Graffiti vandals have targeted a local support center for pregnant women. The phrases "kill us now", "give us your eggs", "freedom", and a swastika cover the glass windows at the front of the Lane Pregnancy Support Center on 13th Avenue in Eugene. The vandalism occurred late Tuesday night or early Wednesday morning. According to a news release, Lane Pregnancy Support Center is a non-profit, privately funded pro-life community outreach serving over 300 clients in Lane County each month.
Click here for the full article.
'Cardiac Death' Allows One to Kill the Organ Donor
In 2006, research done by Dr. Gerald Buckberg, a cardio-thoracic surgeon and UCLA expert, demonstrated that a person can survive cardiac arrest for an average of 72 minutes if they are given the following treatment: cardio-pulmonary resuscitation, the use of a heart-lung machine to keep blood and oxygen circulating, and gradual restoration of blood and oxygen flow.
This research was done at hospitals in Alabama and Ann Arbor, Michigan and also in Germany. Of 34 patients, seven died, only two had permanent neurological changes and 25 recovered completely. One patient had been in cardiac arrest for two and a half hours. Similar results were obtained by research in Japan, Taiwan, and elsewhere in Asia.
Click here for the full article.
The Most Pro-Life State Gains Momentum for Personhood Initiative as Lt Governor Signs On
The Personhood Initiative in Mississippi has recently gain significant momentum because of national personhood efforts emerging around the country. Mississippi has long been known as the most "pro-life" state in America and could be the first state to affirm the personhood rights of all humans.
Lt Governor Phil Bryant also gave this effort a boost by endorsing the effort and signing the petition. He joined a growing and diverse group of political, church, and community leaders from across the state who are getting behind this effort.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Pills Administered Incorrectly
The protocol at Planned Parenthood clinics for administering RU-486, the drug that causes medical abortions, was officially changed in order to reduce the resulting serious infections and deaths. Planned Parenthood is now trying to claim kudos for making medical abortions safer, for the mother. When the FDA first approved RU-486 — a combination of two drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol — as an abortifacient for the general public's use, manufactured by Danco Laboratories, their guidelines suggested oral use as the safest way to effect an abortion. However, Planned Parenthood (PP) had been telling women to use the drug as a suppository, and by their own admission giving it thusly in their clinics. This resulted in serious cases of infection and even death.
Click here for the full article.
Pro-Life Protester Interrupts Sotomayor Confirmation Hearing
An anti-abortion protester briefly disrupted the opening of Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination hearing.
The outburst came during Sen. Dianne Feinstein's opening statement Monday. A man in room interrupted her remarks by shouting: "Senator. What about the unborn!" He called abortion "genocide.
Capitol Police identified the protester as Robert James, from Virginia. He was charged with unlawful conduct and disruption of Congress.
Click here for the full article.
July 13, 2009
July 10, 2009
Health Bills Biggest Pro-Abortion Grab Since Roe
Kennedy-Dodd Health Bill
The two central "health care reform" bills currently moving in Congress – the Kennedy bill and the House Democratic leadership bill – each contain provisions that would, if enacted, represent the greatest expansion of abortion since the Supreme Court handed down its Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion in 1973. These bills contain multiple provisions that would result in federally mandated insurance coverage of abortion on demand, massive federal subsidies for abortion, mandated creation of many new abortion clinics, and nullification of at least some state limitations on abortion.
Next week, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee is expected to consider a number of NRLC-supported amendments offered by Republican senators that would remove the pro-abortion mandates and subsidies from the Kennedy bill. House committees will consider similar amendments during markups of the House Democratic leadership bill, which is also planned for next week.
On July 9, Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ), co-chairman of the House Pro-Life Caucus, distributed to his colleagues the letter that appears below – a collection of statements by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and five pro-abortion organizations, confirming their intent to greatly expand access to abortion on demand, using "health care reform" as a vehicle. You will find it easier to read if you download the PDF image of the letter, click here.
If President Obama, congressional Democratic leaders, and the pro-abortion advocacy groups were to succeed in mandating vast expansions of access to abortion, with federal funding, the predictable result would be a great increase in the number of abortions performed – this, from a president who assured the American people that he would pursue policies to reduce abortions. Click here to see the related Action Alert
Contact: Douglas Johnson
Source: NRLC
Publish Date: July 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Chief of Human Genome Project Tapped by Obama to Lead NIH
President Barack Obama has nominated acclaimed geneticist and leader of the Human Genome Project, Dr. Francis S. Collins, to become the next chief of the National Institutes of Health. The appointment of Collins, a scientist and evangelical Christian who has defended the inherent compatibility of science and religious belief, comes just two days after the NIH released its guidelines governing human embryonic stem-cell (hESC) research.
"My administration is committed to promoting scientific integrity and pioneering scientific research and I am confident that Dr. Francis Collins will lead the NIH to achieve these goals," said President Obama in a statement.
Collins earned fame as a gene hunter upon joining the University of Michigan, pioneering a gene identification technique called "positional cloning." Beginning in 1993, Collins directed the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), an institute under the NIH, until his resignation as its chief in 2008. His most noteworthy contribution during that time was his leadership of the Human Genome Project, which mapped the genetic sequences of 3.1 billion chemical base pairs in human DNA.
The NIH, headquartered in Bethsaida, Maryland, this year will dedicate 40 billion dollars for scientific research, which will now be available to scientists involved in hESCR. Obama has repealed a November 2001 executive order from former President George W. Bush that allowed federal funds only to researchers to working with existing stem-cell lines derived from destroyed human embryos.
Under new NIH guidelines, hESC researchers may apply for federal funding once they have demonstrated that the hESCs they derive are obtained from human embryos created solely for reproductive purposes at fertility clinics, and that the embryos are donated by their parents with "voluntary and informed consent."
Pro-life critics of the NIH guidelines have pointed out that the regulations do not specify enough against the creation of "chimeras" (hybrid human-animal embryos) and have stated that the NIH guidelines are widening the path to embryo-farming for the sake of scientific research.
The Senate confirmation of Collins as NIH director will likely be a smooth process. Collins supported the presidential campaign of Barack Obama and lauded the President's decision to repeal the Bush administration ban on funding new hESC lines. He has also voiced support for "therapeutic human cloning" or somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), whereby the nucleus of a human egg is replaced with the DNA of an individual, resulting in the creation of a clone embryo of that individual. Collins has speculated that stem-cells extracted from an individual's clone would not face immune rejection problems inherent with other hESC therapies.
Collins has also stated that little if any ethical controversy surrounds adult stem-cell research, making it appear that the new NIH-chief will be supportive of that research as well.
However, despite Collins's support for hESC research and SCNT, his high-profile defense of the compatibility of science and religious belief has drawn fire from certain quarters that insist his religious views make his commitment to science suspect. According to the New York Times, some have "privately expressed unease" over Collins's "very public embrace of religion," although the paper did not name any specific individuals.
Collins has written a book called "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief" and has given talks, such as to the American Scientific Affiliation, explaining his life-changing conversion as a 27-year-old scientist, which was due in part to his encounter with C.S. Lewis's book "Mere Christianity."
While a staunch opponent of atheistic Darwinian evolution (Collins has debated Richard Dawkins, author of the "God Delusion"), Collins does not identify himself with the Intelligence Design movement, but instead describes himself as a "theistic evolutionist."
Collins is also the founder and president of the BioLogos Foundation, an educational organization which seeks to promote the harmony existing between science and faith, and educate the public of scientific evidence in nature that points to a Creator.
As an expert on genetic research, Collins has also dismissed the claim of a "gay" gene: that DNA predetermines homosexual behaviors. Instead Collins has noted that environment - including childhood experiences - can influence gene expression leading to a predisposition, but free will and choice have a role in determining a person's behavior.
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Attempt to restore Mexico City Policy sunk by committee
Testifying before the U.S. House Rules Committee in support of the bipartisan Smith-Stupak-Sensenbrenner-Jordan Amendment to restore the Mexico City Policy, Rep. Chris Smith said on Wednesday the proposal would reflect a pro-life trend and would prevent the U.S. from funding the "Trojan horses" of the abortion industry.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) told the committee that polls showed 65 percent of Americans opposed President Obama's January executive order reversing the Mexico City Policy, which forbade federal funding for groups which promote or perform abortions overseas.
"The United States is clearly trending pro-life—ultrasound technology has shattered the myth that an unborn child is not a person," he remarked.
Without euphemism, he said, abortion is "violence against children" that also harms women "emotionally and physically."
He argued that abortion should be understood as infant mortality, which everyone recognizes as an evil.
"An unborn child's immaturity or dependence shouldn't mitigate, negate, or nullify an unborn child's inherent humanity. Human rights ought to be about inclusion, especially for the weakest and most vulnerable, not exclusion."
Rep. Smith also told the House committee that the 2009 Foreign Operations appropriations bill increases population control funding by 40 percent to a record $648 million.
"Our amendment would simply ensure that the huge allocation of tax-payer grant money not be awarded to foreign non-government organizations (NGOs) that perform abortion or lobby for abortion on demand in developing countries," Rep. Smith said.
He said the amendment would direct funds to "family planning services," not abortion.
"Prior to January, the pro-life Mexico City Policy guaranteed, to the extent possible, that unborn children in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere not be put at risk of death by the NGOs we fund," he continued. "Every human life is precious and sacred and worthy of respect. No one is expendable."
Empowering some NGOs would create a "Trojan Horse" for the "global abortion industry," which Rep. Smith said would render President Barack Obama's endorsement of reducing the number of abortions into "cheap political sophistry."
Late on Wednesday evening, the amendment was blocked in the Rules Committee by the Democratic majority.
The Foreign Operations bill, sans amendment, passed the House on Thursday afternoon.
Source: CNA
Publish Date: July 10, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
RU-486 Cited in Rise of Chemical Abortion
Chemical abortions accounted for roughly one-fourth of early abortions obtained by American women last year, according to a new study that cited improved safety in the using the so-called "abortion pill," RU-486.
"However, abortion of any kind is not safe for a pre-born child," said Shari Rendall, director of Legislation and Public Policy for Concerned Women for America.
The research, conducted at Planned Parenthood clinics nationally, reveals a lower risk of a dangerous infection now that the second of the two pills dispensed is taken orally.
But Rendall points out that chemical abortions aren't as safe for women as they are led to believe. "They're making it easy. And this access, coupled with the fact that they're in private means that you're going to have repeated use, which could lead to long-term effects that have never even been studied."
Medical experts expect more chemical abortions, especially because they offer more privacy than surgical abortions.
Chemical abortions require medical oversight but in some states, a less credentialed health professional can administer the drugs with a doctor's supervision.
Pro-life leaders note that pro-abortion groups pushed for RU-486 to be legalized in the U.S. because fewer and fewer doctors are willing to perform surgical abortions.
Contact: Roger Greer
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Governments Maintain IPPF Funding Despite Financial Crisis in 2008
The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), the world's foremost abortion provider, recently released its latest financial report which shows that the organization continues to receive the majority of its multi-million dollar budget from government grants and pay six figure salaries to dozens of its executives despite the world financial crisis.
"IPPF Financial Statements 2008" highlights the work done by IPPF and its affiliate organizations all across the globe. In total, the organization boasts that it has provided over 24 million "contraceptive services" and over 650,000 "abortion-related services" during the reporting period.
Though the financial crisis has increasingly put pressure on governments, funding for IPPF's activities primarily came from government donations. Of IPPF's total income of $119 million, almost 80% of that came directly from government grants. 17 countries gave money to IPPF in 2008, with the governments of Sweden, the United Kingdom and Japan topping the list.
Additionally, $1 million in funding came from the United Nations Population Fund and the UN Program on HIV/AIDS. Charitable foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, and the Hewlett Foundation also filled IPPF's coffers with $23 million. Other prominent abortion advocacy organizations such as Population Action International and Ipas also gave significant amounts.
IPPF's total expenditure for 2008 totaled $121.4 million. While much of that money was spent on IPPF's five priority action areas - adolescents, abortion, access, advocacy and HIV/AIDS - a large amount was spent on staffing costs. In 2008, IPPF employed 297 staffers full-time for a cost of $23 million. Over 3 dozen individuals were paid out six figure salaries, with the top salary grossing close to $480,000 a year.
The report shows that IPPF handed out over $60 million in grants to its member associations around the world and also lists grants to "other organizations." The grants to these "other organizations" include hundreds of thousands of dollars to Latin American offices of "Catolicas" por el Derecho a Decidir ("Catholics" for A Free Choice), abortion-provider Marie Stopes International and Women's Link Worldwide, a group dedicated to strategic litigation against laws protecting life globally.
According to the organization, IPPF's tentacles reached 176 countries through 151 affiliate organizations to push abortion and contraception worldwide last year. In a survey of affiliate activities, IPPF boasts that 88.4% of its affiliates are involved in "advancing national policy and legislation on sexual and reproductive health and rights." 82.3% of those affiliates state that they are involved in counteracting any opposition to sexual and reproductive health and rights.
IPPF is seeking to take advantage of the Obama Administration's decision to rescind the Mexico City Policy which banned organizations from performing or promoting abortion overseas. The report outlines the organization's plans for 2009 which include: pushing its "Declaration of Sexual Rights," a document which declares that governments are obligated to guarantee a sweeping definition of "sexual rights," including abortion, "sexual freedom" and "comprehensive sexuality education." This year, IPPF will also focus on using the events surrounding the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development - also known as the "Cairo Conference" - to advocate for abortion at the United Nations.
Contact: Samantha Singson
Source: C-FAM
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Program Resulted in More than Twice as Many Teen Pregnancies
More than half of UK teen pregnancies end in abortion
A scheme to reduce teenage pregnancies that cost British taxpayers £6 million ($9.8 million US) has backfired, with girls in the program ending up more than twice as likely to become pregnant than those in the general population. The Young People's Development Programme (YPDP) cost £2,500 ($4,085 US) per person and involved giving teenagers sex education and advice about contraception. At the end of the project a total of 16 percent of those involved became pregnant compared with just 6 percent in a comparison group.
A Department of Health spokesman said, "This pilot was based on a successful American program. It did not appear to reduce teenage pregnancy so we will not be taking it any further."
The program ran in 27 parts of England between 2004 and 2007, based on a similar model in New York, and was designed to offer education and support for 13 to 15-year-olds who were deemed at risk of exclusion from school, drug abuse and teenage pregnancy. A total of 2,371 teenagers took part in the program over the three years.
A study evaluating the program published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) found that young women in the YPDP group were more likely to have not used contraception when they most recently had sex.
The study concluded, "Among young women, YPDP participants more commonly reported teenage pregnancies, early heterosexual sex and expectation of becoming a teenage parent, as well as temporary exclusion from school and truancy. No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies, drunkenness or cannabis use. Some results suggested an adverse effect."
At the same time, recently released statistics show that after decades of sex education programs in schools combined with easily available publicly funded abortion, more than half of the children conceived by unwed teens in Britain are killed by abortion. Of around 40,000 pregnancies among girls under 18 years in 2008, more than 20,000 were ended by abortion.
According to figures released this year from the Office for National Statistics, 41.9 girls per 1,000 aged 15 to 17 became pregnant in 2007, compared with 40.9 in 2006. Among girls aged 13 to 15 the rate rose from 7.8 per 1,000 girls to 8.3. Around 8,196 girls aged under 16 became pregnant in 2007.
As these figures were released, the government announced an increase of £20.5 million in funding for "reproductive health" clinics, long-term contraceptive implants and advertising campaigns. More recently, the government announced that it will make explicit sex education a compulsory part of the school curriculum in all grades.
Faced with an ever rising number of teenagers conceiving children, the Labour government has insisted that only more and more explicit "sex education," wider availability of artificial contraception and abortion is the answer.
Phyllis Bowman of Right to Life slammed the government's failed attempts at curbing the problem of teenage pregnancy. "The young have been deliberately sexualised in a culture which sneers at the idea of telling teenagers they should not have sex," she said.
She pointed to "contraception campaigners" who look to unwed teenagers for the bulk of their revenue. "We have the highest level of sexually transmitted disease in Europe and the highest level of sexual activity among teenagers in Europe. UNICEF says we have the unhappiest teenagers in Europe.
A Department of Health spokesman, however, defended the government's approach, saying, "One of the key aims of this Government, as set out in the Sexual Health and Teenage Pregnancy Strategies, is to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and consequently abortions, through better access to contraception.
"Prescribed contraception is available free of charge under NHS arrangements, and the Department of Health has recently invested additional funds to allow for improvements in contraception services."
The Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, launched by Tony Blair's New Labour, has received more than £300 million in funding. It was meant to halve the number of conceptions among girls under 18 in England between 1998 and 2010. At the time the government started the Strategy, fewer than four out of ten pregnant teenage girls opted for an abortion.
Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
A scheme to reduce teenage pregnancies that cost British taxpayers £6 million ($9.8 million US) has backfired, with girls in the program ending up more than twice as likely to become pregnant than those in the general population. The Young People's Development Programme (YPDP) cost £2,500 ($4,085 US) per person and involved giving teenagers sex education and advice about contraception. At the end of the project a total of 16 percent of those involved became pregnant compared with just 6 percent in a comparison group.
A Department of Health spokesman said, "This pilot was based on a successful American program. It did not appear to reduce teenage pregnancy so we will not be taking it any further."
The program ran in 27 parts of England between 2004 and 2007, based on a similar model in New York, and was designed to offer education and support for 13 to 15-year-olds who were deemed at risk of exclusion from school, drug abuse and teenage pregnancy. A total of 2,371 teenagers took part in the program over the three years.
A study evaluating the program published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) found that young women in the YPDP group were more likely to have not used contraception when they most recently had sex.
The study concluded, "Among young women, YPDP participants more commonly reported teenage pregnancies, early heterosexual sex and expectation of becoming a teenage parent, as well as temporary exclusion from school and truancy. No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies, drunkenness or cannabis use. Some results suggested an adverse effect."
At the same time, recently released statistics show that after decades of sex education programs in schools combined with easily available publicly funded abortion, more than half of the children conceived by unwed teens in Britain are killed by abortion. Of around 40,000 pregnancies among girls under 18 years in 2008, more than 20,000 were ended by abortion.
According to figures released this year from the Office for National Statistics, 41.9 girls per 1,000 aged 15 to 17 became pregnant in 2007, compared with 40.9 in 2006. Among girls aged 13 to 15 the rate rose from 7.8 per 1,000 girls to 8.3. Around 8,196 girls aged under 16 became pregnant in 2007.
As these figures were released, the government announced an increase of £20.5 million in funding for "reproductive health" clinics, long-term contraceptive implants and advertising campaigns. More recently, the government announced that it will make explicit sex education a compulsory part of the school curriculum in all grades.
Faced with an ever rising number of teenagers conceiving children, the Labour government has insisted that only more and more explicit "sex education," wider availability of artificial contraception and abortion is the answer.
Phyllis Bowman of Right to Life slammed the government's failed attempts at curbing the problem of teenage pregnancy. "The young have been deliberately sexualised in a culture which sneers at the idea of telling teenagers they should not have sex," she said.
She pointed to "contraception campaigners" who look to unwed teenagers for the bulk of their revenue. "We have the highest level of sexually transmitted disease in Europe and the highest level of sexual activity among teenagers in Europe. UNICEF says we have the unhappiest teenagers in Europe.
A Department of Health spokesman, however, defended the government's approach, saying, "One of the key aims of this Government, as set out in the Sexual Health and Teenage Pregnancy Strategies, is to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and consequently abortions, through better access to contraception.
"Prescribed contraception is available free of charge under NHS arrangements, and the Department of Health has recently invested additional funds to allow for improvements in contraception services."
The Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, launched by Tony Blair's New Labour, has received more than £300 million in funding. It was meant to halve the number of conceptions among girls under 18 in England between 1998 and 2010. At the time the government started the Strategy, fewer than four out of ten pregnant teenage girls opted for an abortion.
Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY
Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of The Illinois Federation for Right to Life. They are presented only for your information.
My First Abortion Party
In a recent article published on AlterNet, 'My First Abortion Party', writer Byard Duncan relates his experience of attending a party thrown by his friend 'Maggie' so as to raise funds to pay for her abortion.
When I got the invite to a friend's abortion party, I thought it was a way to help her through a difficult decision. I was right and wrong.
"Have you guys heard the news?" Maggie (name changed) unwrapped the scarf from around her neck and patted her flat belly. "Preggers." It was around 30 degrees outside, and her cheeks were splashed pink from the Indiana wind.
She had discovered earlier that week, after missing a period and taking the test. "I kind of knew already.
Click here for the full article. - Warning - this is an unedited article about this abortion party coming from an attender, some terms are kind of crude.
New Study Confirms that Pres. Obama's DC Policy Will Increase Abortions Says Dr. Alveda King
Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., commented today on a new Guttmacher Institute study that shows that in states where Medicaid pays for abortions, more poor women have abortions.
"The Guttmacher report is really just another study that confirms the obvious -- subsidized abortion means more abortions," said Dr. King. "My medical insurance paid for my 'legal abortion' in 1973. My 'free' abortion, in turn, made it all too easy for me to be an unsuspecting victim of population control."
Click here for the full article.
Appeals Court: WA Pharmacists Must Heed Order to Distribute Abortifacient Plan B Pill
A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that Washington pharmacists will likely have to obey a 2007 regulation forcing them to distribute the abortifacient morning-after pill, known as Plan B.
The regulation had been temporarily blocked by a Washington judge in 2007 when pharmacists who refused to distribute the pill launched a suit against the state. Today's decision overturned that of U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton, who agreed with the complainants that there was reason to believe the rules violated the pharmacists' right to the freedom of conscience.
The Board of Pharmacy and the State regulations require pharmacy owners to provide the pill, and require individuals to distribute or refer elsewhere for the drug regardless of personal conviction.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Advocacy Group Uses "Extreme Case" at UN to Punish Peru for Pro-Life Laws
The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) is representing a Peruvian teenager who sought an abortion after a rape and suicide attempt in a proceeding before the United Nations compliance committee tasked with overseeing the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). CRR is charging that Peru violated its obligations under the treaty because the teen was unable to obtain an abortion at a public hospital.
After the girl attempted suicide by jumping off a building, CRR alleges she was denied an abortion that CRR says was medically necessary to facilitate successful spinal surgery on the now-paraplegic teen. The complaint asks the Peruvian government to acknowledge a violation of rights under CEDAW, provide her with reparations and rehabilitation, and institute measures to ensure that women can access "therapeutic" abortion.
Click here for the full article.
NIH Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Ignore Public Opinion and the Human
July 7, 2009, marked a major ethical shift in United States government-funded research. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) implemented President Obama's executive order, "Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells" (March 9, 2009). The new NIH "Guidelines" authorize taxpayer funding of research on human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) harvested from human embryos as of July 7, 2009, or from earlier sources, both domestic and foreign, with the approval of the Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director.
Historically, federal funding of research on humans from which they derived no benefit has been prohibited. Now the destruction of human beings in their earliest and most vulnerable stages is promoted and funded by federal taxpayer dollars. Lengthy explanations exist as to how informed consent from the embryo donors will be obtained, and about how conflicts of interest will be handled, but no mention is made about the rights of the embryos themselves.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Pill Used in a Quarter of U.S. Abortions
Roughly a fourth of American women getting early abortions last year did so with drugs rather than surgery, statistics show, as a new study reported improved safety in using the so-called "abortion pill."
Some experts predict the percentage of such "medical abortions," which offer more privacy than surgical termination at an abortion clinic or hospital, will rise even more due to the new study.
Click here for the full article.
My First Abortion Party
In a recent article published on AlterNet, 'My First Abortion Party', writer Byard Duncan relates his experience of attending a party thrown by his friend 'Maggie' so as to raise funds to pay for her abortion.
When I got the invite to a friend's abortion party, I thought it was a way to help her through a difficult decision. I was right and wrong.
"Have you guys heard the news?" Maggie (name changed) unwrapped the scarf from around her neck and patted her flat belly. "Preggers." It was around 30 degrees outside, and her cheeks were splashed pink from the Indiana wind.
She had discovered earlier that week, after missing a period and taking the test. "I kind of knew already.
Click here for the full article. - Warning - this is an unedited article about this abortion party coming from an attender, some terms are kind of crude.
New Study Confirms that Pres. Obama's DC Policy Will Increase Abortions Says Dr. Alveda King
Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., commented today on a new Guttmacher Institute study that shows that in states where Medicaid pays for abortions, more poor women have abortions.
"The Guttmacher report is really just another study that confirms the obvious -- subsidized abortion means more abortions," said Dr. King. "My medical insurance paid for my 'legal abortion' in 1973. My 'free' abortion, in turn, made it all too easy for me to be an unsuspecting victim of population control."
Click here for the full article.
Appeals Court: WA Pharmacists Must Heed Order to Distribute Abortifacient Plan B Pill
A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled that Washington pharmacists will likely have to obey a 2007 regulation forcing them to distribute the abortifacient morning-after pill, known as Plan B.
The regulation had been temporarily blocked by a Washington judge in 2007 when pharmacists who refused to distribute the pill launched a suit against the state. Today's decision overturned that of U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton, who agreed with the complainants that there was reason to believe the rules violated the pharmacists' right to the freedom of conscience.
The Board of Pharmacy and the State regulations require pharmacy owners to provide the pill, and require individuals to distribute or refer elsewhere for the drug regardless of personal conviction.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Advocacy Group Uses "Extreme Case" at UN to Punish Peru for Pro-Life Laws
The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) is representing a Peruvian teenager who sought an abortion after a rape and suicide attempt in a proceeding before the United Nations compliance committee tasked with overseeing the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). CRR is charging that Peru violated its obligations under the treaty because the teen was unable to obtain an abortion at a public hospital.
After the girl attempted suicide by jumping off a building, CRR alleges she was denied an abortion that CRR says was medically necessary to facilitate successful spinal surgery on the now-paraplegic teen. The complaint asks the Peruvian government to acknowledge a violation of rights under CEDAW, provide her with reparations and rehabilitation, and institute measures to ensure that women can access "therapeutic" abortion.
Click here for the full article.
NIH Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Ignore Public Opinion and the Human
July 7, 2009, marked a major ethical shift in United States government-funded research. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) implemented President Obama's executive order, "Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells" (March 9, 2009). The new NIH "Guidelines" authorize taxpayer funding of research on human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) harvested from human embryos as of July 7, 2009, or from earlier sources, both domestic and foreign, with the approval of the Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director.
Historically, federal funding of research on humans from which they derived no benefit has been prohibited. Now the destruction of human beings in their earliest and most vulnerable stages is promoted and funded by federal taxpayer dollars. Lengthy explanations exist as to how informed consent from the embryo donors will be obtained, and about how conflicts of interest will be handled, but no mention is made about the rights of the embryos themselves.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Pill Used in a Quarter of U.S. Abortions
Roughly a fourth of American women getting early abortions last year did so with drugs rather than surgery, statistics show, as a new study reported improved safety in using the so-called "abortion pill."
Some experts predict the percentage of such "medical abortions," which offer more privacy than surgical termination at an abortion clinic or hospital, will rise even more due to the new study.
Click here for the full article.
PRO-LIFE EVENTS
The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity (CBHD) located on Trinity International University's (TIU) Deerfield campus will be hosting its 16th annual summer conference, Global Bioethics: Emerging Challenges Facing Human Dignity. The conference commences on July 16 and runs through July 18 with pre-conference institutes July 13-16, and post-conference seminars July 20-22.
CBHD, has partnered with Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Nurses Christian Fellowship, Advocates International, and TIU to present this conference which features eight plenary speakers, paper presentations, and opportunities for attendees to network with one another.
Click here for more information or to register.
July 9, 2009
Pro-Life Amendment Defeated in House Committee
A 13-year-old ban on federal funding for Washington D.C., abortions, called the Dornan Amendment, has failed to pass the full House Appropriations Committee, by a vote of 26-33. "We now see taxpayer dollars going to fund abortions in the District of Columbia if this becomes law," said U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., who led in the effort to restore the amendment. "And it's very likely it will become law."
Any maybe not the only anti-life law. Life advocates expect pro-abortion Democrat members of the House to target other existing amendments such as the Hyde Amendment and the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. The Hyde Amendment prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or life of the mother; and the Dickey-Wicker amendment prohibits taxpayer funding of the destruction of human embryos for research.
Click here for more...
Obama at the Vatican - pro-abortion meets pro-life
Tomorrow President Barack Obama will travel to the Vatican to meet with Pope Benedict XVI.
Pope Benedict and ObamaWhile President Obama is in Italy on July 10 for the G-8 summit, Pope Benedict has agreed to meet with him. The Associated Press reports that Pope Benedict is so interested in meeting Obama that he has agreed to an afternoon appointment -- a non-traditional time for the Pope to hold meetings -- despite his disagreements with Obama's pro-abortion stance and support for embryonic stem-cell research.
American pro-life Catholics are showing outrage over the much-anticipated gathering between Obama and Benedict.
Click here for more...
Pope Benedict and ObamaWhile President Obama is in Italy on July 10 for the G-8 summit, Pope Benedict has agreed to meet with him. The Associated Press reports that Pope Benedict is so interested in meeting Obama that he has agreed to an afternoon appointment -- a non-traditional time for the Pope to hold meetings -- despite his disagreements with Obama's pro-abortion stance and support for embryonic stem-cell research.
American pro-life Catholics are showing outrage over the much-anticipated gathering between Obama and Benedict.
Click here for more...
Abortion Employee Runs into Pro-Lifer, Keeps Going at Bizarre Rockford Abortuary
ROCKFORD, Illinois, The pattern of abuse at a Rockford abortion facility has continued after an employee allegedly struck with his car a homeless man praying with pro-life protesters, and drove away, according to witnesses at the scene.
The vehicle reportedly struck Scott Griffin on Wednesday as it drove into the driveway of the abortion facility, where pro-lifers say workers frequently drive recklessly in an apparent attempt to intimidate those praying and handing out pro-life literature.
"The dark colored SUV the clinic worker was driving hit Scott Griffin with the mirror on the passenger side so hard the mirror was slammed back into the vehicle and Mr. Griffin was stunned and bruised," Rockford pro-life veteran Kevin Rilott said.
"After the clinic worker hit him she didn't slow down or stop to see how he was - she just kept going."
Another witness, George Lambert, said the female clinic worker "really nailed the guy hard - I couldn't believe she didn't even stop to see how he was."
City Attorney Kerry Partridge refused to comment on whether any suspects had been questioned or charged, saying only that the case is still under investigation.
It was previously reported on the bizarre behavior of the owner and a local abortion supporter at Rockford's Northern Illinois Women's Center. Pro-life protesters have been regularly harassed and grotesque displays remain in the abortion mill's windows, including rubber chickens hanging from nooses, a crufied rubber chicken, a nun doll in a miniature coffin and displays with crucifixes and the words "Jesus loves you a**holes."
One of the most recent additions to the facility's displays is a hand-written sign that reads "NIWC 50,000; JC 50," which indicates the number of abortions performed at the Northern Illinois Women's Center in comparison to 50 saved from abortion by "J.C." - or Jesus Christ.
In March, LSN reported that two young African-American men persuaded their female companion not to abort her child after they were horrified by the rubber chickens hanging by nooses in the abortion facility windows, which pro-lifers at the scene pointed out to them.
The recent Rockford incident continues a rash of violence against pro-life protesters and sidewalk counselors across the country in recent weeks. Last week a man was arrested after he pulled a gun on a woman offering him pro-life literature in front of a Phoenix abortion mill. Another vehicular assault occurred in June at a Chico, CA abortion clinic, where a pro-life protester was nearly run down by an SUV. Witnesses report the driver was enraged by the graphic abortion image the woman carried. The suspected attacker was subsequently arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 7, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
IRS tells pro-lifers to give up 1st Amendment
IRS Requires affirmation they will not 'protest'
The Internal Revenue Service has told members of the Coalition for Life of Iowa they would have to give up their 1st Amendment rights in order to be recognized as a non-profit organization, according to a complaint being pursued by members of the Thomas More Society.
The organization incorporated in 2004 as a not-for-profit under Iowa law and has been operating strictly within the guidelines for groups set up for religious, educational and charitable purposes, a letter sent to the IRS last week said.
"As detailed in its … narrative, the Coalition for Life carries out its tax-exempt work by sponsoring educational forums and coordinating with other like-minded groups to educate the public and otherwise promote sanctity of life principles," the letter continues.
"The Coalition is aware that from time to time, individuals who may or may not be involved with the Coalition gather for prayer outside of a Planned Parenthood facility. These gatherings are consistently small (ten or fewer people), peaceful, not in any way disrupting, and consist solely of silent and spoken prayers," the lawyer wrote.
However, an IRS agent then contacted the Coalition, through its president Susan Martinek, demanding to know whether the group "engaged in any 'picketing' or 'protest' activities at Planned Parenthood. … You then asked Ms. Martinek to have all Coalition Board members sign a statement that the Coalition will not 'picket' or 'protest' outside of Planned Parenthood or similar organizations and will not 'organize' others to do so," the law firm's letter said.
Concerned over the sudden restrictions on free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion rights, the Coalition contact legal counsel, and attorney Sally Wagenmaker said she contacted the IRS about the issue.
"You expressed the legally erroneous view that the Coalition is not allowed per se to engage in 'advocacy' as a section 501(c)(3) organization," the attorney said.
"The IRS' requests come perilously close to violating the First Amendment constitutional rights of the Coalition's supporters, and they are not otherwise germane to the Coalition for Life's pending ... application. As you acknowledged verbally to me over the telephone, the Coalition's application is now ripe for approval. The IRS's delay and questioning … constitutes unnecessary and prejudicial interference with the Coalition's legal right to a tax-exempt determination."
"This is the way government oppression creeps into a society," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "It starts when the government targets, and attempts to intimidate and silence the grassroots dissenters who will not dance to the tune of the Obama administration's radically pro-abortion policies."
"This is not only political intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service but it is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights," Brown said. "Neither the Coalition for Life of Iowa nor any other educational and advocacy organization should be subjected to such discriminatory scrutiny. This is a clear case of government repression."
Contact:
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The Internal Revenue Service has told members of the Coalition for Life of Iowa they would have to give up their 1st Amendment rights in order to be recognized as a non-profit organization, according to a complaint being pursued by members of the Thomas More Society.
The organization incorporated in 2004 as a not-for-profit under Iowa law and has been operating strictly within the guidelines for groups set up for religious, educational and charitable purposes, a letter sent to the IRS last week said.
"As detailed in its … narrative, the Coalition for Life carries out its tax-exempt work by sponsoring educational forums and coordinating with other like-minded groups to educate the public and otherwise promote sanctity of life principles," the letter continues.
"The Coalition is aware that from time to time, individuals who may or may not be involved with the Coalition gather for prayer outside of a Planned Parenthood facility. These gatherings are consistently small (ten or fewer people), peaceful, not in any way disrupting, and consist solely of silent and spoken prayers," the lawyer wrote.
However, an IRS agent then contacted the Coalition, through its president Susan Martinek, demanding to know whether the group "engaged in any 'picketing' or 'protest' activities at Planned Parenthood. … You then asked Ms. Martinek to have all Coalition Board members sign a statement that the Coalition will not 'picket' or 'protest' outside of Planned Parenthood or similar organizations and will not 'organize' others to do so," the law firm's letter said.
Concerned over the sudden restrictions on free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion rights, the Coalition contact legal counsel, and attorney Sally Wagenmaker said she contacted the IRS about the issue.
"You expressed the legally erroneous view that the Coalition is not allowed per se to engage in 'advocacy' as a section 501(c)(3) organization," the attorney said.
"The IRS' requests come perilously close to violating the First Amendment constitutional rights of the Coalition's supporters, and they are not otherwise germane to the Coalition for Life's pending ... application. As you acknowledged verbally to me over the telephone, the Coalition's application is now ripe for approval. The IRS's delay and questioning … constitutes unnecessary and prejudicial interference with the Coalition's legal right to a tax-exempt determination."
"This is the way government oppression creeps into a society," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "It starts when the government targets, and attempts to intimidate and silence the grassroots dissenters who will not dance to the tune of the Obama administration's radically pro-abortion policies."
"This is not only political intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service but it is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights," Brown said. "Neither the Coalition for Life of Iowa nor any other educational and advocacy organization should be subjected to such discriminatory scrutiny. This is a clear case of government repression."
Contact:
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Women's Coalition for Justice: Conservative Women Leaders Speak Out on Sotomayor
Members of the Women's Coalition for Justice released the following statements in advance of the Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor beginning next Monday.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the Susan B. Anthony List, stated, "Women are best protected by the rule of law -- and blind justice. Their rights are most endangered when personal preference, ideology or painful personal history inform judgment. Susan B. Anthony and her early feminist compatriots fought for a human rights standard sustained only through blind justice. When evidence of personal preference appears in any Supreme Court nominee's judgment, it should give all women pause. Sonia Sotomayor's record of support for judicial activism and her work for the pro-abortion Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund offer little comfort that she will be a friend to the unborn on the Supreme Court. Given what we know about Sonia Sotomayor's own judicial philosophy, including her support of policymaking from the bench, senators have just cause to reject her appointment to the United States Supreme Court."
Genevieve Wood, Vice President of Strategic Initiatives, The Heritage Foundation, stated, "I am troubled by Judge Sotomayor's rejection of Justice O'Connor's favored adage that a wise old man would reach the same conclusion as a wise old woman. It is deeply offensive that she has suggested that the sexes and ethnicities 'have basic differences in logic and reasoning,' and even more offensive that she believes it is somehow patriotic to indulge in gender or ethnic biases. Her statements raise grave concerns about whether she can truly be impartial and the current defense that she simply endorses including different perspectives doesn't hold water. The Senators must ask challenging questions to determine whether she believes that a wise woman can reach the same conclusion as a wise man, or whether she intends to bring bias, as she has suggested, even to most cases."
Connie Mackey, Senior Vice President for FRCAction remarked, "I reject the admonition of Senator Chuck Schumer that opposing the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor will cause the Republican Party to lose women's vote permanently. I believe his crystal ball is cloudy when it comes to women in America. Women think independently and most women will see that Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist who will use the courts to make policy reflective of her own personal judgments as opposed to ruling based upon the tenets put forth by the Constitution. Her career as an activist is well-documented and disqualifies her from taking the 9th seat on the United States Supreme Court."
Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life remarked, "It's important for the American people to understand that the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court will dramatically shift the dynamics of the Court. Her record of activism in support of a radical pro-abortion agenda is clear and documented. This is a judge with a record significantly worse than Judge Souter's. We are asking the Senate Judiciary Committee to seriously consider the consequences of confirming a Supreme Court justice whose radical record shows she would rule against all common-sense legal protections for the unborn, including parental notification, informed consent and bans on partial-birth abortion. The American people will not tolerate a nominee who is outside the mainstream of American public opinion."
Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee stated, "Sonia Sotomayor's record reveals she lacks the primary characteristic required of a judge -- impartiality. She has used her position as a judge to deny equal justice to people based on their ethnicity. She worked with organizations that aggressively fought against common-sense regulations on abortion. Her flippant dismissal of cases and unwillingness to provide Constitutional reasoning for her decisions exposes her arrogance, disrespect for our judicial system and the people whose lives are dramatically impacted by her decisions. Through her work as a judge and in organizations, she has denied people equal opportunity to make a living because of the color of their skin, preborn babies their right to live, and women the right not to be exploited by abortionists. After giving her the benefit of the doubt, her record of giving preferences to certain classes of people and denying equal justice to others obliges Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee to oppose her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Sonia Sotomayor has disqualified herself from the U.S. Supreme Court. Senators need to set aside their party loyalty and do their Constitutional duty to uphold equal justice for all by opposing Sonia Sotomayor's nomination."
Contact: Joy Yearout
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the Susan B. Anthony List, stated, "Women are best protected by the rule of law -- and blind justice. Their rights are most endangered when personal preference, ideology or painful personal history inform judgment. Susan B. Anthony and her early feminist compatriots fought for a human rights standard sustained only through blind justice. When evidence of personal preference appears in any Supreme Court nominee's judgment, it should give all women pause. Sonia Sotomayor's record of support for judicial activism and her work for the pro-abortion Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund offer little comfort that she will be a friend to the unborn on the Supreme Court. Given what we know about Sonia Sotomayor's own judicial philosophy, including her support of policymaking from the bench, senators have just cause to reject her appointment to the United States Supreme Court."
Genevieve Wood, Vice President of Strategic Initiatives, The Heritage Foundation, stated, "I am troubled by Judge Sotomayor's rejection of Justice O'Connor's favored adage that a wise old man would reach the same conclusion as a wise old woman. It is deeply offensive that she has suggested that the sexes and ethnicities 'have basic differences in logic and reasoning,' and even more offensive that she believes it is somehow patriotic to indulge in gender or ethnic biases. Her statements raise grave concerns about whether she can truly be impartial and the current defense that she simply endorses including different perspectives doesn't hold water. The Senators must ask challenging questions to determine whether she believes that a wise woman can reach the same conclusion as a wise man, or whether she intends to bring bias, as she has suggested, even to most cases."
Connie Mackey, Senior Vice President for FRCAction remarked, "I reject the admonition of Senator Chuck Schumer that opposing the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor will cause the Republican Party to lose women's vote permanently. I believe his crystal ball is cloudy when it comes to women in America. Women think independently and most women will see that Sonia Sotomayor is a judicial activist who will use the courts to make policy reflective of her own personal judgments as opposed to ruling based upon the tenets put forth by the Constitution. Her career as an activist is well-documented and disqualifies her from taking the 9th seat on the United States Supreme Court."
Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life remarked, "It's important for the American people to understand that the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court will dramatically shift the dynamics of the Court. Her record of activism in support of a radical pro-abortion agenda is clear and documented. This is a judge with a record significantly worse than Judge Souter's. We are asking the Senate Judiciary Committee to seriously consider the consequences of confirming a Supreme Court justice whose radical record shows she would rule against all common-sense legal protections for the unborn, including parental notification, informed consent and bans on partial-birth abortion. The American people will not tolerate a nominee who is outside the mainstream of American public opinion."
Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee stated, "Sonia Sotomayor's record reveals she lacks the primary characteristic required of a judge -- impartiality. She has used her position as a judge to deny equal justice to people based on their ethnicity. She worked with organizations that aggressively fought against common-sense regulations on abortion. Her flippant dismissal of cases and unwillingness to provide Constitutional reasoning for her decisions exposes her arrogance, disrespect for our judicial system and the people whose lives are dramatically impacted by her decisions. Through her work as a judge and in organizations, she has denied people equal opportunity to make a living because of the color of their skin, preborn babies their right to live, and women the right not to be exploited by abortionists. After giving her the benefit of the doubt, her record of giving preferences to certain classes of people and denying equal justice to others obliges Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee to oppose her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Sonia Sotomayor has disqualified herself from the U.S. Supreme Court. Senators need to set aside their party loyalty and do their Constitutional duty to uphold equal justice for all by opposing Sonia Sotomayor's nomination."
Contact: Joy Yearout
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Publish Date: July 9, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
ACLJ Files Appeal Brief in Massive Fraud Case against California Planned Parenthood Affiliates
The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) today filed an opening appeal brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a multi-million dollar fraud case against Planned Parenthood (PP) affiliates in California.
ACLJ is representing a federal whistleblower and former employee of the PP affiliate in Los Angeles who claims the affiliates illegally marked up the supposed cost of various birth control drugs when seeking government reimbursement, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of overbilling - at taxpayer expense.
The federal False Claims Act (FCA) forbids government contractors from submitting "false or fraudulent" claims for payment. The FCA also authorizes private individuals to bring suit against the offenders to recover the fraudulently obtained funds.
"No one should be permitted to scam the public treasury for profit," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "The FCA was designed to remedy such illegal runs on taxpayer money."
When the former PP staffer sued the PP affiliates in federal court, charging the defendants with having fraudulently overbilled the state and federal governments in the amount of tens of millions of dollars, the prominent law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP began representing the PP defendants in the case for free. The Skadden attorneys asked the federal district court to dismiss the case on technical jurisdictional grounds.
The federal district court accepted the Skadden arguments in part, and dismissed the case. ACLJ attorneys then entered the case to handle the appeal.
"The basic question at this point is whether the former PP employee is a proper whistleblower under the False Claims Act," said Sekulow. "The answer is 'Yes.'
"The ACLJ brief dissects and refutes the arguments of PP's attorneys point by point, explaining why the court of appeals should reverse the lower court's judgment and reinstate the lawsuit."
President Obama has called for federal funds to the Title X familly planning program, which subsidizes Planned Parenthood, to be increased by $10 million to a total of $317 million.
Click here to read the ACLJ brief.
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Ginsburg: I thought Roe was to rid undesirables
Justice discusses 'growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of'
In an astonishing admission, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it "populations that we don't want to have too many of."
Her remarks, set to be published in the New York Times Magazine this Sunday but viewable online now, came in an in-depth interview with Emily Bazelon titled, "The Place of Women on the Court."
The 16-year veteran of the high court was asked if she were a lawyer again, what would she "want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda."
Abortionists admit killing babies, call it 'absolute evil.' Get the culture-war classic 'The Marketing of Evil' – autographed – $4.95 today only!
Ginsburg responded:
Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don't know why this hasn't been said more often.
Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?
Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn't really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.
When pressed to explain what she meant by reproductive rights needing to be straightened out, Ginsburg said, "The basic thing is that the government has no business making that choice for a woman."
Asked if that meant getting rid of the test the court imposed, in which it allows states to impose restrictions on abortion such as a waiting period, the justice said she was "not a big fan of these tests."
I think the court uses them as a label that accommodates the result it wants to reach. It will be, it should be, that this is a woman's decision. It's entirely appropriate to say it has to be an informed decision, but that doesn't mean you can keep a woman overnight who has traveled a great distance to get to the clinic, so that she has to go to some motel and think it over for 24 hours or 48 hours.
I still think, although I was much too optimistic in the early days, that the possibility of stopping a pregnancy very early is significant. The morning-after pill will become more accessible and easier to take. So I think the side that wants to take the choice away from women and give it to the state, they're fighting a losing battle. Time is on the side of change.
Actual artist rendition of
Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg
asleep during a hearing in 2006
Three years ago, Ginsburg received some embarrassing national attention when she napped on the bench during a court hearing.
"Justices David Souter and Samuel Alito, who flank the 72-year-old, looked at her but did not give her a nudge," reported Gina Holland of the Associated Press.
The incident caught the attention of Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, who said:
"At first, she appeared to be reading something in her lap. But after a while, it became clear: Ginsburg was napping on the bench. By Bloomberg News's reckoning – not denied by a court spokeswoman – Ginsburg's snooze lasted a quarter of an hour.
"It's lucky for Ginsburg that the Supreme Court has so far refused to allow television in the courtroom, for her visit to the land of nod would have found its way onto late-night shows."
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: July 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
In an astonishing admission, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it "populations that we don't want to have too many of."
Her remarks, set to be published in the New York Times Magazine this Sunday but viewable online now, came in an in-depth interview with Emily Bazelon titled, "The Place of Women on the Court."
The 16-year veteran of the high court was asked if she were a lawyer again, what would she "want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda."
Abortionists admit killing babies, call it 'absolute evil.' Get the culture-war classic 'The Marketing of Evil' – autographed – $4.95 today only!
Ginsburg responded:
Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don't know why this hasn't been said more often.
Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?
Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn't really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.
When pressed to explain what she meant by reproductive rights needing to be straightened out, Ginsburg said, "The basic thing is that the government has no business making that choice for a woman."
Asked if that meant getting rid of the test the court imposed, in which it allows states to impose restrictions on abortion such as a waiting period, the justice said she was "not a big fan of these tests."
I think the court uses them as a label that accommodates the result it wants to reach. It will be, it should be, that this is a woman's decision. It's entirely appropriate to say it has to be an informed decision, but that doesn't mean you can keep a woman overnight who has traveled a great distance to get to the clinic, so that she has to go to some motel and think it over for 24 hours or 48 hours.
I still think, although I was much too optimistic in the early days, that the possibility of stopping a pregnancy very early is significant. The morning-after pill will become more accessible and easier to take. So I think the side that wants to take the choice away from women and give it to the state, they're fighting a losing battle. Time is on the side of change.
Actual artist rendition of
Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg
asleep during a hearing in 2006
Three years ago, Ginsburg received some embarrassing national attention when she napped on the bench during a court hearing.
"Justices David Souter and Samuel Alito, who flank the 72-year-old, looked at her but did not give her a nudge," reported Gina Holland of the Associated Press.
The incident caught the attention of Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, who said:
"At first, she appeared to be reading something in her lap. But after a while, it became clear: Ginsburg was napping on the bench. By Bloomberg News's reckoning – not denied by a court spokeswoman – Ginsburg's snooze lasted a quarter of an hour.
"It's lucky for Ginsburg that the Supreme Court has so far refused to allow television in the courtroom, for her visit to the land of nod would have found its way onto late-night shows."
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: July 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
New NIH Guidelines Give Scientists Green Light for Embryonic Stem Cell Research
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has given embryonic stem-cell researchers the green light to apply for federal funding of their work with minimal restrictions under new guidelines that took effect July 7. However, the NIH rejected the overwhelming public input expressing concerns over the morally questionable research, which thus far has failed to yield any beneficial therapies, unlike adult stem-cells.
In a press release, the NIH states that the new guidelines "will ensure that NIH-funded research in this area is ethically responsible, scientifically worthy, and conducted in accordance with applicable law."
The NIH directives were a response to President Barack Obama's Executive Order (EO) 13505 that rescinded an earlier executive order from the Bush administration in 2001. That order prohibited federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, except for those stem-cell lines already in existence, and mandated voluntary informed consent without financial incentives on the part of the parents of human embryos.
Under the current NIH regulations, "voluntary and informed consent" on the part of the individuals donating their embryonic offspring becomes the overriding ethical principle, along with the specification that stem-cells derived from human embryos must have been created originally for "reproductive purposes" through in vitro fertilization (IVF) and not for the sake of scientific research. The NIH guidelines state that individuals donating their human embryos to research must give "voluntary written consent" without payment of any kind, and must be informed of the available options at the IVF facility.
However, outrage has erupted on other corners over the NIH dismissal of a public review of the draft of guidelines, as nearly 60 percent of respondents had vocalized their dismay with the decision to fund embryo-destroying stem cell research with taxpayer money. These ethical and moral concerns, however, were not taken into account.
Catholic News Service reports that approximately 30,000 out of 48,955 comments on the National Institutes of Health's draft guidelines expressed opposition to the federal funding of such research. NIH dismissed these concerns on the basis that they were "deemed not responsive to the question put forth."
"We did not ask them whether to fund such funding, but how it should be funded," asserted Dr. Raynard S. Kington, acting director of NIH, in a July 6 telephone briefing with the media.
"The comments of tens of thousands of Americans opposing the destruction of innocent human life for stem cell research were simply ignored in this process," objected Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the U.S. Catholic bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities in a statement. "Even comments filed by the Catholic bishops' conference and others against specific abuses in the draft guidelines were not addressed."
Rigali points out that the NIH failed to eliminate specific abuses for what scientists do with the embryonic stem cells once they have obtained them. Although Sec. IV prohibits the introduction of human embryonic stem-cells into "primates," that does not close the door on scientists looking to develop other "chimeras" or admixed inter-species embryos. It only prohibits their "breeding."
"For example, federally funded researchers will be allowed to insert human embryonic stem cells into the embryos of animal species other than primates; federal grants will be available even to researchers who themselves destroyed human embryos to obtain the stem cells for their research," protested Rigali. "Existing federal law against funding research in which human embryos are harmed or destroyed is not given due respect here."
Although human embryos are admittedly destroyed by extracting their stem-cells, the NIH stated that the annual appropriations ban on human embryo research, sec. 509, the Dickey Amendment, has consistently been interpreted by the Department of Health and Human Services (HSS) "as not applicable to research using hESCs, because hESCs are not embryos as defined by Section 509." The NIH points out that Congress has not challenged this interpretation since the HHS began funding ESC research in 2001.
The NIH states that IVF doctors and stem-cell researchers "should be different individuals" in order that donors remain free from undue influence, but that distinction will be just encouraged, not mandated under the guidelines, as the NIH predicted that in some cases "separation was not practicable."
Prospective donors would also have to be informed that their embryos would be used to obtain their stem-cells for research, their embryos would be destroyed, that they could impart no restriction as to how their embryos were to be used or for whom they were used, and that they would not receive any direct medical benefit, or commercial benefit from the donation.
In substance, the final guidelines from the NIH have minimal differences from the draft proposed earlier in April, and pro-life advocates have criticized them saying the human beings most effected - and least taken into account - by these guidelines are the human embryos themselves.
"The Obama Administration today slides further down the slippery slope of exploiting non-consenting members of the human species - human embryos," stated Douglas Johnson, Legislative Director of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).
Johnson pointed out that while the NIH will not fund the deliberate creation of human embryos specifically for research, "This seeming restraint is part of an incremental strategy intended to desensitize the public to the concept of killing human embryos for research purposes."
Johnson stated the NRLC believes a "bait and switch" strategy is already in the works, whereby Congress will codify and extend the boundaries of stem-cell research in legislation that exceeds the scope of the two bills on embryonic stem-cell research bills that were both vetoed by President Bush in 2006 and 2007. Such a bill, NRLC contends, would include the creation of human embryo farms with embryos created or cloned specifically for research purposes.
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 8, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
IFRL NEWS SHORTS FOR THURSDAY
Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of The Illinois Federation for Right to Life. They are presented only for your information.
RU486 and the Nazi connection
I have been looking at a few things that might be of interest concerning the connection between the RU-486 human insecticide and the trail it leads to the concentration camps gas Zyklon B. I know a lot of things have been implied about there being a connection, but I really want to define the connection for readers with the hope that others will wake up and see that once a company has trodden the path of human extermination, it doesn't take much to compel them down that path again. Maybe, just by chance, the hearts of a few will be pricked by the idea that this new "miracle drug" is nothing different than the old "miracle drug" that Zyklon B was to the Nazis.
Click here for the full article.
Catholic Church Offers $100,000 Stem Cells Grant
Hoping to contribute to the end of the use of embryos in research, the Catholic Church is offering a $100,000 grant for research into the medical use of adult stem cells. The Sydney Archdiocese announced the grant on Wednesday, saying it is still vehemently opposed to embryonic stem cell research but approves of the use of adult stem cells. Sydney Archbishop Cardinal George Pell says adult stem cells can already be used in the treatment of heart and liver disease.
Click here for the full article.
Couple to Face Committal Over Abortion
A young woman charged with procuring her own miscarriage will face a committal hearing alongside her boyfriend in September. Tegan Simone Leach, 19, of Cairns, became the first woman to be charged with the offence in half a century after using a smuggled pill to abort her foetus. Her boyfriend, Sergie Brennan, 21, is charged with attempting to procure and supply drugs to procuring an abortion. Cairns Magistrates Court on Wednesday set the matter down for a committal hearing on September 3. Pro-choice advocates have blasted the decision to charge the couple, saying it's an unprecedented breach of the rights of women.
Click here for the full article.
La. Governor Signs Refusal of `Deadly Health Care' Bill
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has signed into law a bill that protects doctors, nurses and pharmacists who refuse to provide health care on religious or moral grounds. The new law will shield health providers from civil or criminal penalties, job loss or demotion because they refuse to provide certain services. That includes abortion, certain types of emergency contraception, human embryonic stem cell research and euthanasia. Supporters of the bill said health providers shouldn't face retaliation from their [baby killer] employers if they refuse to perform care that violates their religious beliefs.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Could Prove Divisive For Health Reform, Too
An ultimatum against using federal money for abortion procedures could reopen the politically treacherous rift over the issue, creating yet another obstacle for congressional Democrats to overcome if they are to achieve their health reform goals, Time reports. "While current versions of the [health reform] legislation do not address the abortion issue at all, late last month 19 anti-abortion Democrats in the House sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, warning 'we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan.'"
Click here for the full article.
Euthanasia bill fails in Britain Parliament
The Falconer Amendment would have permitted physicians, under certain criteria, to help disabled and terminally ill patients commit suicide. The amendment was powerfully opposed by Baroness Sue Campbell, who suffers from spinal muscular atrophy. She told members of Parliament that approval would send the wrong signal and instill a sense of fear in those who are disabled and those who face death from illness.
In a press release, Paul Tully, general secretary for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, urged the Voluntary Euthanasia Society -- now called Dignity in Dying -- to drop its parliamentary campaign in the measure's defeat. He calls it offensive to disabled people and their caregivers.
Click here for the full article.
RU486 and the Nazi connection
I have been looking at a few things that might be of interest concerning the connection between the RU-486 human insecticide and the trail it leads to the concentration camps gas Zyklon B. I know a lot of things have been implied about there being a connection, but I really want to define the connection for readers with the hope that others will wake up and see that once a company has trodden the path of human extermination, it doesn't take much to compel them down that path again. Maybe, just by chance, the hearts of a few will be pricked by the idea that this new "miracle drug" is nothing different than the old "miracle drug" that Zyklon B was to the Nazis.
Click here for the full article.
Catholic Church Offers $100,000 Stem Cells Grant
Hoping to contribute to the end of the use of embryos in research, the Catholic Church is offering a $100,000 grant for research into the medical use of adult stem cells. The Sydney Archdiocese announced the grant on Wednesday, saying it is still vehemently opposed to embryonic stem cell research but approves of the use of adult stem cells. Sydney Archbishop Cardinal George Pell says adult stem cells can already be used in the treatment of heart and liver disease.
Click here for the full article.
Couple to Face Committal Over Abortion
A young woman charged with procuring her own miscarriage will face a committal hearing alongside her boyfriend in September. Tegan Simone Leach, 19, of Cairns, became the first woman to be charged with the offence in half a century after using a smuggled pill to abort her foetus. Her boyfriend, Sergie Brennan, 21, is charged with attempting to procure and supply drugs to procuring an abortion. Cairns Magistrates Court on Wednesday set the matter down for a committal hearing on September 3. Pro-choice advocates have blasted the decision to charge the couple, saying it's an unprecedented breach of the rights of women.
Click here for the full article.
La. Governor Signs Refusal of `Deadly Health Care' Bill
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has signed into law a bill that protects doctors, nurses and pharmacists who refuse to provide health care on religious or moral grounds. The new law will shield health providers from civil or criminal penalties, job loss or demotion because they refuse to provide certain services. That includes abortion, certain types of emergency contraception, human embryonic stem cell research and euthanasia. Supporters of the bill said health providers shouldn't face retaliation from their [baby killer] employers if they refuse to perform care that violates their religious beliefs.
Click here for the full article.
Abortion Could Prove Divisive For Health Reform, Too
An ultimatum against using federal money for abortion procedures could reopen the politically treacherous rift over the issue, creating yet another obstacle for congressional Democrats to overcome if they are to achieve their health reform goals, Time reports. "While current versions of the [health reform] legislation do not address the abortion issue at all, late last month 19 anti-abortion Democrats in the House sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, warning 'we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan.'"
Click here for the full article.
Euthanasia bill fails in Britain Parliament
The Falconer Amendment would have permitted physicians, under certain criteria, to help disabled and terminally ill patients commit suicide. The amendment was powerfully opposed by Baroness Sue Campbell, who suffers from spinal muscular atrophy. She told members of Parliament that approval would send the wrong signal and instill a sense of fear in those who are disabled and those who face death from illness.
In a press release, Paul Tully, general secretary for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, urged the Voluntary Euthanasia Society -- now called Dignity in Dying -- to drop its parliamentary campaign in the measure's defeat. He calls it offensive to disabled people and their caregivers.
Click here for the full article.
July 8, 2009
Obama Policy Encourages Embryo Destruction
Guidelines for federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research offer incentives for experiments that end human life and have not successfully treated disease.
The Obama administration's final guidelines for federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research do more than remove a small protection for living human embryos.
They actually encourage scientists to destroy preborn human life, courtesy of $10 billion in federal stimulus money designated for biomedical research, including embryonic stem-cell trials.
"The regulations virtually guarantee that many more living human embryos will be destroyed for research," said Carrie Gordon Earll, senior bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family. "This policy also creates a tax-dollar incentive for scientists to destroy human embryos."
The regulations, issued under the auspices of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), represent the fulfillment of President Barack Obama's March executive order to overturn a Bush administration policy that limited the number of stem-cell lines that could be used in federally funded experiments. Bush's order did not allow taxpayer money to be used on stem cell lines created after Aug. 9, 2001, removing the incentive to destroy additional embryos for government funded research.
That meant existing embryos created by couples through in-vitro fertilization were off-limits to federally funded researchers.
Tim Goeglein, a former Bush aide who now serves as Focus on the Family's vice president of external affairs, called Obama's reversal of the Bush policy "one of the most important domestic, political and policy changes between the two administrations."
"It is a remarkable contrast on the question on the centrality of human life," he said. "It is immoral to have taxpayers funding research that actually requires the destruction of human embryos."
Particularly troubling is that embryonic stem cells have not cured or successfully treated a single patient. By contrast, non-embryonic (or adult) stem cells are readily available in sources such as bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, the pancreas and brain, and no lives are lost in the collection process.
Currently, more than 70 identified diseases and disabilities are treatable using non-embryonic stem cells, including breast cancer, leukemia and sickle cell anemia. Researchers also have successfully treated patients with Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, heart damage and spinal cord injuries using non-embryonic stem cell sources.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, called the NIH guidelines "poor science" and "bad health-care policy."
"The guidelines implement a plan that will force taxpayers to foot the bill for research that involves human destruction, not healing," he said.
Earll pointed out that another tragedy of the policy is that it doesn't require couples be informed of all the options available to them when making a decision about what to do with their embryos, including the ability to "adopt the embryos to another pregnancy-challenged couple."
For that and many other reasons, Goeglein said, "this is a sad and disappointing decision."
"The greatness of the pro-life movement is that it upholds the standards of the moral levees that hold together a culture rooted in human dignity," he noted. "What this policy does is wrong. And we should say that.
"All of us, at one point, were human embryos. Embryos are a central part to human dignity and worth."
Contact: Gary Schneeberger
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: July 7, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
New On-the-Ground Investigations Confirm UNFPA Complicity in China's Coercive Population Policy
The Population Research Institute (PRI) is turning up the heat on the Obama administration for handing $50 million to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) with news of yet another investigation confirming the UN group's complicity in China's coercive birth control policies.
In March and May of 2009, PRI carried out two separate investigations, covering 6 UNFPA "model counties." These are counties where the UNFPA claim that their efforts have "removed birth targets and quotas and introduced a quality-of-care approach" - a claim the investigators call "outrageous."
PRI investigator Colin Mason and President Steven Mosher say they found that not only do coercive measures remain in force, but the situation is in some ways worse than in previous years, when an original investigation prompted the Bush administration to halt the UNFPA's U.S. taxpayer funding.
"We put boots on the ground, and found that the UNFPA's claim that it 'played a catalytic role in introducing a voluntary reproductive health approach in China' was patently absurd," said Mason. "The policy is just as coercive in these areas as anywhere else."
"Women continue to be arrested for the crime of being pregnant," said Steven Mosher. "They continue to be forcibly aborted. Minorities continue to be targeted. The handicapped are forbidden children. These violations of human rights are occurring right under the UNFPA's nose. It is ludicrous to suggest that the UN population controllers do not know about them."
In 2001, PRI submitted an exposé of the UNFPA's activities in China to the U.S. State Department. President Bush responded by sending State Department delegates on a second investigation. Although the team was welcomed and escorted by the Chinese government, the officials concluded that the UNFPA was in fact complicit in China's coercive birth control policies, and foreign aid funds were cut off from the UNFPA in 2002.
However, days after taking office in January, President Obama announced he would resume funding of the UNFPA without commenting on the investigations.
According to U.S. law, known as the Kemp-Kasten amendment, no taxpayer funds may go to an organization that supports coercive birth control. When the UNFPA was allotted $50 million in this year's omnibus appropriations bill, a clause was included that specifically insulated the UNFPA from the Kemp-Kasten prohibition.
The bill explicitly prohibited the sum from funding programs in China; however, there is no evidence that the UNFPA's monies are not fungible, and could therefore be used to free up other funds for use in China. In addition, the Kemp-Kasten amendment prohibits funds from going to organizations that support such programs, rather than prohibiting the programs themselves.
"United States law is clear: our tax dollars are not to be used to fund forced abortion or coercive measures overseas," said Mosher. "Yet it is equally clear that the UNFPA is involved in precisely what the law forbids.
"We call for Congress to recognize, even if the President will not, that funding for the UNFPA is de facto funding for coercive family planning in China. Such funding should be suspended immediately."
Mosher told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview today that he heard the accounts of human rights abuse from residents of three of the UNFPA's "model" counties in May: Fengning Manchu Autonomous County, Luan County, and Wenshui County. In Fengning, Mosher spoke to several Manchus who confirmed that "heavy fines and forced abortions are the order of the day."
PRI says that the UNFPA counties also facilitate the eugenic goals of the Chinese government. Mosher recounted his meeting with a mute woman in Luan county whom the investigative team learned had been forcibly sterilized.
"She was very intelligent, and very friendly, and among the most vivacious people I met while I was in China - she communicated by hand gestures," he said. "Then we came to the subject of children, and she had been sterilized, because she was mute. And what people don't realize about China's one-child policy is that it's also a eugenic policy. ...
"Handicapped babies are killed at birth; if a person with a handicap applies to marry, they may be given permission to marry, but they first have to undergo sterilization. So China doesn't want any children from people born with even minor handicaps."
Mosher said that a report on the latest investigation would be completed this week and sent to several officials with the Obama administration, who have not responded to PRI's investigation in March of similar "model" UNFPA counties in China.
Mosher expressed frustration at Obama's willingness to take the UNFPA's own claims "at face value," in stark contrast to the Bush administration's reaction in 2001.
"If they don't believe us, [the administration] should take a look for themselves," he said.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: July 7, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)