NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY

NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)

Planned Parenthood and ACLU Obstruct People's Rights with Lawsuit against Personhood Nevada



CARSON CITY, NV - Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have filed a lawsuit against the sponsors of a Nevada ballot initiative defining the term "person." The simple, one-sentence amendment states, "In the great state of Nevada, the term 'person' applies to every human being." . . . "This is now the third time that the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have ganged up to silence the voice of the people, and their right to ballot initiatives," concluded Keith Mason. "In Colorado, they failed. They are trying to silence us, and to keep the vote away from the people. The citizens have a right to ballot initiatives, and human beings have a right to live."
Click here for the full article.


Congress Spending Bill Boosts Family Planning Funding 19% Above 2009



On December 10th, the House of Representatives debated and passed an omnibus spending bill for fiscal year 2010 containing a significant funding increase for family planning and reproductive health (FP/RH) programs. . . . Funding: The bill includes a total of $648.5 million for bilateral and multilateral FP/RH programs, an increase of more than $103 million or 19 percent above the FY 2009 enacted level and $55 million more than the President’s budget request. Of the $648.5 million total, $593.5 million is provided to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for bilateral field and centrally-funded programs and $55 million is earmarked for a U.S. contribution to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The $593.5 million allocated for bilateral programs represents an increase of about $98.5 million above the comparable FY 2009 level of $495 million. FP/RH programs fared well compared to other non-HIV/AIDS global health programs, which nevertheless enjoyed modest increases such as $54 million more for maternal and child health.
Click here for the full article.


Stem-Cell Opponents Sue State Over Ballot



ST. LOUIS - Missouri's Secretary of State and Auditor manipulated ballot language to prejudice state voters against a proposed constitutional amendment by a group that opposes stem-cell research, the group claims in Federal Court. The Missouri Roundtable for Life claims Secretary of State Robin Carnahan and Auditor Susan Montee intentionally manipulated ballot language to prejudice voters against their proposal. The group and its director and co-plaintiff Frederic Sauer want voters to approve a state constitutional amendment that would require that in any fiscal year the first $200 million disbursed from the Life Sciences Research Trust Fund be spent on primary health care for poor Missourians, but not for abortion services or human research, which includes stem cell research.
Click here for the full article.


Children as a Rationed Commodity?



Eco-socialists have devised a system called “cap-and-trade,” in which businesses are required to buy permits to cover so-called greenhouse emissions, with the option of selling permits they don’t use. Human population growth may eventually be regulated in much the same way. In a December 8 editorial prompted by the UN global warming summit in Copenhagen, Canada’s National Post insisted that “A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate.” The Chinese government used the Copenhagen conference to extol the supposed virtues of their totalitarian program.
Click here for the full article.


More Baby Murdering Thugs Get 6-Figure Salaries from Taxpayers



The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data. Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months — and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted. Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time -- in pay and hiring -- during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.
Click here for the full article.

Illinois Federation for Right to Life PAC Announces 2010 Primary Endorsements

Illinois Federation for Right to Life PAC Announces 2010 Primary Endorsements

    

The Illinois Federation for Right to Life (IFRL) Political Action Committee (PAC) has published its endorsements for the upcoming 2010 Illinois Primary to take place on February 2nd, 2010.

Anyone can view and download the endorsements by visit the IFRL website at www.ifrl.org and clicking on the 2010 Primary Election Link near the top of the page. 

Published are the Candidate Surveys, Candidate Responses and IFRL-PAC Endorsements.

The IFRL-PAC's mission is to help those who want their vote to protect the unborn, the disabled and the elderly.  Those endagered innocent lives that are being threatened need men and women in government who respect all human life.
 
It is not the PAC's intent to control any political party.  It the PAC's intent to elect men and women of all political parties who will speak for and vote for legislation to protect the first and most important right for all of us - our right to life.
 
When more than one pro-life candidate seeks the same office, IFRL PAC always endorses the pro-life incumbent.  There are a few candidates who we recommend over the opponent. The IFRL PAC has even endorsed a candidate who had no opposition.  The purpose of that endorsement is to keep you informed that we continue our support because the candidate continues to support the right to life issues.

The IFRL-PAC Endorsements page is paid for by the IFRL-PAC, connected with the Illinois Federation for Right to Life, Inc. and was not authorized by any of the candidates. James M. Quirke, Treasurer. A copy of our report is on file and is available for purchase from the Federal Election Commission, Washington, D.C., and the Illinois State Board of Elections, Springfield, IL.

VOTING WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE

 

1. Vote!

First, make sure you actually vote. Primary Election Day is Febraury 2nd, 2010. Take advantage of early voting if your state allows it, and if you’re going to be out of state or are homebound, use an absentee ballot! Bring your voting decisions to prayer.

 

2. Know the candidates.

Be sure you know where the candidates stand on the issues.

 

3. Reject the Disqualified.

If a candidate came forward and said, “I support terrorism,” you wouldn’t say, “I disagree with you on terrorism, but what’s your health care plan?” Similarly, those who permit the destruction of innocent life by abortion disqualify themselves from consideration.

 

4. Distinguish Policy from Principle

Most disagreements between candidates and political platforms do not have to do with principle (“Is there a ‘Right to Crime?’”), but rather with policy (“How do we reduce crime?”). But the dispute over whether there is a right to life does deal with principle, and is therefore more fundamental.

 

5. Weigh other issues properly.

Not all issues have equal weight. The Catholic Church teaches that war and capital punishment, for example, may at times be morally justified, but abortion and euthanasia never are.

 

6. Keep your loyalty focused on Jesus.

Your loyalty to Jesus Christ must be stronger than your loyalty to any political party.

 

7. Remember, the Party Matters.

Elections do not only put individual candidates into power; they put political parties into power. Consider what the parties stand for, and how the outcome of the election affects the balance of power.

 

8. Distinguish “choosing evil” from “limiting evil.”

If two opposing candidates both support abortion, then ask: Which of the two candidates will do less harm to unborn children? This is not "choosing the lesser of two evils," but rather choosing to limit an evil, and that is a good.

 

9. Support the candidate with more than your vote!

Additional activities include donating to the campaign, volunteering for the campaign, handing out literature for the candidate, making phone calls and visits on the candidate’s behalf, sending emails, using yard signs and bumper stickers, and praying for the candidate.

 

Elections are not contests between two candidates. They are contests between two teams. The bigger and more active team will bring in the most votes.

 

10. Mobilize as many other voters as possible!

Each of us has one vote, but each of us can mobilize hundreds, even thousands of votes. Focus on mobilizing those who agree with you rather than convincing those who don’t. If you can take the day off on Election Day, do so. Spend the day contacting people by phone and email, reminding them to vote, and helping them get to the polls.

 

By: Fr. Frank Pavone, MEV

 

NO APOLOGIES FOR BEING SINGLE ISSUE VOTERS

 

Some well intentioned but misguided friends often suggest that a vote based only on a candidate's position on Life Issues is simply narrow. Doesn't single issue voting disclose a lack of interest in and knowledge of other vital issues-especially education, immigration and health care matters?

 

Absolutely not! A citizen's right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness are worth nothing if he/she can be put to death without trial. A very wise man once said, "You can be more or less poor; you can be more or less hungry; but you cannot be more or less dead." 

 

The Non-negotiable issues of abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, human cloning, traditional marriage, have been set apart. The first four are life issues dealing with deliberate homicide against which we have always had protective laws. If a candidate is willing to express his support for any one of these forms of homicide, what difference should it make what his position is on education or health care? Father Pavone of Priests for Life asks: "If your candidate declares his support for terrorism, would you even ask him how he stood on immigration or any other matter?"

 

How can it be possible that more than thirty-four years have passed without these specific instructions being promulgated? The problem heretofore could have been our rather reasonable assumption that the value of innocent human life is far too obvious to call for special instruction on how to vote, allowing consciences to become plastic. Now, we face the assertion that it's the law and we just have to get used to it. Did we get used to slavery when it also was the law? Will we be more ready to defy God's law than to reject our allegiance to one political party?

A criticism frequently leveled at single-issue voters has to do with capital punishment. Some will contend that we have no right to support the cause of Life if we do not at the same time and with the same force denounce capital punishment. Misinformation abounds on the position of the Catholic Church on capital punishment. The Church officially condemns abortion; it doesn't forbid capital punishment in principle. Pope John Paul II merely gave it his own considered view that in our time capital punishment will no longer be defensible. His personal judgment carries weight but does not have the status of official teaching.

 

Bishop Rene Gradida, Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Corpus Christi, declared: "There is no clear unequivocal position of the Church on such issues as minimum wage, education, health care matters, immigration etc." From this we are to understand there is no moral equivalence between these lesser issues and the intrinsic evils, which are always gravely evil in themselves and prohibited by absolute moral norms derived from the natural law.

 

By: Irene Napier, Right to Life McHenry County

Sen. Enzi: It's ‘Absolutely Not’ Morally Right to Take Tax Money from Pro-Life Americans and Give it to Insurance Plans That Cover Abortion

Sen. Enzi: It's 'Absolutely Not' Morally Right to Take Tax Money from Pro-Life Americans and Give it to Insurance Plans That Cover Abortion



Capitol Hill – Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wy.) said it is "absolutely not" morally right to take taxpayer money from pro-life Americans to pay for health insurance plans that cover abortion.
 
As currently written, the Senate health care bill mandates that at least one health insurance plan available through the government exchange where people getting tax subsidies to buy health insurance will be required to buy insurance must provide abortion coverage. 
 
On Wednesday, CNSNews.com asked Enzi: "Is it morally right to take tax money from pro-life Americans and give it to health plans that cover abortion?"
 
Enzi said: "Absolutely not.  That's what our amendment was about yesterday.  We're not…we made every effort that we could to get people to realize that you shouldn't be taxing people to pay for things they don't believe in, that they absolutely oppose, that they know is a detriment to life."

Click here to hear the audio clip. 

The Senate health care plan, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," includes a  section headlined "Assured Availability of Varied Coverage Through Exchanges." In this section, on p. 120 of the 2,074-page legislation, it requires the secretary of Health and Human Services to ensure that at least one health insurance plan offered in government-regulated insurance exchanges -- where people will be able to purchase health insurance using government subsidies -- must provide coverage of abortion.
 
The secretary also must make certain that at least one plan available in the exchanges does not cover abortions.
 
The relevant language says: "The Secretary shall assure that with respect to qualified health plans offered in any Exchange established pursuant to this title—(I) there is at least one such plan that provides coverage of services described in clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (B); and (II) there is at least one such plan that does not provide coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i)."

The clause "(i)" of "subparagraph (B)" referred to in this passage defines those types of abortions currently banned from receiving federal funding under the Hyde Amendment. The Hyde Amendment bans federal funding for all abortions except those done in cases of rape, incest and a threat to the life of the mother.
 
The language of the Senate's health care bill mandates that at least one health insurance plan available to people buying health insurance with federal subsidies cover those abortions that are currently prohibited from receiving federal funding under the Hyde Amendment.
 
On Tuesday, Dec. 8, the Senate voted 54-45 to table – to end consideration of and thus kill -- an amendment by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) that would have essentially applied the Hyde Amendment language to the Senate health care bill. And, like the amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) in the House of Representatives, which passed in that chamber, Nelson's proposal would have explicitly prohibited any federal money from paying for any part of a health insurance plan that covers abortion. 
 
Seven Democrats and 38 Republicans voted against tabling Nelson's amendment while 52 Democrats and two Republicans voted for tabling the amendment and thus ending it.
 
Senator Enzi voted against tabling the Nelson amendment.

Contact: Karen Schuberg
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: December 11, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Copenhagen: China pushing Population Control as the Final Solution

Copenhagen: China pushing Population Control as the Final Solution



COPENHAGEN - Population control has emerged as a key issue for "climate change" talks in Copenhagen, after the issue was brought forward by Chinese delegates. Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) said, "Population and climate change are intertwined, but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming."

"Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture."

The Chinese newspaper China Daily quotes Zhao saying that China's population program has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society. China has reduced the number of births by 400 million since instituting its one-child "family planning" policies, and this has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions per year, Zhao continued.

Although she declined to mention China's laws forcing women into abortion and sterilization, Zhao did acknowledge that her country faces what some have called a looming demographic crisis because of the policy, with an aging population, a reduced work force and a severe nationwide gender imbalance from sex-selective abortion.

"I'm not saying that what we have done is 100 percent right, but I'm sure we are going in the right direction and now 1.3 billion people have benefited," she said.

Todd Stern, the US Special Envoy to the conference told journalists yesterday that China is the world's largest emitter of CO2, calling the data "frightening."

"By 2020, China will be a 60% bigger emitter than the US; by 2030, it will be 80% bigger. The inescapable conclusion: major developing economies must be brought into an international framework that obligates them to curb emissions," Stern said.

The conference is proceeding despite the recent revelations that some leading climate scientists may have falsified or withheld scientific information to inflate the data on "global warming." Information was released on the internet by unidentified hackers in November that appeared to show that researchers at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, one of the world's key sources of the climate change theories, had sought to prevent dissenting scientific papers from being published and deleted e-mails and raw data that would have refuted the global warming theory.

After the internet world was immediately filled with stories and theories on what quickly became dubbed "Climategate," the University of East Anglia announced it would conduct an independent review of the matter.

The 15th Session of United Nations Climate Change Conference of Parties runs from December 7 to 18.

Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: December 11, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Victory we didn't notice: Pro-abort acceptance of Hyde Amendment as "abortion neutral"

Victory we didn't notice: Pro-abort acceptance of Hyde Amendment as "abortion neutral"



At ReligiousDispatches.org, pro-abort Frederick Clarkson got half his premise wrong, claiming pro-lifers are reaching beyond the Hyde Amendment in our fight to prohibit public funded abortions in healthcare. But Clarkson made a fascinating point, one I think most of us missed...

    Last summer President Barack Obama told Katie Couric on the CBS Evening News that there is a "tradition" in Washington "of not financing abortions as part of government funded health care." This benchmark moment in the history of abortion rights in the United States was more than 3 decades in the making.

    The ostensibly pro-choice president was referring to the principles of the Hyde Amendment passed 3 years after Roe vs. Wade....



    Named for the conservative Catholic congressman, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL), it proscribed federal funds from being used to provide abortions. The main effect was to remove abortion from the list of medical services that could be paid for through the federal Medicaid program. Many reproductive rights supporters saw it as an affront to poor women....

    But a creeping Washington consensus emerged during the current debate on health care reform that took many by surprise: The Hyde Amendment is now seen as a moderate, "abortion-neutral" position that neither advances nor restricts abortion.

    The gradual adoption of the principles of the most significant anti-abortion legislation in history as a moderate compromise constitutes a stunning shift in American political and religious life....

    Historic pro-choice religious communities see Hyde differently than the current Inside the Beltway consensus. For example, on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of Hyde, the... Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice... issued a "call to conscience to end this discriminatory and punitive measure"....

I think Clarkson is absolutely right. In the thick of the battle, we didn't see this concession. Although I've read recent calls from the abortion industry to rescind Hyde, which is reperilized every year, it will be that much more difficult here on out, since so many pro-aborts, most importantly Obama, have labeled it abortion-neutral.

In fact, these concessions might brought permanent passage of the Hyde Amendment that much closer.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: December 11, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Using Abortifacients to Covertly Abort Another’s Baby

Using Abortifacients to Covertly Abort Another's Baby



The story broke this Saturday that another attempt has been made to surreptitiously use a chemical abortifacient to kill a woman's baby.  In this instance a Brooklyn woman, Keisha Jones, was infuriated to find out that her husband's girlfriend became pregnant, so she tried to kill the girlfriend's baby by chemically inducing a miscarriage.  According to a story in the New York Daily News Jones tricked the pregnant mother, Monique Hunter, into going to a pharmacy and picking up a prescription for misoprostol, a drug that immediately causes a pregnant woman to begin uterine contractions.  The trick worked, she took the drug, and Hunter soon went into labor.

Misoprostol is the second drug in the Mifepristone (RU-486)/Misoprostol abortion regimen approved by the FDA.  It should be noted that RU-486 is not available in the United States by prescription.  RU-486 is only available through abortion providers who agree to certain terms and conditions set by FDA and the drug manufacturer / distributor – that is, doctors, clinics, and hospitals.  RU-486 kills the pregnancy by blocking its development, but the misoprostol is needed to expel the embryonic or fetal remains.

Thankfully, the baby was born alive and is healthy.  Incredibly, Jones tried another stunt to kill the baby: this time she tried to have poisoned milk given to the baby.  That trick didn't work, and it led to Jones's arrest.

Misoprostol was approved as an anti-ulcer medication, but it can be used to kill.  Pregnant women need to be very careful about the drugs they take.  In particular, they need to be warned never to take misoprostol, mifepristone (RU-486), or methotrexate, an abortifacient and chemotherapeutic drug.

Contact: Chris Gacek
Source: FRCBlog
Publish Date: December 9, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Permissive Abortion Laws May Be Hazardous To Mothers' Health, Per New Report

Permissive Abortion Laws May Be Hazardous To Mothers' Health, Per New Report



NEW YORK - A new report from the World Economic Forum (WEF) shows that countries with restrictive abortion laws are often the leaders in reducing maternal mortality, and those with permissive laws often lag. According to the report, the pro-life nation of Ireland has topped the global rankings once again with the best maternal health performance.

Abortion advocates have attempted to push an international "right to abortion," claiming that restrictive laws force women to seek unsafe abortion, which in turn leads to high maternal mortality.  In October, the Guttmacher Institute released a report on global abortion calling on states to "expand access to legal abortion and ensure that safe, legal abortion services are available to women in need." Sharon Camp, president of the Guttmacher Institute, asserted that "in much of the developing world, abortion remains highly restricted, and unsafe abortion is common and continues to damage women's health and threaten their survival."

An examination and comparison of several countries included in the WEF survey show that legal abortion does not mean lower maternal mortality rates.  

Both Ireland and Poland, favorite targets of the abortion lobby for their strong restrictions on abortion, have better maternal mortality ratios than the United States. Ireland ranks first in the survey with 1 death for every 100,000 live births. In recent years Poland has tightened its abortion law and ranks number 27 on the list with 8 deaths per 100,000. In the United States where there are virtually no restrictions on abortion, the maternal mortality ratio is 17 out of 100,000 live births.

Other regions of the world show similar trends. The African nation with the lowest maternal mortality rate is Mauritius, a country with some of the continent's most protective laws for the unborn.  On the other end of the spectrum is Ethiopia, which has decriminalized abortion in recent years in response to global abortion lobby pressure. Ethiopia's maternal death rate is 48 times higher than in Mauritius. South Africa has the continent's most liberal abortion laws and also a high maternal mortality ratio of 400 deaths per 100,000.

Chile, with constitutional protection for the unborn, outranks all other South American countries as the safest place for women to bear children. The country with the highest maternal mortality is Guyana, with a rate 30 times higher than in Chile. Guyana has allowed abortion without almost any restriction since in 1995. Ironically, one of two main justifications used for liberalizing Guyana’s law was to enhance the "attainment of safe motherhood" by eliminating deaths and complications associated with unsafe abortion.

Similarly in Asia, Nepal, where there is no restriction on the procedure, has one of the world's highest maternal mortality rates. The lowest in the region is Sri Lanka, with a rate fourteen times lower than that of Nepal. According to the pro-abortion public interest law firm Center for Reproductive Rights, Sri Lanka has among the most restrictive abortion laws in the world.

Pro-lifers emphasize that the WEF report reinforces their contention that skilled birth attendants and access to emergency obstetric care should be the focus of maternal mortality reduction efforts, rather than increasing access to legal abortion.

(This article reprinted by LifeSiteNews.com with permission from www.c-fam.org)

Contact: Samantha Singson
Source: c-fam.org LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: December 11, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Ameliorating Alzheimer’s with Adult Stem Cells

Ameliorating Alzheimer's with Adult Stem Cells



An international research team has published results showing that injection of bone marrow adult stem cells into the brain can ameliorate effects of Alzheimer's disease in a mouse model of the disease. Injection of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells reduced deposition of the protein found in Alzheimer plaques, decreased inflammatory responses often associated with the disease, and improved cognitive function. The results are encouraging, though still a long ways from clinical application.

Earlier this year scientists at UC-Irvine showed that neural stem cells could rescue memory in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. Their published results indicated that the adult stem cells helped protect neural connections in the brain by secreting a factor called brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). Lead author Matthew Blurton-Jones noted:

    "If you look at Alzheimer's, it's not the plaques and tangles that correlate best with dementia; it's the loss of synapses – connections between neurons. The neural stem cells were helping the brain form new synapses and nursing the injured neurons back to health."

Similar results were published by researchers at the University of South Florida in July. They found that a human growth factor that stimulates blood stem cells to proliferate in the bone marrow reverses memory impairment in Alzheimer's mice. The protein factor mobilized blood stem cells in the bone marrow and neural stem cells within the brain and both of these actions led to improved memory and learning behavior in the Alzheimer's mice.

    "The concept of using GCSF to harness bone marrow-derived cells for Alzheimer's therapy is exciting and the findings in mice are promising, but we still need to prove that this works in humans," said Dr. Raj, a physician researcher at the Byrd Alzheimer's Center at USF Health.

Based on their promising findings with mice, the researchers are doing a randomized, controlled clinical trial to test the safety and effectiveness of the treatment in 12 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.

Contact: David Prentice
Source: FRCBlog
Publish Date: December 11, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)

Senate Health Care Bill Would Allow Insurers to Limit Coverage for Seriously Ill Patients



Washington - A loophole in the Senate health care bill would let insurers place annual dollar limits on medical care for people struggling with costly illnesses such as cancer, prompting a rebuke from patient advocates.
 
The legislation that originally passed the Senate health committee last summer would have banned such limits, but a tweak to that provision weakened it in the bill now moving toward a Senate vote.
Click here for the full article.


Michelle Duggar delivers 25-week, 1lb 6oz baby by C-section



Mom and baby Josie need our prayers. From ABC News, within the hour:

    Michelle Duggar, star of the TLC reality show 18 Kids and Counting has given birth to her 19th child in an emergency C-section.

    New baby Josie Brooklyn, born Thursday evening, weighs 1 pound 6 ounces and is in stable condition at the neonatal intensive care unit at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, TLC reports.

    TLC reports "Michelle is resting comfortably" while Josie Brooklyn stays at the neonatal intensive care unit, and that "the family is grateful for all the prayers and well wishes during their recovery."

    Duggar's baby was not due until March, but TLC is reporting that Duggar went into the hospital early suffering pain from a gallstone.
Click here for the full article.


The Eyes Have It With Adult Stem Cells



UK scientists report successful adult stem cell treatment of 8 patients with Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency, a painful, blinding disease that requires long-term, costly treatment. Corneal cloudiness has been estimated to cause blindness in 8 million people (10% of total blindness) worldwide each year. Professor Majlinda Lako, a member of the UK team, said:

    “This research shows promise to help hundreds of people regain their sight. These exciting results offer a new treatment and hope for people with LSCD.”

Professor Robin Ali of the UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London noted:

    “The Newcastle team has obtained some very impressive results in patients following stem cell transplants to repair the surface of the cornea. It is hugely exciting to see that a type of stem cell therapy can now be applied routinely to treat a form of blindness. These results also provide us with further encouragement to develop stem cell therapies to repair the retina in order to treat conditions such as age related macular degeneration.”
Click here for the full article.


Adultery & Murder: Game Over For Tiger Woods: Abortion, Love Child, Sex Tape Now Added To The Mix



The Tiger Woods soap opera may be getting near its end as Tiger Woods' sponsors are fleeing due to reports that as well as fathering a love child, Tiger also arranged an abortion for one of his mistresses. Oh, and last but not least, there may be a sex tape as well. The reports come from The National Enquirer, hardly a great source of correct news, but likewise the Enquirer did break the cheating scandal to begin with, so they obviously have good sources when it comes to Woods. The Magazine also hinted that the abortion story could be more, saying that “There is more than one woman out there who could come forward.” Woods has previously been reported to practice unsafe sex.
Click here for the full article.


U.S. House Okays Taxpayer Funding For Abortion In Washington D.C.



WASHINGTON - Congress took an important step toward granting the nation’s capital more control over its own affairs Thursday as the House voted to remove a measure that bars the city from using local tax money to help low-income women pay for abortions. The legislation would also allow the city to legalize medical marijuana — a move that was overwhelmingly approved by voters in a referendum in 1998 — and to continue to finance needle-exchange programs. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat and the city’s nonvoting member of the House, said the bill’s passage represented a major breakthrough for home rule (Isa.5:20). Removing the rider that barred financing for abortions was especially important, Ms. Norton said, because it “has created severe hardships for low-income women in the District.”
Click here for the full article.


What, no Planned Parenthood "Choice on Earth" cards this year?



It's getting late for Planned Parenthood to begin promoting its annual "Choice on Earth" holiday cards, but the abortion behemoth hasn't done so yet this year, hm.

Could it be the gross gimmick was a financial loser? Or perhaps PP decided it can't handle any more negative publicity at the moment and prefers to lay low?
Click here for the full article.

Senate kills pro-life amend. on health care, now working to filibuster health care bill

Senate kills pro-life amend. on health care, now working to filibuster health care bill



WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate voted Tuesday to table -- and thereby kill -- an amendment that would have barred federal funds in health-care reform from paying for abortions.

The 54-45 vote to table the amendment turned back an effort by Sens. Ben Nelson, D.-Neb., and Orrin Hatch, R.-Utah, to revise the Senate health-care bill to prohibit federal funding for abortions in a government-managed program and federal subsidies for private insurance plans that cover abortions.

With the tabling of the Nelson-Hatch Amendment, the bill sponsored by Majority Leader Harry Reid -- the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act -- moves forward without the restrictions on federal funding of abortion that were placed in the measure by the House of Representatives. The pro-life restrictions in the House bill were promoted by Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.).

Two Republicans -- Susan Collins and Olympic Snowe, each of Maine -- joined 52 Democrats in supporting the table resolution. Opposing the table resolution were 38 Republicans and seven Democrats: Evan Bayh (Ind.), Robert Casey (Pa.), Kent Conrad (N.D.), Byron Dorgan (N.D.), Ted Kaufman (Del.), Nelson and Mark Pryor (Ark.).

Having seen an amendment lose that would have prevented the Senate health care bill from funding abortions, the nation's leading pro-life groups say they'll now urge senators to defeat the overall bill with a filibuster.

Their chances of success are unknown, although they apparently have one Democratic ally -- Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- who has said he has "drawn a line in the sand" and would filibuster the bill if it didn't contain language prohibiting tax dollars from paying for abortions. It was Nelson's amendment that was defeated Tuesday when the Senate voted to "table" the proposal, 54-45, essentially killing it. The amendment mirrored language that was added to the House health care bill by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.).

Nelson's support of the overall bill is critical: There are 60 senators in the Democratic caucus and it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster. The pro-life groups say they'll ask their constituents to call their senators and urge a "no" vote on "cloture," which if passed with 60 votes would stop a filibuster and limit debate.

"[T]his is a long way from over," the National Right to Life Committee said in a statement, noting that the bill again must pass the House, where there are a bloc of pro-life Democrats.

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said he found Tuesday's Senate vote both "discouraging and encouraging."

"It's discouraging that the Senate as a whole could not comprehend the need to respect the will of 70 percent of the American people that public funds should not pay for or subsidize the killing of our nation's unborn citizens," Land told Baptist Press. "It was encouraging in that the motion to table got 54 votes, well short of the 60 needed to stop a filibuster. As long as there are sufficient pro-life senators such as Sen. Nelson who are willing to filibuster any health legislation that does not contain these restrictions on abortion, it will be difficult to break the filibuster and pass the entire bill.

"In that case," Land added, "then pro-choice supporters will have to decide between their pro-choice convictions and their desire for a vastly increased government role in health care."

Other groups, including the Family Research Council, Democrats for Life, Concerned Women for America and Americans United for Life, also said they would support a filibuster. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops also said that failure to include pro-life language would "require us and others to oppose this bill because it abandons both principle and precedent."

Americans United for Life said, "We now have no choice but to work vigorously to defeat this bill."

The Nelson amendment would have done two things: 1) prevent a government-run public option from covering abortion, and 2) prohibit federal subsidies for lower-income people from purchasing private plans that cover abortion. Exceptions would be made for cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life. A woman would be permitted to use her own money to purchase a "rider" that covers abortion.

It is not known, though, whether the public option will remain in the bill. If it is dropped -- as some media outlets reported Wednesday would happen -- then the bill conceivably could pick up the support of one of Maine's two Republican senators (Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins), who are both pro-choice, thus offsetting Nelson voting for a filibuster. Snowe and Collins were the only Republican senators opposing the Nelson amendment and are considered the GOP's most liberal members.

Asked after Tuesday's Senate vote if he was confident the bill would be successfully filibustered, the Family Research Council's Tom McClusky said, "The magic of the Senate is that just about anything can happen.... Sen. Nelson has drawn a pretty hard line when it comes to what type of abortion language he wants to see in the bill."

Seven Democrats joined 38 Republicans in opposing the motion to table the amendment: Nelson, Evan Bayh (Ind.), Robert Casey (Pa.), Kent Conrad (N.D.), Byron Dorgan (N.D.), Ted Kaufman (Del.) and Mark Pryor (Ark.).

Pro-life groups are trying to pressure those and other Democratic senators to support a filibuster if pro-life language isn't added. The Family Research Council says it is calling every household in Arkansas, South Dakota and Louisiana -- all conservative states with Democratic senators -- to conduct a survey on such topics as abortion funding, rationing, higher taxes and the public option. It is also calling pro-life households in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Participants who answer a particular way will be given information on contacting their senators, an FRC release stated. Democratic Sens. Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), Tim Johnson (S.D.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Jim Webb (Va.) and Mark Warner (Va.) all sided with pro-choicers in voting to table the Nelson amendment.

"We're doing everything in our power to make sure that the constituents of those senators know that those senators are voting to expand abortion in this country," Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said.

One concern among pro-lifers is that Democrats in both chambers will avoid the usual House-Senate conference -- where the differences in the two bills normally would be worked out -- and instead simply send the Senate bill straight to the House, which could pass it without changes and send it to President Obama. Such a move would bypass another round of haggling in the Senate and could make the bill easier to pass. House leaders, of course, must agree to such a move and likely would have a say in the final Senate bill.

"I think that's clearly what they're going to do," Perkins said. "We've been hearing that for a little over a week. They know that if … they work on it and send it to conference, it's in great jeopardy."

The challenge for House leaders, Perkins said, would be to get the 64 Democrats who voted for the Stupak pro-life amendment last time to support a pro-choice health care bill.

"They would have to go back on that vote and support taxpayer funding of abortion," Perkins said of the 64 Democrats. "I think it will be a major fight in the House to approve the Senate bill."

Pro-lifers also are anticipating Reid bringing to the floor a "manager's amendment" with supposed pro-life language that would be promoted as a compromise. Perkins said it likely would be "fake" pro-life language.

During debate Tuesday, Nelson told senators he wasn't there "to debate for or against abortion."

"This is a debate about taxpayer money," Nelson said. "It's a debate about whether it's appropriate for public funds to -- for the first time in more than three decades -- cover elective abortions.... Most Americans and most of the people in my state would say, 'No.' ... Some suggest that the Stupak language imposes new restrictions on abortion. But that's not really the case. We're seeking to just apply the same standards to the Senate health-care bill that already exist for many federal health programs.”

A CNN poll in November found American adults are against "using public funds for abortions when the woman cannot afford it" by a 61-37 percent margin. Other polls have found slightly higher or lower percentages, but all show that adults oppose federal funding of abortion.

Contact: Michael Foust
Source: BP
Publish Date: December 8 & 10, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.

Evidence of Counseling Abuse at Planned Parenthood Continues to Surface in Undercover Student Video

Evidence of Counseling Abuse at Planned Parenthood Continues to Surface in Undercover Student Video



APPLETON, Wisc. - New undercover footage from an Appleton, WI Planned Parenthood abortion clinic shows clinic staff, including the abortion doctor, lying to two young women about fetal development and encouraging the one who is pregnant to obtain an abortion because "women die having babies."

In the undercover video, when the two women ask a Planned Parenthood counselor if the pregnant woman's 10-week-old unborn child has a heart beat, the counselor emphasizes "heart tones," and answers, "Heart beat is when the fetus is active in the uterus--can survive--which is about seventeen or eighteen weeks." On the contrary, embryologists agree that the heartbeat begins around 3 weeks. Wisconsin informed consent law requires that women receive medically accurate information before undergoing an abortion.

The counselor then says, "A fetus is what's in the uterus right now. That is not a baby." Dr. Polhaska, the abortion doctor, insists, "It's not a baby at this stage or anything like that." Polhaska also states that having an abortion will be "much safer than having a baby," warning, "You know, women die having babies."

The video comes one month after the widely reported resignation of Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson. Johnson left her leadership position at Planned Parenthood in Bryan, TX after watching a 13-week old fetus being aborted in her clinic on ultrasound. She said during a recent interview, "Planned Parenthood really tries to instill in their employees and the women that are coming in for abortions that this is not a baby." In another interview, she noted, "They don't want to talk about when your baby has a heartbeat," because "they don't want to give the woman information that could give her a connection with her baby."

The investigation is organized by Live Action, a nonprofit student group. Lila Rose, the 21-year-old UCLA student and Live Action president, says medical lies and manipulative counseling are routine at Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion chain.

"They will do or say anything in order to sell more abortions to more women, whether it is covering up sexual abuse or lying to women about medical facts," says Rose. "Our team has visited dozens of Planned Parenthood clinics undercover. Planned Parenthood, while claiming to support patient self-determination, operates with an 'abortion-first mentality.'"

The video is the first in Live Action's "Rosa Acuna Project," a multi-state undercover audit documenting Planned Parenthood's abortion counseling. Planned Parenthood has come under fire in recent months after Live Action's investigations found them willing to conceal sexual abuse and accept donations targeted to abort African-Americans only. Videos of abuse cover-up prompted state investigations of Planned Parenthood and diversion of the abortion giant's public subsidies.

"Planned Parenthood is a billion-dollar organization with nearly $350 million of government funding, and stands to gain hundreds of millions more from national health care," says Rose. "Do we really want to subsidize an organization that gives women in need atrocious misinformation and predatory abortion practices?"

Click here to see the new video.

Contact: Lila Rose
Source: Live Action
Publish Date: December 9, 2009
Link to this article.  
Send this article to a friend.