Two pioneers of the legalization of abortion in America, Susan Hill and Ruth Proskauer Smith, have died.
The National Organization of Women (NOW) announced Tuesday the death of Susan Hill, who was president of the National Women's Health Foundation, president and CEO of the National Women's Health Organization in North Carolina, and a founding member of both the National Abortion Federation (NAF) and the National Coalition of Abortion Providers. She opened more than a dozen abortion mills across the country, including the first in the state of Florida, and owned as many as five centers at one time.
A cancer sufferer, Hill was also a close friend of Kansas late-term abortionist George Tiller. Tiller, who infamously boasted of having killed over 60,000 children in the womb in over 30 years at his Wichita clinic, was shot and killed last May.
In a June interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, Hill claimed that pro-life protests had become "much more aggressive, much more hostile" following the murder, and that they had wished ill on her. "They were yelling at me that I was next to die," she said.
On Friday, abortion pioneer Ruth Proskauer Smith died at the age of 102 in her Manhattan home.
Smith was a co-founder of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL) in 1969. She remained involved in what became NARAL Pro-Choice of New York up until recent years.
Smith was also an advocate of euthanasia, and one friend hinted that the NARAL veteran may have speeded her own death. In a tribute to Smith, euthanasia leader Barbara Coombs Lee said the elderly abortion icon died "in the manner she had wished for, planned for and devoted her life to securing as her right."
Smith's mother, the former Alice Naumberg, was a co-founder of the Euthanasia Society of America.
The national director for Generation Life says it comes as no surprise that liberal groups are upset over a Super Bowl ad featuring Tim Tebow and his mother.
Focus on the Family produced the 30-second spot, which is slated to run during the CBS broadcast on Sunday and reportedly will feature Pam Tebow recounting her decision to carry Tim to full-term, despite a doctor's advice to have an abortion due to health concerns.
Liberal and feminist groups were quick to denounce the ad, even though it has yet to be previewed, and Brandi Swindell, founder and national director of Generation Life, contends the heated opposition shows the liberal groups' true colors.
"They're not really pro-choice organizations -- they are pro-abortion organizations," she contends. "So it's disappointing when you see ads that pretend to be pro-woman, that at the end of the day are completely anti-woman. And we see them being very pro-abortion, very anti-woman as they protest and are so angry over this ad."
The National Organization for Women has criticized the network's decision to air the ad, saying it "life threatening" and "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning." To which, self-described pro-choice sports columnist Sally Jenkins replies : "If the pro-choice stance is so precarious that a story about someone who chose to carry a risky pregnancy to term undermines it, then CBS is not the problem."
In my last article, a somber remembrance of Roe v. Wade, I called attention to something that shocked readers: I noted that the Obama administration and Democratic Congress "rejected funding for school vouchers for poor children in Washington, DC, but supported funding for abortions for the mothers of those children."
The contrast is breathtaking, but true. It's another jolt to traditionally minded voters — especially pro-life Democrats and independents — who voted for "change" on November 4, 2008, and are now absorbing the change they authorized. In this case, the change stands in stark contrast to previous administrations and Congresses that prohibited federal funds to finance abortions in the District of Columbia. It veers well beyond liberals' assurance that abortion merely be "safe, legal, and rare."
If you didn't hear about this until now, don't be surprised. Over 300,000 pro-lifers marched in Washington last month without notice by the mainstream media. So, I'd like to take a moment to explain what happened:
Last summer, in July 2009, the overwhelmingly Democratic House of Representatives narrowly passed (by a vote of 219-208) a bill permitting the DC government to use locally raised tax revenues to provide abortions, reversing a long-standing prohibition.
Almost all Republicans voted against the bill. They were joined by some (but not enough) Democrats. Unfortunately, because of how Americans voted on November 4, 2008, the extreme left has such a massive majority in Congress that legislators who think taxpayers shouldn't pay for abortions couldn't stop the measure from being passed. Worse, because Americans — who, in recent polls, describe themselves as more pro-life and more conservative than ever — voted for the most radical abortion-rights advocate in the history of the presidency, the bill had full backing from the White House.
And so, the change in favor of abortion funding came via a $768 million DC Financial Services Appropriations bill that — here's the kicker — also included termination of school vouchers for poor children in Washington, DC, forcing those children out of private schools and back into public schools they fled.
Most Americans didn't notice any of this, given that the mainstream media that serves as educator-in-chief didn't dare highlight the story. Two sources that did notice, however, are worth quoting:
One is Rep. Joe Pitts, the Pennsylvania congressman who is a stalwart champion for the unborn. Pitts told me: "It's shameful that Congress has decided to use taxpayer dollars to fund the destruction of life in our nation's capital but has denied funding for a successful scholarship program that allows poor children a chance at a decent education. The juxtaposition in policies could not be more disturbing."
More disturbed than Pitts was Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, who was fit to be tied: "Following the lead of President Barack Obama," said Donohue, "the House of Representatives passed a bill that would allow the District of Columbia to fund abortions. Also following Obama's wishes, the same bill affirmed the...congressional decision to end school vouchers there."
"Here's what it comes down to," summed up Donohue. Poor pregnant women living in Washington, DC, "will be told that if they decide to abort their baby, the government will pay for it. But if they persist in bringing their baby to term, the government will not help them to avoid the same lousy public schools that Barack and Michelle shunned for Sasha and Malia." Donohue denounced the action as "cruel."
No doubt, it's an outrage. Of course, it's also predictable. By and large, liberals oppose school vouchers but support legalized abortion. In that sense, this is nothing new.
What is new, however, is this sudden aggressive push by today's "progressives" for taxpayers to fund abortions. This is the culmination of a progressive death march begun a century ago by Planned Parenthood founder and racial eugenicist Margaret Sanger, who preached extraction of "human weeds" from the gene pool in order to advance "race improvement" (her words). Today's progressive heirs have taken Sanger's torch and lit up the barn.
And thus, we now have — in no less than the nation's capital — a poster-child for that grim progressive worldview. It's a child who doesn't get aid to go to a private school — even as his mother pays school taxes — but whose mother gets aid to abort the child's sibling.
We're not only losing our conscience as a nation; we're losing our mind.
I know the response I'll get from Democrats: furious emails, enraged at me. That's sad. I'm simply reporting what happened. I didn't vote for any of this. I plead with them: If you're angry, write to the people in your party who are responsible. Only you can stop this madness. Clean your own house.
Focus on the Family advocates abstinence education because it works. Really? Yes - and we have evidence that proves our claim. But first, some context.
Today it's difficult for young people to comprehend sexual purity, much less put it into practice. Our culture defines relationships as by-products of sexual performance, and its concept of "beauty" straddles a thin, gray line between salacious exposure and soft porn. It also doesn't help young adults that their parents and the culture encourage them to put education and career ahead of marriage and family, thus driving the average age of marriage well beyond the mid-20s.
But if you talk to young people, a gradual change is taking place. They're experiencing the aftermath of a sexual tsunami, and are sorting through the refuge left in the wake of sexually liberated parents. The fallout from broken, dysfunctional families is painful - a model they don't want to replicate. Young men and women are searching for brighter futures and not so sure they want to follow the road map they've seen modeled and taught.
Enter the findings of a landmark study published in the February 2010 Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine. This study of 662 high-risk, African-Americans in sixth and seventh grade offers the latest proof we have to add to our growing mountain of evidence that abstinence education works.
There are the four take-away points from this latest and hugely noteworthy research. Students receiving abstinence-centered education:
initiated sex less; had fewer sexual partners; (Hold your breath ...) did not reduce their use of condoms among the sexually active; had more pronounced risk reductions than those receiving safe-sex and comprehensive sex education, which showed little difference compared to students receiving no formal sex education. The study's objective conclusion? "Theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement." Abstinence-centered education is effective with this generation because it provides direction, character education and a guide for healthy living. It gives hope for a brighter future to those regretting their sexual involvement. It encourages parents to participate in and lead this discussion.
So it seems that while President Obama promised change to young America, his administration is actually short-changing the next generation by de-funding abstinence-centered programs in our nation. Let's hope our president lends more support to where the evidence is leading - because abstinence education works. Really!
The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano republished an interview on Wednesday detailing current research on a new source of stem cells that is being called "the future of medicine."
According to the Vatican newspaper, the pioneering research is presently taking place at the Biocell Center of Busto Arsizio in Milan and involves using stem cells taken from amniotic fluid to create a retinal regeneration therapy. This stem cell source is considered morally licit as it does not require the destruction of human embryos.
In an interview with Giuseppe Simoni, an Italian biologist and geneticist from Milan, L'Osservatore Romano's Joseph Reguzzoni shed light on amniotic stem cells, which are now at the forefront of genetic research. The interview was originally published in September-December 2009 edition of the magazine "Communio."
"We are studying a particular type of stem cell, the amniotic stem cell, that represents a 'first' in the course of our existence," Simoni said of Biocell. "We are investing all of our work in the conviction that the study of amniotic cells could bring us to better understand many phenomena, and in consequence improve the lives of the sick, cure pathologies (which are) to-date incurable, and make more effective the remedies already used. In the field of amniotic cells, additionally, we are really at the beginning: everything still needs to be studied, verified, demonstrated."
"The possibilities are really so many and the hopes infinite," Simoni said.
When asked to explain why stem cells have been so pursued by medical researchers, Simoni explained that "The stem cells and their behavior are important to understanding the dynamics of tumors, the regeneration of tissues, the continual cell proliferation that takes place each minute in the course our entire lives."
Simoni also outlined the differences between embryonic stem cells and ones obtained from amniotic fluid. "Unlike embryonic stem cells," he noted, "in a not so distant future, everyone could possess their own amniotic cells, or have in close relatives an availability of compatible amniotic cells."
"For the embryonic cells, on the other hand, the conversation is more complicated, you need to find the embryo, develop compatible lines..." which, according to Simoni, not only have large costs associated with them but also have the power to generate large profits.
"All this," he stated, "is inconsistent with our mission and irreconcilable with our code of ethics."
"We believe, actually, that ethics are necessary in everything," he continued. "You can't work well if you don't have respect for the person, also for a person yet to be born. How can something good come out of an injustice or an inethical behavior?" Simoni asked.
"In this sense the study of the amniotic fluid and the stem cells they contain are not inconsistent with ethical principles."
L'Osservatore Romano reported that in addition to the Biocell Center of Busto Arsizio, numerous other institutions have agreed to take part in the research on amniotic stem cells and retina regeneration. The list includes Harvard Medical School's Department of Opthalmology, the IRCCS Foundation and three Italian hospitals.
In a case that could have far-reaching implications for medical research and health care based on genetics, groups representing thousands of doctors, scientists and patients went to court Tuesday to argue that no one should be able to patent human genes, a question that has long been controversial in scientific circles. The case involves a Utah company, Myriad Genetics, and the University of Utah Research Foundation, which in 1994 isolated the DNA sequence for the BRCA1 and later the BRCA2 genes, mutations of which can greatly increase a woman's chance of developing breast and ovarian cancer. Myriad sells a test for the genes. Click here for the entire article.
Some Vermont lawmakers say it's time to apologize for a part of the state's history. It's the so-called eugenics movement, which was carried out in many states in the early 20th century. The selective-breeding program sought to sterilize citizens labeled feeble-minded or criminal. A University of Vermont professor conducted the so-called "Vermont Eugenics Survey," which led to the state passing a sterilization law in 1931. The law resulted in the sterilization of several hundred poor, rural Vermonters as well as Abenaki Indians, French-Canadians and others deemed unfit to have children. Click here for the entire article.
An enthusiastic crowd filled the Capitol Rotunda Wednesday to show opposition to some abortions and support for a bill that would require women seeking the procedure to undergo an ultrasound before the killing starts. ``Senate Bill 38 is a very important bill,'' said Sen. Elizabeth Tori, R-Radcliff, the bill's sponsor. She urged those at the Kentucky Right Life [sic] Rally to call lawmakers in support of the killing measure, which also would require a woman seeking an abortion to meet with a health professional 24 hours beforehand for counseling. Click here for the entire article.
Abortion clinics would face mandatory licensure and strict regulation (naziesque) under a bill approved by the Virginia House of Delegates. After much debate, the House this week voted 72-25 in favor of the measure proposed by Delegate Matthew J. Lohr, R-Rockingham. The bill now moves to the Senate; it has been referred to the Senate Committee on Education and Health. Lohr said abortion clinics in Virginia are relatively unregulated and rarely inspected. Under his proposal, an abortion clinic's equipment would have to pass inspection by the state Board of Health every other year, and each clinic would have to possess emergency life-saving equipment such as a defibrillator. Click here for the entire article.
Researchers using a kind of MRI scan called functional magnetic resonance imaging have found that some patients diagnosed as "vegetative" are able to answer questions internally.
One patient was asked yes/no questions like "Is your father's name Thomas?" "We were astonished when we saw the results of the patient's scan and that he was able to correctly answer the questions that were asked by simply changing his thoughts," said the study's coauthor.
"Not only did these scans tell us that the patient was not in a vegetative state but, more importantly, for the first time in five years it provided the patient with a way of communicating his thoughts to the outside world." Click here for the entire article.
The Montgomery County Council in Maryland on Tuesday voted to require pregnancy counseling centers to post a disclaimer saying they do not have medical professionals on staff. Pro-life advocates said the centers are being unfairly targeted because they do not provide abortion or contraception.
The county council approved the new regulation by a 7-2 vote. The rule also requires centers to post notices encouraging women to consult a licensed health care provider. Click here for the entire article.
Police removed a group of 15 Spanish Right to Life advocates gathered outside the Queen Sofia Museum in Madrid, the site where the European Human Rights Commission was conducting a meeting.
The pro-life protestors were carrying signs reading, "What about my rights?" alongside pictures of a baby at 13 weeks of gestation. Police forced them to leave the area outside the building where the meeting was taking place.
The government of Mexico City noted in a report this week that abortion has become a "plague" in the capital, as 7 out of every 10 women who inquire about the procedure end up choosing abortion.
The report, which was delivered to the Legislative Assembly's Commission on Health, reveals that between April 2007, when abortion was legalized in Mexico City, and December 2009, there were 50,936 inquiries about abortion before the 12th week of pregnancy. Sixty-eight percent of these women (34,660) opted to have the procedure while 32% (16276) chose to continue their pregnancies.
The report says that the Beatriz Velasco de Aleman Clinic and the Ticoman General Hospital have become the two main locations where abortions are performed. Click here for the entire article.
Michigan is investigating well-known abortionist Abraham Alberto Hodari -- and there is concern he may flee the country before charges can be filed.
Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue (OR), explains his organization's role in the Hodari case. "Operation Rescue filed a complaint both against his medical license and his medical practice for a botched abortion and failure to comply with local and state statutes," he states.
The Michigan Department of Community Health has informed Operation Rescue that a probe will be forthcoming. Newman says the allegations against the abortionist are many.
Troy Newman"At least two women have died," says the pro-life leader. "[And] there have been countless allegations of forced abortions...in fact, there's one lawsuit that's going on right now for forced abortion."
In that case, a woman who was a teenager at the time claims she changed her mind about aborting her baby, but that an assistant helped Hodari hold her down and did the abortion against her will.
Those cases and others, Newman claims, show "a 20-year history of abuse" by Hodari. For that reason, the longtime pro-lifer is grateful that an investigation is finally under way. "We pray that Hodari...will finally be stripped of his medical license," he states.
According to Newman, Hodari currently is liquidating his assets. "But if criminal charges are filed, it wouldn't be unlikely for an abortionist such as this just to flee the country," says OR's president. "So we're watching him very closely and asking law enforcement to do the same."
President Obama's fiscal year 2011 budget contains anti-life provisions.
One includes a request to continue public funding of abortions in Washington, D.C. Another stipulation may include money going to the United Nations Population Fund for activities that could include overseas abortions.
There is some good news. The budget does retain the Hyde Amendment that prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortions through the Health and Human Services annual appropriations bill.
Richard Doerflinger, associate director of the Secretariat of Pro-life Activities at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said numerous polls show Americans don't want public funding of abortion.
"This administration wants public funding of abortion of various kinds," he said. "Some inroads have already been made against longstanding funding provisions."
Congress still must approve the president's proposal.
Last week the State of Colorado settled the case of Wiechec v. Hemphill, in which two Colorado State Troopers and a member of Governor Bill Ritter's staff were accused of violating the constitutional rights of Mr. John Wiechec. On October 7, 2008, these individuals were complicit in preventing Mr. Wiechec from engaging in expressive First Amendment activity in support of Amendment 48, Colorado's Personhood Amendment, while at a public park near the West Steps of the Colorado State Capitol building. The measure redefined "person" to include an unborn child from the moment of conception.
In October 2009, attorney James Rouse, who is representing Mr. Wiechec, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado naming the troopers and Governor Ritter's staff member as defendants for causing the unlawful arrest of Mr. Wiechec. The complaint alleges violations of Mr. Wiechec's constitutional rights, including his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and right to free speech under both the United States and Colorado Constitutions. The complaint also alleges various other state civil claims which address the unlawful detention of Mr. Wiechec and the personal injury suffered at the hands of one of the arresting officers.
While the Governor used amplified sound to express his opposition to Amendment 48 at a rally organized for that purpose, Mr. Wiechec expressed support of the Amendment using his unamplified natural voice, never causing the Governor to interrupt his speech. Mr. Wiechec and others were approximately 25-yards away from the rally in the public park surrounding the capitol building to express their support for the Amendment. At all times Mr. Wiechec kept himself distinctly separate and apart from rally activity.
Attorney Rouse stated, "This case shows that not even high ranking government officials can get away with silencing pro-life speech that occurs in a traditional public forum such as a park, no matter how much the government official disagrees with the pro-life viewpoint."
Leading lawmakers hoping to revive President Barack Obama’s stalled health care overhaul have started writing a compromise bill, but it’s unclear when the legislation will be ready for votes, a top House Democrat said Tuesday. The measure would change the massive Senate-approved health bill to what bargainers from the White House, Senate and House agreed to last month, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said in a brief interview. Rangel’s remarks, if borne out, could be the first concrete sign that Democrats will try enacting major health legislation in the wake of the Republican upset in a Massachusetts special election that cost them their crucial 60th Senate seat. Stunned by that setback, the White House and top Democrats have been conceding that they no longer know if they have the votes to pass health legislation, or what such a bill would look like. In January, White House and congressional negotiators agreed to ease a Senate-approved tax on high-cost health insurance plans opposed by unions and many House Democrats. They also planned to remove a Senate provision having the federal government fully pay for an expansion of Medicaid coverage solely for Nebraska, one of whose senators, Democrat Ben Nelson, was the crucial 60th vote for the Senate bill at the time. Click here for the entire article.
Three additional states have taken up the "personhood" cause in a push to guarantee the constitutional rights of the preborn. Iowa, Virginia and Kansas are now among more than 30 states pursuing personhood amendments – a move pro-lifers view as their best chance of ending abortion in the U.S. "Personhood is a revolution of the pro-life movement," said Keith Mason, co-founder of Personhood USA, in a statement. "It challenges what's been done in the past, stimulates the movement's present, and eradicates the need for pro-life efforts in the future. Personhood is the best hope to end abortion in America." Click here for the entire article.
The Washington Post posted a breakthrough story this afternoon about a "landmark" scientific study showing abstinence education works and comprehensive sex ed, well, not so much.
High points:
# Study subjects were African-American students
# Study controls and results were so airtight the Obama administration, which devised new rules to cutting abstinence ed from federal funding, admitted the new evidence may open the door for grants
# Study results were stark (33% of abstinence educated students had sex within 2 years vs. 52% who were only taught about "safe sex")
The article, worth reading in its entirety...
Sex education classes that focus on encouraging children to remain abstinent can convince a significant proportion to delay sexual activity, researchers reported Monday in a landmark study that could have major implications for the nation's embattled efforts to protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases....
In the first carefully designed study to evaluate the controversial approach to sex ed, researchers found that only about a third of 6th and 7th graders who went through sessions focused on abstinence started having sex in the next 2 years. In contrast, nearly half of students who got other classes, including those that included information about contraception, became sexually active.
"I think we've written off abstinence-only education without looking closely at the nature of the evidence," said John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the University of PA, who led the federally funded study. "Our study shows this could be 1 approach that could be used."
The research, published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, comes amid intense debate over how to reduce sexual activity, pregnancies, births and sexually transmitted diseases among children and teenagers. After declining for more than a decade, births, pregnancies and STDs among U.S. teens have begun increasing again.
The Obama administration eliminated more than $150 million in federal funding targeted at abstinence programs, which are relatively new and have little rigorous evidence supporting their effectiveness. Instead it is launching a new $114 million pregnancy prevention initiative that will fund only programs that have been shown scientifically to work. The administration Monday proposed expanding that program to $183 million next year. The move came after intensifying questions about the effectiveness of abstinence programs.
"This new study is game-changing," said Sarah Brown, who leads the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. "For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex and reduce their recent sexual activity as well."
The new study is the first to evaluate an abstinence program using a carefully "controlled" design that compared it directly to alternative strategies - considered the highest level of scientific evidence.
"This takes away the main pillar of opposition to abstinence education," said Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who wrote the criteria for federal funding of abstinence programs. "I've always known that abstinence programs have gotten a bad rap."
Even long-time critics of the approach praised the new study, saying it provided strong evidence that such programs can work and may deserve taxpayer support.
"One of the things that's exciting about this study is that it says we have a new tool to add to our repertoire," said Monica Rodriguez, vice president for education and training at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.
Based on the findings, Obama administration officials said programs like the one evaluated in the study could be eligible for federal funding.
"No one study determines funding decisions, but the findings from the research paper suggest that this kind of project could be competitive for grants if there's promise that it achieves the goal of teen pregnancy prevention," said Health and Human Services Dept. spokesman Nicholas Pappas.
Several critics of abstinence-only approach argued that the curriculum tested was not representative of most abstinence programs. It did not take on a moralistic tone as many abstinence programs do. Most notably, the sessions encouraged children to delay sex until they are ready, not necessarily until they were married, did not portray sex outside of marriage as never appropriate or disparage condoms.
"There is no data in this study to support the 'abstain-until marriage' programs, which research proved ineffective during the Bush administration," said James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth.
But abstinence supporters disputed that, saying that the new program was essentially the same as other good abstinence programs.
"For our critics to use 'marriage' as the thing that sets the program in this study apart from federally funded programs is an exaggeration and smacks of an effort to dismiss abstinence education rather than understanding what it is," Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association.
The new study involved 662 African-American students who were randomly assigned to go through 1 of 5 programs: An 8-hour curriculum that encouraged them to delay having sex; an 8-hour program focused on teaching safe sex; an 8- or 12-hour program that did both; or an 8-hour program focused on teaching the youngsters other ways to be healthy, such as eating well and exercising.
Over the next two years, about 33% of the students who went through the abstinence program started having sex, compared to about 52% who were just taught safe sex. About 42% of the students who went through the comprehensive program started having sex, and about 47% of those who just learned about other ways to be healthy. The abstinence program had no negative effects on condom use, which has been a major criticism of the abstinence approach.
"The take-home message is that we need a variety of interventions to address an epidemic like HIV, sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy," Jemmott said. "There are populations that really want an abstinence intervention. They are against telling children about condoms. This study suggests abstinence programs can be part of the mix of programs that we offer."
A TV station in British Columbia tonight will air the Priests for Life 60-second video, "Everyone Against Abortion, Please Raise Your Hand." The pro-life ad features the hand and forearm of an aborted child.
"This is a breakthrough moment," said Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life. "We tried and tried to have this ad televised in the United States and met only resistance. That Canadian pro-lifers would take the spot and get their government's approval to air it is a great step forward in helping people see what abortion truly is."
The ad has been available on the Priests for Life website (www.unborn.info) for months and when advertised on the Drudge Report last year, received hundreds of thousands of viewings, but has been rejected for viewing by American television stations.
"Perhaps the Canadian government's decision and CBS's broadcast of Focus on the Family's Tim Tebow ad will spark a new openness to allowing the pro-life view to be seen and heard," said Fr. Pavone. "For decades, abortion advocates have had their perspective advertised in the scripts of countless television shows. Fairness and the fact that over half of the American public calls itself pro-life will hopefully spur more airing of projects showing that the baby in the womb is fully human and, therefore, deserving of love and respect."
The push to shove abortion coverage out of health care reform continues.
Former Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colorado) is touring the country for the Susan B. Anthony List, challenging Blue Dog Democrats who are pro-life to remain steady and vote against any health care reform bill that includes tax dollars for abortion. Musgrave remembers the 1990s when she ran for office and abortion was not a good campaign subject.
"Way back through those years you weren't supposed to talk about abortion," she recalls. "But now it is the issue that could stop this health care legislation."
She believes the American people are paying attention, even though some in Washington seem to be turning a deaf ear. That is evident, she says, in the recent New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races and the special election in Massachusetts for the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat. In all three cases, a Republican won.
"Anybody who would think that the [Senate] seat that was held by Kennedy for...46 years was going to go Republican, if someone had told us that six months ago, we would have thought they were crazy," the former congresswoman notes. "So there was a clear message there from the Scott Brown victory [in Massachusetts]."
Musgrave points out that surveys show 70 percent of Americans oppose the use of tax dollars to pay for abortion, and she suggests that voters bombard Washington with phone calls, e-mails, and letters, letting elected representatives know what they expect in health care reform.
As the brutal consequences of China’s one-child policy that became law in 1978 are becoming fully known, it is apparent that unborn females, young girls and young women are the real victims of this law.
Chinese parents have traditionally preferred sons, since a son carries the family name, inherits family properties and supports his parents in their old age, while Chinese daughters become part of their husband’s family. Thus, limiting families to one child has resulted in the sex-selection abortion of girls as Chinese parents are forced to choose between their future security and the lives of their daughters.
The magnitude of this situation and the vast numbers of Chinese women missing because they were aborted is being acknowledged, as Chinese boys now outnumber girls by the millions — resulting in a dire shortage of eligible brides for China’s young men. The most calamitous consequence of the shortage of Chinese girls is the growing trade of foreign girls and women from many countries — especially Korea — being trafficked into China for the purpose of forced marriages and sexual exploitation.
China’s one-child policy is a triple whammy against women. It begins with the women who are forced to make the horrendous decision to abort an unborn baby girl because sons are preferred in a one-child family. Then, the life of the aborted baby girl is snuffed out, obviously without her consent. Now, women beyond China’s borders are paying the price of this misguided and cruel policy as they are forcibly trafficked into China to sexually satisfy China’s disproportionately male population.
As this travesty against women is perpetuated in China and surrounding countries, one wonders where the female “pro-choice” defenders are when it comes to these women who are being forced into unimaginable situations, clearly not of their own choosing. Rather than speaking up for millions of women in this dire situation, a coalition of women’s groups in the U.S., including Women’s Media Center, National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority Foundation, are galvanized and unloading their fire on a Super Bowl ad about one woman who tells of choosing life for her son. Pam Tebow chose to continue a risky pregnancy rather than abort her baby, and her inspiring story is one of celebrating life and families. You can read here the opinion of a pro-choice Washington Post staff writer, Sally Jenkins, who agrees that the nation can learn much from the Tebows.
As the Tebows are telling their story of choosing life, other compassionate people are working through their local pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) to provide healthy alternatives to abortion.
Supporters of the pro-choice movement in Chicago (Isa.5:20) gathered at the "The Future of Choice" located within the Sofitel Hotel in commemoration of the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. Among the near 700 supporters in attendance, psychosexual therapist and expert Dr. Ruth Westheimer took the stage as key speaker, accompanied by sex columnist for Time Out Chicago , Men's Health magazine, Psychology Today and author of Because It Feels Good: A Woman's Guide to Sexual Pleasure, Debby Herbenick, PH.D, performing as the master of ceremonies. PPIL Board Chair Joanne Howard, the President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America Cecile Richards, and the CEO & President of PPIL Steve Trombley were also in attendance and delivered remarks to the anniversary's attendees. Click here for the entire article.
Abortion foes are promising to continue their protest over a proposed Fitchburg (Mass.) Planned Parenthood office. Officials of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts are scheduled Tuesday to present their plan for the proposed office to the Fitchburg City Council. But the group Mass Citizen for Life is vowing to crowd the meeting with abortion foes to express their opposition. Last week, around 70 to 80 anti-abortion advocates protested and prayed in front of the proposed site. Jesse Mermell, vice president of external relations at Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said the organization plans to open the Fitchburg office with federal grant money. Click here for the entire article.
This week Mexican pro-life organizations warned that leaders of the Convergence Party have threatened to “help” Mexican teenage girls travel to the country's capital to obtain legal abortions.
The National Union of Parents and the Federation of Private Schools of Southern Tamaulipas denounced party leaders for endangering the lives of the teens who decide to abort their babies without the knowledge of their parents.
Convergence Party officials have said they intend to promote the idea to students at the universities and high schools in Tampico and help them “get around” local laws by paying for their transportation to Mexico City to undergo abortions. Click here for the entire article.
Nebraska's legislators have before them a bill that would ban late-term abortions.
State Senator Mike Flood, speaker of the Nebraska Legislature, recently introduced the "Abortion Pain Prevention Act" -- a measure that would ban abortions after 20 weeks in the womb. Flood believes babies should not be forced to experience the excruciating pain of abortion.
"The medical science shows that doctors right now [who are] performing neonatal surgeries on babies in the womb...administer anesthesia for the very reason that these babies do feel pain," the senator explains. "They grimace when pricked with a needle stick." Click here for the entire article.
The Utah House Health and Human Services Committee on Tuesday approved a bill (HB 12) that would permit criminal charges against a woman who attempts to have an illegal abortion, the Salt Lake Tribune reports. The legislation would define which abortions are legal and protected from prosecution. According to the Tribune, terminating a pregnancy in a manner not allowed under the legislation could lead to a charge of criminal homicide, which is a second-degree felony.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Carl Wimmer (R), was developed in response to a case in Uintah County, in which a 17-year-old paid a man $150 to beat her in an attempt to cause a miscarriage of her seven-month-old fetus. A judge dismissed charges against the teen because a woman cannot be punished under current state law for attempting to arrange an abortion. The state has appealed the ruling. Click here for the entire article.
Pharmacists in the Spanish region of Catalonia along with the organization, Network of Responsible Pharmacies, are opposing a new provision allowing the morning-after pill to be distributed to girls under the age of 16 without a prescription or parental consent.
The spokesperson for the Network of Responsible Pharmacies, Marta Perez, said the provision implemented by the Socialist government constitutes an attack on the professional freedom of pharmacists. She added that it could endanger public health, especially that of young people, due to the misinformation about the true effects of the drug being distributed by the Ministry of Health. Click here for the entire article.
Pro-life groups are fighting an attempt in an Illinois community to pass a "bubble zone" ordinance that would keep counselors away from women who are entering abortion clinics.
The abortion facility in Rockford is notorious for signs and posters -- some of them anti-Christian in nature -- that mock pro-life advocates. The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to keep those groups away from potential customers. Rockford Pro-Life Initiative member Kevin Rilott tells OneNewsNow that the clinic wants the ordinance in place because it pegs pro-lifers for its declining business.
"Over the years, the Rockford abortion facility...used to do around 50 to 70 abortions per week," Rilott explains. "[But] through the prayers [and] the hard work of dedicated Christians, the numbers at this abortion facility have gone down to about 20 abortions a week."
That drop equates to a loss in income of about $600 for each abortion not performed since sidewalk counselors have successfully been offering women who seek abortions a way to save their babies and work out their problems.
"It's interesting," Rilott remarks. "We checked with the Rockford Police Department, and for the last 25 years in this city we have not had one woman entering this clinic complain about a pro-life sidewalk counselor."
Any complaints, he says, have been generated by the clinic and its supporters -- and even though the mayor and some members of the council are against the idea of a bubble zone, its defeat is not ensured.
The awful (and tragic) comments of novelist Martin Amis, suggesting that "suicide booths on every corner" would be a splendid solution to the purported problem of the "stinking" elderly– my take here–continues to provoke comment. The Times of London reports the reaction of the 92-year-old writer Diana Hathill, who urges that the elderly be treated as individuals. From the story:
The author of five volumes of memoirs — the most recent, Life Class, was published last month — is not against euthanasia. "I would like to think if I wanted to end my life I could. People shouldn't have to beg to die." However, she says that is different from Amis's view that people should be bumped off when they are no longer useful to society. "You have to have some control. People don't want to be burdens, everyone I know who is old frets that their family has to cope with them but they don't really want to die before their time." Animals sometimes receive better treatment than old people, she thinks. "The British like animals because they are simple creatures, they give them clothes, furniture, gourmet pet food, it's getting ridiculous."
The elderly should be treated as individuals, she says. "You shouldn't expect them all to retire at a certain age, I carried on working until I was 75. One does eventually go off the boil but you shouldn't take the pan off the hob too early." It was, the writer says, agonising moving into a retirement home. "Quite dreadful, but now it's rather nice. Some people here are very old indeed, but you suddenly discover they are still very interesting."
Hathill is talking at cross purposes with herself. On one hand she says she rejects Amis's thesis, but then accepts it in the next breath, just not as crassly.
The problem of elders feeling a burden shouldn't be understandable. Rather, it should be opposed. The reason so many accept the "burden" meme is that they hear the message that their lives, at some point, aren't worth living and as Hathill points out, become too expensive to maintain. But legalizing euthanasia promotes that very dehumanization of the elderly. You can't say treat them as equals with the rest of society, but also assist their suicides. That is akin to saying, don't smoke, but if you do, use filter cigarettes: What you end up with is people smoking.
The legislature in Washington state is considering a proposal that would regulate pro-life pregnancy clinics that provide services in problem pregnancies.
Paula Cullen (Life Services) According to Paula Cullen, executive director of Life Services of Spokane, what is happening in the state is part of a nationwide campaign pushed by abortion-advocacy groups that seek to steer women in an unplanned pregnancy to abortion providers instead of pregnancy centers.
"A bill has been proposed in the Washington state legislature to regulate pregnancy centers in a way that would be very chilling on our ability to do what we are called to do," Cullen explains. "It would require pregnancy centers to conform to standards defined by Planned Parenthood and NARAL, etcetera."
Those are the most prominent pro-abortion groups in the United States, and the Life Services executive director believes this legislation would force out of business the more than 45 pro-life clinics in the state that are providing $15 million in services to state residents without using tax dollars.
According to polls, the UK is becoming ever more assisted suicide friendly. From the story:
The public’s support for a change in the law on assisted suicide and euthanasia was uncovered by the YouGov poll following a succession of high profile court cases. Three quarters of those polled said the law should be amended to allow assisted suicide, a crime punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Even if the law was not changed, more than 80 per cent of the 2,053 people questioned said relatives of terminally ill people, who had made it clear they wanted to die, should not be prosecuted.
The disconnect shown by this poll result is rather astonishing. Assisted suicide has been pushed for the last year in the UK by cases that did not involve terminal illnesses. Debbie Purdy, for example, has non terminal MS. Her lawsuit to protect her husband from prosecution if he took her to Switzerland for assisted suicide led to the public prosecutor effectively decriminalizing–by promising not to prosecute–assisted suicides of the terminally ill, disabled, and those with degenerating conditions, so long as the deed is done by family or friends (proving, at least, that AS is not “medical”). Most recently, a woman who assisted the suicide of her chronically ill daughter (a bad case of chronic fatigue syndrome), was found not guilty of attempted murder–the wrong crime to charge, especially as she had plead guilty to assisted suicide–and is now in all the papers about how killing her daughter as an act of selfless love. Perhaps so, but that is easy to say by those really motivated to put the “beloved” out of their own misery–as was the case with George Delury’s doing away with his wife Myrna Lebov.
And now Terry Pratchett, a famous novelist–what is it with UK novelists these days?–has proposed literal death panels:
Sir Terry Pratchett, the author who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease, is due to deliver a lecture in which he will call for assisted suicide “tribunals” that would give the terminally ill permission to end their lives. In the Richard Dimbleby Lecture, he will offer himself as a test case for just such a tribunal. The panels would include a legal expert in family matters and a doctor with experience of serious, long-term illness, who would determine whether sufferers were of sound mind.
The UK’s social structure is in serious trouble across a broad front–a growing crisis about which the pundits hand wring all the time. The recent UK plague of assisted suicide deaths–so reminiscent of the Kevorkian binge here in the 1990s–reflects that decline. Add in the UK’s quality of life-based health care rationing, and it doesn’t look good for the UK’s elderly, disabled, and otherwise expensive for whom to care.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday said that she could gather enough votes to pass the Senate's health care reform bill (HR 3590) if the upper chamber agrees to make several changes to the bill through reconciliation, CongressDaily reports. While speaking to reporters before President Obama's State of the Union address, Pelosi said her chamber is not likely to pass the Senate's bill in its current form, but "we can pass this thing" by using reconciliation and a two-track approach to "resolv[e] some of the issues." Although several moderate Democrats earlier in the week said they were against using reconciliation, Pelosi argued that the procedural maneuver was "established for this purpose."
Editor's Note: Reconciliation is a legislative process in the United States Senate intended to allow consideration of a contentious budget bill without the threat of filibuster. Reconciliation limits debate and amendment, and therefore favors the majority party. Click here for more...
