Judge Jody Luebbers
An Ohio judge has ruled a Planned Parenthood affiliate violated a state law involving an under-age girl in another example of misconduct uncovered among the abortion giant's centers.
Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Jody Luebbers ruled Dec. 7 that Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio broke the state's informed consent law when its doctor failed to meet with a 14-year-old girl at least 24 hours before performing an abortion on her. The decision came even before the case goes to trial Feb. 7.
"The health and safety of young girls is more important than Planned Parenthood's desire to perform an abortion," said Brian Hurley, an Alliance Defense Fund-affiliated lawyer who is representing the girl's parents in the case.
The parents -- who, along with their daughter, remain unnamed at Luebbers' order -- filed suit on behalf of their daughter when they learned Planned Parenthood performed an abortion on her after she was brought to the clinic by her soccer coach, who was the father of the unborn child. John Haller, 22 at the time, served three years in prison for sexual battery.
The Planned Parenthood clinic failed to notify civil authorities, a requirement in cases of statutory rape. The clinic also failed to inform the parents of the abortion or the sexual relationship, according to Alliance Defense Fund.
This is the latest in a pattern uncovered at some Planned Parenthood clinics. Hidden-camera investigations since 2008 by Live Action, a pro-life organization led by college students, have caught Planned Parenthood employees in Alabama, Arizona, California, Indiana and Tennessee seeking to cover up alleged child sexual abuse.
Affiliates of Planned Parenthood Federation of America performed 324,008 abortions in 2008, the latest year for which statistics have been reported by the organization.
Contact: Tom Strode Source: BP
Publish Date: December 21, 2010
The 112th Congress, which takes office in January, will bring with it more than 50 new pro-life representatives. Three from Virginia. One from New York. At least four from Ohio. Another five from Pennsylvania.
Leaders in the pro-life movement will be looking for them to get right to work.
"We made major pro-life gains last month, but they mean absolutely nothing if we do not turn them into serious legislative gains for the unborn," Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, wrote recently.
Republicans took back the majority in the House in November, claiming 242 seats, which will provide opportunities to pass pro-life amendments and stop taxpayer funding of abortion. Democrats, who typically support abortion, maintain control of the Senate.
In addition to pro-life amendments being added to budget bills, two bills will be introduced to block federal funding of abortion throughout the government, as promised by House Republican leadership before the election.
Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., will co-sponsor the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, which would install a government-wide prohibition on such funding, including a repeal of abortion funding in ObamaCare. And Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., will sponsor the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, to ensure that Title X family planning programs do not send tax dollars to abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood.
Leading the House will be four pro-lifers: Rep. John Boehner (Ohio), as speaker; Rep. Eric Cantor (Virginia), as majority leader; Rep. Kevin McCarthy (California), as majority whip; and Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Texas), as chairman of the House Conference.
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, applauded the GOP for its choice of leadership.
"Speaker Boehner has told me he wants to be the most pro-life speaker ever," she said recently. "We look forward to working with Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor and these new pro-life leaders of the House of Representatives."
Pro-life advances in the next two years would lay the groundwork for even greater progress if life advocates can add to their number of Senate allies in 2012 and elect a pro-life president.
"The leaders of both parties have been reminded that pro-life voters count," Dannenfelser said. "We remember. And our convictions about life are not 'also-rans' to any political party's priorities."
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: December 21, 2010
European Court of Human Rights
Pro-life advocates welcomed a legal ruling that refused to find there is a European right to abortion in a case that had been labeled the "Roe v. Wade of Europe."
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled there is no right to abortion for the Council of Europe that overrides pro-life laws in member countries. The decision, which is binding on all lower chambers and countries of the council, said the European Convention on Human Rights "could not be interpreted as conferring a right to abortion," according to a court news release.
The court, however, decided Ireland violated the rights of a woman who obtained an abortion in England because of fear her cancer might return and threaten her life if she continued to carry her child. The Grand Chamber ruled the Irish government should revise its procedures to enable a woman in such a circumstance to obtain an abortion in her own country.
William Saunders of American United for Life (AUL) said the Dec. 16 ruling "is a victory for those who value the sanctity of all innocent human life."
"The Convention was designed to protect against injustice," said Saunders, AUL's senior counsel and a consultant in the case, in a written statement. "The Court correctly held that the Convention cannot be used to deny a member state's right to legally protect its smallest and most vulnerable members."
In a written release, Jeanne Monahan of Family Research Council (FRC), which filed a brief on behalf of Ireland, described the court's decision as "a very welcome message not only to its constituent countries but to the world at large that the so-called 'right to an abortion' is neither fundamental nor recognized worldwide, as abortion advocates would suggest."
Ireland is one of four countries in the 47-member council that have not legalized abortion. The others are Andorra, Malta and Poland, according to the Times of Malta.
The chamber's decision against a council-wide right to abortion rejected efforts by abortion-promoting organizations that have sought to extend such a requirement to all member states and to punish health-care workers who refuse to perform the procedure.
The case -- A, B and C v. Ireland -- involved three women living in Ireland who traveled to Britain in 2005 for abortions. The Grand Chamber ruled against two of the women, whose reasons for seeking abortion did not involve a threat to their lives.
The court decided Ireland violated the "right to respect for her private life" of the third woman, who feared carrying her child to term might cause her cancer to come out of remission, according to the court's release. The Irish government did not provide the appropriate procedures for the woman to have an abortion, since the country's constitution protects the right to life of both the mother and her unborn child, the court said.
Roger Kiska, legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) in Europe, said in a written release, "[I]t's regrettable that Ireland lost on the third count despite such a lack of judicial record, physician consultation, or recourse to Irish courts."
ADF represented FRC in its brief filed with the court.
The chamber ordered Ireland to pay the woman the equivalent of 15,000 euros, which is about $19,600 in the United States.
Roe v. Wade is the 1973 opinion in which the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed state bans on abortion and, in conjunction with an accompanying decision, effectively legalized the procedure for any reason throughout all stages of pregnancy.
Contact: Tom Strode Source: BP Publish Date: December 21, 2010
Cincinnati Window Company Replaces Windows Shattered in Pro-Abortion Attack
Gilkey Windows in Cincinnati
In the wake of an act of pro-abortion violence, a Cincinnati window company has offered to replace the damaged windows at the home of Joe and Ann Scheidler, founders of the Pro-Life Action League.
On Thursday, December 2, the Scheidlers were awakened by the sound of shattering glass. They later discovered that someone had hurled two chunks of asphalt through their living room and dining room windows. Glass was all over the floor and outside on the front porch. One of the "missiles" was inside a plastic bag with an expletive-filled note for Joe Scheidler from self-identified "crazy feminist[s]." Click here to read the text of the note (warning: strong language).
"I have to admit it's a little unsettling," said Joe Scheidler, founder and president of the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League. "But I have never tried to hide where I live or keep my phone number a secret. I think you have to be accessible, even if that means some of your enemies might show up."
After reading the story of the window vandalism online, Mike Gilkey, owner of Gilkey Windows in Cincinnati and passionate pro-lifer, wanted to do something to help the Scheidlers.
"I was speechless when I got a call from Mr. Gilkey's office offering to replace our windows," said Ann Scheidler, vice president of the League. "And it's not just the broken windows -- he's going to replace all the windows in the living room and dining room. This is unbelievably generous."
Joe Scheidler had met the Gilkeys more than 20 years ago while giving a speech in Cincinnati. Gilkey Window Company has a showroom in Chicago Ridge, and the company has recently expanded into the market of replacement windows in school buildings, helping to reduce heating and cooling costs and create a healthy and green environment.
"We are so grateful to the Gilkey family and company," said Joe Scheidler. "I hope any pro-lifer who needs new windows or doors will turn to Gilkey. In fact they can come over to my house and see my new windows. After all, we're in the book!"
Contact: Stephanie Lewis Source: Pro-Life Action League Publish Date: December 22, 2010
January 1 may be the day for New Year's Resolutions, but December is the time where politicos and think tanks and activists start planning their new initiatives in a big way.
Having watched his own party take it on the chin--both at the federal AND state levels--you would anticipate that pro-abortion President Barack Obama is in the uncomfortable position of having to do some serious re-evaluation. Or, perhaps not, judging by a piece that ran in Politico--"President Obama 2.0: Becoming 'CEO of America'," by John Harris and James Hohmann.
They argue, convincingly, that it's not just that Team Obama has a weak bench. The first-string lacks many of the skill set successful White House teams have possessed before. (And Obama, himself, has very little real legislative experience and is learning executive skills on the fly.)
Given all that, the advice is to "discard the Congress-focused strategy of the first two years and coming up with new and more creative ways to exercise power and set the national agenda." Where to look for guidance?
"Presidential scholars and veterans of previous administrations from both parties point to five strategies past presidents have used to meet the challenge Obama is confronting now," write Harris and Hohmann. Let's look at three. Trust me, it's essentially blue smoke and mirrors--and executive orders.
On the one hand Obama is being counseled to avoid Capitol Hill/the legislative process by issuing executive orders. It cannot be good for us, or the babies, or the medically vulnerable when Obama is following his instincts which include enthusiastically advancing the agenda of his many pro-abortion allies.
On the other hand, he is advised to "co-opt" the GOP opposition by adding some token Republicans to his Administration. ("Obama's challenge is to make sure that wave [of "conservative anger and energy"] is a spent force by 2012 -- in part by letting conservatives think they have achieved some of what they want"). Obama may think the public is an unsophisticated as this recommendation assumes, but in an era of limitless communication, meaningless gestures have short shelf-lives.
He's also advised to follow in the footsteps of Bill Clinton and use the powers of the executive branch (in "legitimate ways," of course) to expressly serve his own political ends--aka make use of the two million people who serve the Executive Branch. This is just another way of saying take credit for everything under the sun that is good, a strategy that Clinton excelled at.
And, I almost forgot, Obama should also "Draw new lines -- with new ideas." Put another way, "focus on issues for which debate transcends traditional partisan terms."
But this is the same rigmarole that Obama served up running for the Presidency--and ever since. For us in particular, all we EVER hear is that if were "really pro-life" or "really concerned about reducing the number of abortions," we'd buy into one or another bogus "compromise." Or we would accept Obama's assurances that an executive order can neutralize/obviate/eliminate all the provisions of ObamaCare that promote abortion.
So, we may hear that Obama is re-tooling, but there is zero reason to believe that means he will take his foot off the abortion-enhancing accelerator.
Contact: Dave Andrusko Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: December 20, 2010
A New York nurse has lost her appeal of a court decision involving a work incident that she believes violated her conscience rights.
The Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has refused Nurse Kathy DeCarlo the right to sue for enforcement of the Church Amendment -- the federal law that protects healthcare workers against discrimination for their beliefs -- after she was threatened with disciplinary measures if she did not assist in a late-term abortion.
"Nurse DeCarlo had been forced by Mt. Sinai Hospital in Manhattan, her employer, to assist with a 22-week abortion -- a horrific experience which gives her nightmares to this day," reports Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney Steven F. Aden.
Steven Aden (ADF)Hospital administrators also attempted to coerce her into signing an agreement that she participate in future abortions, but the court has refused to apply the conscience-protection amendment, ruling that only the federal government has the right to do so.
"Unfortunately, the Obama administration has now taken the position that it will not enforce rights under the Church Amendment and has tried to set aside regulations passed in the Bush administration to give the Church Amendments more teeth and to protect pro-life healthcare workers," the attorney laments.
Meanwhile, a state court lawsuit in which DeCarlo requests damages is still pending. Aden says ADF will back the nurse until she and other pro-life healthcare workers are vindicated and their right of religious conscience is protected.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 21, 2010
A campaign against late-term abortions in Wisconsin has proved victorious, and one supporter of the effort feels it should be an encouragement to the rest of the country.
After an almost two-year struggle to convince the University of Wisconsin to drop its plans to perform late-term abortions at a medical center in Madison, the school agreed and now says it will also refrain from doing them elsewhere. Virginia Zignego of Pro-Life Wisconsin tells OneNewsNow it took a number of approaches to convince the school, including the participation of thousands in prayer vigils during that period.
Virginia Zignego"We have aired hundreds of pro-life television commercials in the Madison area, which emphasized the humanity of the pre-born," she reports. "Tens of thousands of people signed a pro-life petition, and hundreds of people boycotted the Madison Surgery Center."
She believes the success in Madison should warm the hearts of pro-life individuals throughout the rest of the country.
"Overwhelmingly, Americans have shown that they are more and more pro-life, and this really shows the impact that average people can have when they stand together," the Wisconsin pro-lifer notes.
After much success for the pro-life cause throughout the state, Zignego reports that only one late-term abortion center remains in Milwaukee and continues to kill viable babies.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 21, 2010
A Georgia woman has filed suit in federal court for the right to assisted suicide.
The New Jersey-based Final Exit Network, which is alleged to have helped people commit suicide, stopped its activities in Georgia when four members were arrested in connection with a June 2008 suicide. The four are charged with violating Georgia law in the death of John Delmer, 58, of Cumming, who died of asphyxiation after inhaling helium in the presence of two of them.
Rita Marker, an attorney and founder of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, now tells OneNewsNow that 43-year-old Susan Caldwell, who has a serious medical issue, wants the help of the Final Exit Network as she seeks to die.
"The woman...has Huntington's Chorea -- which is really a devastating illness, without question," she acknowledges. "But she has now filed suit in federal court asking that an 'exit guide' can be assigned to her."
Rita Marker (International Tasf Force on Euthanasia and Assited Suicide)According to the Final Exit Network, exit guides assist people through suicides. The arrests of the four Network guides two years ago prevented Caldwell from proceeding with her plans.
Marker says the lawsuit is dangerous -- and not just because it is filed in federal court. "This makes it clear that if indeed the court were to agree with her, this would permit anybody, anyplace, anytime to be involved in someone else's suicide just saying it's a compassionate thing to do," says the Task Force spokeswoman.
The court could dismiss the case -- or it could issue a ruling, which would send it on a path to the U.S. Supreme Court. Whether that court would accept it, of course, would be a totally different matter since it usually rules on only a handful of cases each year.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 21, 2010
The American Life League (ALL) has issued a report linking one of the nation's leading Catholic hospital chains with sterilization. Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) is the parent company of St. Joseph Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, where an abortion took place late 2009.
The ALL report was made public as Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix awaited an assurance from CHW officials that the Arizona hospital would never again perform a direct abortion, and that the institution would comply with Catholic moral teachings. Bishop Omsted has threatened to withdraw the "Catholic" designation from St. Joseph hospital if he does not receive such assurances by December 21.
In addition to the hospital in Phoenix, CHW operates institutions in Arizona, California, and Nevada. In researching CHW, the ALL found that:
* CHW institutions have provided referrals for tubal ligations and vasectomies;
* Health-care coverage at CHW institutions include provisions for contraception;
* and CHW institutions have provide grants to organizations that promote abortion, homosexuality, and contraception;
"At least one CHW member hospital promotes the nation's largest abortion chain, Planned Parenthood, on its web site, and another lists the provision of contraceptives as a service," the report states. "Twelve CHW members (as of 2001) performed tubal ligations," and "20 members currently refer for vasectomies by staff physicians on their web sites."
A story in Corpus Christi's Caller.com yesterday about a Planned Parenthood breaking ties with the national organization dropped an abortion bomb:
The local chapter of Planned Parenthood will drop its affiliation with the national organization and take a new name beginning Jan. 1.
Clients shouldn't notice any changes in prices or services other than the office changing its name to Family Planning of the Coastal Bend, CEO Amanda Stukenberg said.
Planned Parenthood wanted to standardize its operations at all of its agencies nationwide, Stukenberg said.
That included a new requirement for all affiliates to perform abortions, something the Coastal Bend office didn't see as necessary because of abortion services offered by local doctors, Stukenberg said.
"We have never provided abortions," she said. "Our position is that if that is a need in your community, fine. There are far greater needs in our area than abortion. We feel that women here have options. We don't need to duplicate services."
It's unclear how many Planned Parenthood affiliates are following the local chapter's lead. National officials couldn't be reached for comment Monday.
There's no reason to think the affiliate misunderstood PP's mandate, or else the separation would not have gotten this far.
This news has major ramifications across the United States.
RU486 medical abortions will skyrocket, for starters, particularly in PP locations not zoned for in- or out-patient surgery, and along with them webcam (telemed) abortions – if those aren't stopped on the state or federal level.
All nonaborting PPs previously considered "feeders" will now become stopping places.
I imagine that inside the industry, abortion wars are breaking out even as I type, as PP makes a major power play to wipe out independent abortion mills.
This is huge, devastating for babies. Statistics bear out that the more abortion mills there are, the more abortions there are.
Contact: Jill Stanek Source: JillStanek.com Publish Date: December 21, 2010
PPFA received $363 million in government grants and contracts
As dreadful as the contents are, Planned Parenthood's 2008-2009 Annual Report makes for compelling reading. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PPFA_Annual_Report_08-09-FINAL-12-10-10.pdf]
Having gone through it twice, and aided immeasurably by the work of people who are far more knowledgeable about PPFA than I am, let's see what can be said about "The Promise of Change: Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual report 2008-2009."
Some of the highlights, so to speak, include…
What is missing--the number of abortions (and the number of adoption referrals and prenatal clients), customary in prior years. Perhaps that's because, as we reported back in September, PPFA's Factsheet's revealed that abortions had jumped a whopping 6% to 324,008 while the number of adoption referrals had dropped by more than 10%. We don't have reliable national count yet for 2008, but considered as a percentage of the latest national annual abortion figure the Guttmacher Institute reported for 2005, this would make Planned Parenthood responsible for 26.8% of all abortions performed in the U.S. This easily cements their place as America's top abortion chain. [See pie charts below.]
*The massive amounts of money PPFA receives from the government (in the form of grants and contracts): $363 million. While PPFA's 2008-2009 Annual Report does not break out what portion of that $363 came from the FEDERAL government, the attached chart does show the correlation between increased government funding to PPFA and increased abortions conducted by PPFA.
*We see that PPFA was energized by the results of the November 2008 elections. "With the election of President Barack Obama, a self-described pro-choice President, Planned Parenthood launched reinvigorated advocacy campaign for ambitious policies" to…
"achieve affordable, quality, comprehensive reproductive health care as part of health care reform" ; "expand access to reproductive health care through Medicaid in advance of health care reform"; "increase government funding for family planning programs": and [my description] stifle the conscience right of health care workers who oppose (among other things) abortion.
*Many pro-lifers may not realize the determination with which PPFA seeks to massively expand abortion internationally, particularly in countries that have protective laws. In the Annual Report we read (to pick four examples)
(1) "In Kenya, we worked with advocates who developed a grassroots campaign to increase public support for decriminalizing abortion."
(2) "Latin America and the Caribbean, we offered training for health center security and tracking groups hostile to women's health and family planning."
(3) "In northern Nigeria, we overcame the reluctance of a large religious organization to introduce basic reproductive health care through its more than 100 health centers. Now, more than 60 of those centers offer birth control and refer women to private medical providers if they need a safe abortion."
(4) "We worked with the Obama administration to protect women's health and promote sexual and reproductive rights around the world, including overturning the global gag rule [Mexico City Policy] and restoring U.S. reproductive health and safe motherhood funding to the United Nations Population Fund [UNFPA].
There's much more that you can read at http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PPFA_Annual_Report_08-09-FINAL-12-10-10.pdf, so let's finish up with two other salient points.
First, under the category 'Agents," the report lists Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who received the PPFA Margaret Sanger Award (named after its founder). "You may remember that under persistent questioning from pro-life Rep. Chris Smith Clinton finally admitted the truth. "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health," Clinton told Smith. "And reproductive health includes access to abortion that I believe should be safe, legal, and rare."
Second, PPFA's power within pro-abortion circles grows and grows. After a series of recent mergers and disaffiliations, the group now has 95 affiliates. The group is said to have had more than double that number in 1979. Many of the larger, more profitable affiliates have gobbled up the smaller ones as the organization becomes leaner and quite literally, as the record number of abortions shows, meaner.
Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: National Right to Life Publish Date: December 18, 2010
Failed to meet with young teen 24 hours before performing abortion
Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio Region violated a state law requiring "informed consent" before performing an abortion on a 14-year-old girl in March 2004, according to an Ohio court.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins says the ruling by Judge Jody Luebbers shows why the American taxpayers should stop funding Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider.
"Judge Jody Luebbers stood up to the nation's largest abortion provider, ruling that Planned Parenthood defied state laws by not reporting suspected child abuse and not providing a mandatory counseling session – including offering pregnancy options – 24 hours prior to the abortion. Despite these kinds of abuses, Planned Parenthood is a billion-dollar-a-year organization, raking in approximately $350 million annually in state and federal grants," said Perkins in a news release.
"Once again, we see how Planned Parenthood has failed to protect the health and safety of women. And as we can see from this case, procuring an abortion is more important to Planned Parenthood than following the law on something as important as protecting young women from sexual predators," Perkins continued.
"Isn't it time to stop taxpayer funding of such a group? We call on the new Congress to act quickly on legislation introduced by Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, a bill that would prohibit Title X family planning dollars being awarded to groups that provide abortion as family planning, such as Planned Parenthood," said Perkins.
The ruling is the latest development in a civil suit brought by the parents of the girl, who became pregnant by her 22-year-old soccer coach. The coach then brought the girl to the Planned Parenthood clinic to abort the baby.
The coach, John Haller, was later convicted of sexual battery and served three years in prison.
According to a Dec. 10 news release from the Alliance Defense Fund, the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas ruled that Planned Parenthood failed to meet with the underage mother at least 24 hours before performing the abortion. The clinic performed the abortion the day the girl came to the clinic.
According to the decision, Planned Parenthood, "breached their duty…to have a physician, at least 24 hours prior to Plaintiff Jane Roe's abortion, meet with Plaintiff Jane Roe in a private setting to be certain that Plaintiff Jane Roe understood the information necessary for her to make an informed decision about whether to have an abortion."
"The court made the right decision at this point in the case, and we look forward to ultimate success once the trial is over," said Alliance Defense Fund Legal Counsel Matt Bowman in the news release.
"The health and safety of young girls is more important than Planned Parenthood's desire to perform an abortion," said the ADF-affiliated attorney, Brian Hurley, representing the parents. "Ohio law mandates that Planned Parenthood meet with someone seeking an abortion in advance to be certain that she has all the information she needs to make a decision. That didn't happen."
In their civil suit, the parents also allege that Planned Parenthood failed to inform them, or notify civil authorities, as state law requires in cases of statutory rape.
An issue raised by the case reached the Ohio Supreme Court in 2009. The court ruled that the parents did not have the right to obtain the clinic's records of "confidential child abuse reports or medical records of other minors" during pre-trial discovery.
According to the supreme court's opinion summary, "a police investigation revealed that the teen had been sexually abused and impregnated by her soccer coach, John Haller; that the phone number provided to Planned Parenthood by Jane had been Haller's cell phone number; and that the person from whom the clinic had obtained consent for the abortion was Haller, not Jane's father. Haller was later convicted on multiple counts of sexual battery."
The case, Roe v. Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio Region, is scheduled to be tried on Feb. 7.
Contact: Brian Fitzpatrick Source: WorldNetDaily Publish Date: December 18, 2010
Attorneys are expecting a Florida judge to contribute another favorable ruling in their fight against Barack Obama's healthcare reform law.
Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of the Liberty University's Law School, says Judge Roger Vinson of the U.S. Northern District Court has indicated he is likely to reject the law and "even the scorecard" on legal challenges to the law.
Matt Staver"Based upon what the judge in Florida has written before, he was pretty sarcastic and critical of the administration and how this healthcare bill came about," Staver accounts. "Some of the comments that he's made during this argument lead me to [believe] that he's going to rule the same way that the recent ruling came down in Virginia,." In that case, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson decided Congress has no authority to force people to purchase health insurance. (See earlier story)
The Liberty Counsel founder suggests that forcing the nation's citizens to purchase healthcare is equivalent to a government-issued mandate that its citizens purchase broccoli because it is a healthy food.
But several of the cases that are being presented against ObamaCare are headed to the Supreme Court, where "they may be ultimately argued together on the same day," Staver explains. "They're not going to be consolidated because each case has something different."
He believes the Supreme Court will ultimately decide to strike down the healthcare reform law enacted earlier this year.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 20, 2010
Police have posted a surveillance camera at a notorious abortion clinic in Rockford, Illinois.
Local pro-life warrior Kevin Rilott tells OneNewsNow it was pro-life demonstrators who requested that the city set up the camera.
"There have been a number of incidents happen at this abortion clinic," he shares. "[In one] a pro-lifer was assaulted -- and the abortion clinic itself has 12 video cameras covering every square inch of the block around there. But when the police went to get the video from the clinic, for some reason they [claimed they] just forgot to start all 12 of their cameras that morning."
Kevin Rilott 2In another incident, says Rilott, two men with a woman entering the clinic grabbed the woman, knocked her to the ground when she sought out pro-life counselors, and dragged her several feet into the clinic. Police were called.
"The young woman was afraid to talk," says the pro-life activist, "and they asked the clinic for the video of what happened -- and of course, that morning they forgot to start their video cameras again."
Rilott contends that in that process, the abortion clinic is covering up crimes. He adds that abortion clinic workers have accused pro-lifers of doing things Rilott claims they have not done.
The police surveillance camera is mounted high on a pole and will be operated 24 hours a day, every day of the year.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 19, 2010
Operation Rescue has uncovered questionable information about a late-term abortionist's medical license application in Maryland.
LeRoy Carhart recently opened a late-term abortuary in Maryland -- though he neglected to mention in his application last September the true nature of his medical practice and his two-decade-long association with abortion clinics.
Cheryl Sullinger of Operation Rescue tells OneNewsNow information has surfaced showing the abortionist identifies his medical practice in Nebraska under a different title -- "Bellevue Health/Emergency Clinic, Inc." In fact, according to the pro-life activist, Carhart does not even mention abortion and leads one to believe he is an emergency room physician and a university professor.
"So we believe that he has sanitized his application in order to obscure from the medical board the true nature of his abortion business," she suggests.
Cheryl Sullinger (Operation Rescue)Sullinger says the abortionist omitted from his application the work he did for Wichita late-term abortionist George Tiller, as well as other fragments of his work history at abortion clinics in eight states. So Operation Rescue has documented five of Carhart's Wichita patients who had to be hospitalized within one year following an abortion procedure.
"We also documented the death of Christin Gilbert, who was also a Carhart patient who unnecessarily died because of inadequate care that was given her during a third-trimester abortion," the pro-lifer adds.
Her group has filed a complaint with the medical licensing board in Maryland, asking its members to reconsider licensing LeRoy Carhart to continue his practice.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 20, 2010
Earlier this week, the Washington Post ran an article about a new study disputing the contention that abortions increase the risk of mental-health problems among women. This study, conducted by Julia Steinberg of UC–San Francisco and Lawrence Finer of the Guttmacher Institute, appeared in the October 2010 issue of Social Science and Medicine. It is somewhat surprising that the authors decided to publish this study in an independent, peer-reviewed journal.
All too often, researchers who support legal abortion are content to have their analyses appear in the Guttmacher Institute's own publications.
The primary purpose of this particular study was to discredit a previous study conducted by Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green University. Coleman used the same dataset -- the National Comorbidity Study -- to document that women who reported having had an abortion were at increased risk for anxiety, mood disorders, and substance abuse. In their report, the authors claim Coleman's study had methodological problems, and that they were unable to replicate her findings.
Unfortunately, the Post failed to report that Steinberg and Finer's study has some methodological shortcomings of its own. Most importantly, Steinberg and Finer use a much shorter time frame with which to analyze women's psychological health. Coleman's study reflected twelve-month prevalence of mental-health effects; Steinberg and Finer's looked at 30-day prevalence. This poses two problems. First, it reduces the number of data points in the study and therefore makes it more difficult to obtain a statistically significant finding. Second, a significant percentage of women may not suffer psychologically until months after the abortion has taken place.
This is the second time in two months that the Washington Post has given a prestigious platform to research calling into question whether obtaining an abortion increases a woman's risk of psychological problems. But interestingly, during this past year alone, studies finding evidence that women who have had abortions are at greater risk for a range of mental-health problems -- including post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, alcoholism, and drug abuse -- have appeared in such journals as The Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, Journal of Pregnancy, and The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.
Beyond this, there is a substantial body of peer-reviewed literature about the negative impact that abortion has on the health of women. Unfortunately, this research has been all but ignored by the Post -- and the rest of the mainstream media.
Editor's note. The previous appeared at National Review Online's "The Corner"
Michael J. New is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alabama and a fellow at the Witherspoon Institute.
Contact: Michael J. New Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: December 18, 2010
Pro-life advocates are warning an omnibus spending bill of more than $1.2 trillion would expand federal funding of abortion.
Congress has failed to pass appropriations legislation for the various federal agencies in 2011, so the Democratic leadership in the Senate is pushing adoption of the all-encompassing spending measure before the end of the lame-duck session. Republicans, who will take control of the House of Representatives and have a stronger minority in the Senate when the new Congress convenes Jan. 4, are promoting what is known as a continuing resolution that would extend funding for government operations through Feb. 18.
The Family Research Council pointed to several provisions in the Senate's omnibus proposal it says would increase government support of abortion. At his weblog, Tom McClusky, vice president of FRC Action, included the following among pro-life concerns in a bill of more than 1,900 pages:
-- There will be $750 million in the Prevention and Public Health Fund for what McClusky describes as a "slush fund" that can be dipped into by organizations that do abortions.
-- Funding for "international population programming" will increase by $62 million under a presidential administration that rescinded the ban on funds to overseas groups that perform or promote abortions.
-- Money for Title X, the federal government's family planning program, will grow by $10 million from last year. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the country's leading abortion provider, is the No. 1 recipient of Title X funds.
-- Government money will continue to be used to underwrite abortions in the District of Columbia.
In addition, McClusky said there will be more than $1 billion in funding for the new health-care reform law, which will permit subsidies for insurance plans that cover abortions.
Pro-lifers received some encouraging news Dec. 15, when it was announced Democrats and Republicans had agreed on a Department of Defense authorization bill that would exclude a section allowing privately funded abortions to be performed in military hospitals in this country and abroad. A prohibition on such abortions has been in place for 14 years.
Republicans in the Senate had twice blocked floor action on the Defense authorization measure when it included the abortion provision and repeal of the ban on open homosexuals serving in the military. Opponents of the homosexual prohibition -- which is known as Don't Ask, Don't Tell -- are seeking to rescind it in a free-standing bill.
Contact: Tom Strode Source: Baptist Press
Publish Date: December 16, 2010
The latest annual report from Planned Parenthood (PP) for 2008-2009 is revealing on several fronts.
One, it's the first annual report in recent years not to include actual numbers in several key categories: number of abortions, adoption referrals and prenatal services.
PP released a fact sheet on its 2008 activity in September showing an increase in abortions (from 305,310 in 2007 to 324,008 in 2008) and a sizable drop in adoption referrals (from 4,912 in 2007 to 2,405 in 2008). The 2007 report is found here.
Why PP would change reporting formats now is open to speculation. Perhaps the abortion numbers for 2009 were even higher, and the adoption referrals even lower. Unless it releases a fuller report in the future, we won't know.
One trend worth noting is that in recent years as the amount of government money going into PP's coffers increases (i.e. taxpayer funding), so does the number of abortions. Members of Congress are absolutely right to pursue a bill defunding this group, which is one of the nation's leading perpetrators of abortion.
The 2009 report also highlights PP's involvement in promoting sexually graphic sex education.
Page 7 features two high school-age students, one male and one female, putting a condom on a fake penis. Page 10 shows a coed high school-age class listing combinations of how different body parts can unite in intimacy. And, Page 6 promotes the work of two fashion designers who created designer condoms for a New York City premiere, sponsored by PP.
That's what your tax dollars are supporting at Planned Parenthood. It's time to defund.
Contact: Carrie Gordon Earll Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: Decmeber 16, 2010
The European Court of Human Rights has struck a blow to Ireland's law against abortion.
The complaint, which has been dubbed the "Roe v. Wade of Europe," was filed by three Irish women -- identified as "A," "B," and "C" -- who sued to abolish the country's constitutional amendment that protects innocent life. The court ultimately ruled that A and B's rights were not violated, but the rights of C were because doctors had said she would die without an abortion.
Joseph Meaney (Human Life International)"Basically, it's the European Court of Human Rights trying to impose the permission of abortion on Ireland, which is another case of European institutions trying to trample on local laws when they tend to be pro-life," contends Joseph Meaney of Human Life International (HLI).
The court decided that Ireland should provide a more clear procedure to determine the risk of a mother's life and her access to abortion, but Meaney believes that decision is wrong as it ultimately says Irish law provides for abortion to save the life of the mother.
"It's actually a misinterpretation because...the Irish constitution says...that both the child and the mother have an equal right to life. Therefore, one has to try and save both," the pro-lifer explains. "It does not give any permission for abortion because abortion is never a treatment."
Meaney goes on to suggest that Ireland ought to ignore the court's ruling, just as Italy did when the court ordered that crosses be removed from school classrooms. In addition, he points out that the European Convention on Human Rights contains no right to abortion.
Contact: Charlie Butts Source: OneNewsNow Publish Date: December 17, 2010
So much of what we report on is because our kindly readers forward me stories. "When is twins too many" appeared last Friday in Canada's National Post, and it is a sobering reminder that just because we haven't read a lot about something, that doesn't mean it's not taking place.
"Fetal reductions are most commonly conducted by inserting an ultrasound-guided needle through the mother's abdomen and into the uterus, injecting a potassium chloride solution into the chosen fetus or fetuses, stopping their hearts," writes Tom Blackwell of the National Post. "They are typically performed between the ninth and 12th week, often with the most accessible or smallest fetuses marked for reduction, unless one is abnormal."
The difference now a days appears to be that the old justification--a woman carrying many babies is more likely to lose them all, so "reducing" the number is not as awful as pro-lifers say it is--is long gone. In classic slippery slope fashion,
Increasingly twins are being "reduced" to singletons, something that formerly was almost unheard of.
The number of such "selective reductions" is growing, not for medical reasons, but for socio-economic/lifestyle reasons.
Blackwell's story uses the pregnancy of a Toronto-area business executive and her husband as the hook for his story. When she subsequently aborts, she makes no apologies.
"I'm absolutely sure I did the right thing," she said. "I had read some online forums; people were speaking of grieving, feeling a sense of loss. I didn't feel any of that. Not that I'm a cruel, bitter person ... I just didn't feel I would be able to care for (twins) in a way that I wanted to."
The most interesting comments come two sources. One is a woman whose support group counsels couples over the loss of their unborn babies.
"She said she has heard from a number of people in the past several months who were seeking twin reductions to lessen their burden as parents, something she had never encountered before," Blackwell writes. "Though she strives to help them in a nonjudgmental way, she admits the trend 'saddens and scares' her. 'Is this a healthy thing? We have to ask these questions: Where does it stop? When do children become a commodity?'
The other is from Mark Evans, whose involvement goes back to the early days of "fetal reduction." Once upon a time he "believed reductions were ethically warranted only for triplets or higher-order multiple pregnancies," Blackwell writes. But now "he said the evidence now suggests that reducing twins to a singleton leads, on average, to better outcomes."
Better outcomes?
According to Evans, aborting one of the two twins now makes up 5% to 7% of the total "reductions," a percentage that can likely only increase "especially among the 40-somethings."
Evans uses the same defense of eliminating one of two unborn babies as when he justified selectively aborting a number of children: "In North America, couples can choose to have an abortion for any reason," he noted.
If there is any good news in this story, it is that when the Toronto-area couple decided to selectively abort, "Most obstetrician-gynecologists she and her husband contacted wanted no part of a twin reduction."
Contact: Dave Andrusko Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: December 16, 2010
