Headlines for November 25th

     

Will advocates of embryonic stem-cell research admit their errors?

Pro-life Democrats predict broad religious exemption from contraception mandate

Is abortion ever necessary?

Critic points out media bias against adult stem cells

SF picking on pro-life centers

25 states now offering pro-life tags, promoting adoption

Is abstinence education working?

Bad news for abortuaries

GA personhood 'an uphill battle'?

Advocacy Begins to Expand WA Assisted Suicide Law

Pro-Life Democrats Expect Obama Administration to Issue Final Rule That Will Allow Religious Exemption

Thomas More Society Gets Preliminary Injunction to Allow Prayer at Abortion Clinic

Incoming Spanish Prime Minister Promised to Repeal Abortion Law and Other Anti-Family Policies of Socialist Government

Study: Some brain injury patients misdiagnosed

Four More Texas Abortionists Face Discipline for Violations Uncovered by Operation Rescue

News links for November 18th, 2011

News links for November 18th, 2011


Pro-lifers decry Girl Scouts ties with feminist groups

Advocacy Begins to Expand WA Assisted Suicide Law

New Children's Book Celebrates Adoption

317 Texas Women Harmed by Abortion File Brief Supporting Enforcement of Texas' Informed Consent Law

National Campaign Urges Gov. Cuomo to Approve NY 'Choose Life' License Plate

Chen Guangcheng's report released on China's forced abortion and sterilization

D.C. Abortions, Taxpayers, and the Unborn

Planned Parenthood 'stealing from the public'

Pro-life centers optimistic in 'culture of life'

Defending women's 'right to know'

Planned Parenthood throws in the towel

Austin Relents on Pregnancy Center Signs

YouTube Video Details Realities of RU-486

'Personhood' defeat not a serious setback for pro-life movement

    

Representatives of the Thomas More Society and the Pro-Life Action League say the defeat of Mississippi's "personhood" initiative does not mark a serious defeat for the pro-life movement.

"The number one argument we hear, is that this is the 'silver bullet' that is going to overturn Roe v. Wade and end abortion in America. I'm not convinced that is at all the case," said Pro-Life Action League Executive Director Eric Scheidler.

"If one were to be passed, would it survive a federal court challenge? There's really no good reason to think it would," Scheidler told CNA on Nov. 11.

The Pro-Life Action League's executive director supports the intentions of the "personhood" movement, which seeks to end abortion by extending legal rights to all humans from the moment of conception.

But he is skeptical about the personhood approach. So were Mississippi's Catholic bishops, who did not take a position either for or against the recent personhood initiative "Proposition 26." 

Supporters of that proposition lost their bid to amend Mississippi's constitution, when 58 percent of voters opposed it on Nov. 8.

But even if such a measure succeeded, Scheidler noted that it could only serve to overturn Roe v. Wade if a majority of Supreme Court justices were willing to question that ruling.

Without such a majority, the court could end up re-affirming a constitutional "right" to abortion as it did in the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

"It seems unlikely that Justice Anthony Kennedy would join a five-vote majority in upholding the personhood of the unborn," Scheidler observed. Justice Kennedy upheld a right to abortion in the 1992 case.

Some personhood proponents have told Scheidler that such calculations show a lack of faith. But he pointed out that God calls believers to be prudent and careful.

"God gives us the wisdom to look at the tools available to us, in the time in which we live, and choose what we think are the most appropriate tools to use for the task at hand," he reflected.

In the view of Thomas More Society Special Counsel Paul B. Linton, personhood proposals are the wrong tools for the task of ending abortion.

"No justice on the Supreme Court – including the justices who dissented in 'Roe,' and Justices Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito – has ever expressed the view that the unborn child is, or should be regarded as, a 'person' as that word is used in the 14th Amendment," Linton said in a Nov. 11 interview.

"Whatever you, or I, or anyone else, thinks about whether unborn children should be regarded as persons, what's important is what the justices think," Linton pointed out. "And not one of them has ever expressed the view that the unborn child should be regarded as a 'person.'"

"That's why there's no support on the court for personhood – they just don't think the Federal Constitution addresses the issue one way or the other."

Even the court's most conservative justices, he said, view the Constitution as neutral on the matter of personhood and conception.

"Justice Antonin Scalia filed a partial dissent in the 'Casey' case in 1992," Linton said, recalling a dissent joined by others including Justice Clarence Thomas.

"In the opening paragraph, he said: the states may allow abortion on demand, if they so choose, but the Constitution does not require them to do so."

Linton also said it was "naive" for personhood supporters to imagine they could "force the court to revisit" the abortion question.

"You cannot force the court to do anything. Their jurisdiction is almost entirely discretionary, and it would be with respect to any case like this. So I don't see a case like this even getting up to the Supreme Court."

"If you had a state that passed a Mississippi-style measure, and it were challenged and struck down by a federal district court, that could be appealed to the court of appeals for that particular district," he explained.

"However, once you're past that initial appeal, you no longer have a right to further review. You can only seek discretionary review from the Supreme Court."

And Linton shares Scheidler's view that a review of Roe v. Wade might end badly in the current court.

"I think the court would reaffirm 'Roe.' It would be the fourth time for them to reaffirm it."

Linton also criticized personhood supporters' inconsistency on the question of what their proposals would actually do if passed.

"Does this 'personhood' language have any effect in and of itself on state law? Or does this require the legislature to enact specific pieces of legislation to give it effect?" he asked.

"That's unclear. We don't know if it's self-executing or if it requires some sort of implementing legislation. If it's not self-executing, then what does it do? Does it do anything?"

"No one really knows what these amendments would do," said Linton. "And the supporters of these measures don't seem to have a consistent position on that."

Despite these concerns, the push to enact personhood has momentum. Alabama State Senator Phil Williams is already working on a similar proposal in his state legislature.

Scheidler remains unconvinced. "Maybe a better method is needed," he said.

"Maybe we need to bring people first to recognize the humanity of the child at 20 weeks, at 10 weeks, at 5 weeks, and save all the babies we can right now." Such measures, he said, have been "successful in backing the abortion industry into a corner in many states, especially since the 2010 election."

Scheidler says these incremental methods are not a form of compromise, but a realistic way of working toward the pro-life movement's goal.

"We are all fighting for the same goal, which is an end to abortion," he said.

He hopes activists focused on personhood can maintain good relations with those who choose other strategies.

"The folks working for personhood, and those in the pro-life movement who have expressed opposition to these measures, all share a common goal," Scheidler said.

"If we can't agree on that, then I think the movement's in big trouble."

"But we can. We need to respect the fact that there are going to be differing opinions about the best strategy to use, to achieve that common goal."

Source: CNA/EWTN News

Supreme Court recusals not unusual

    

While calls continue for Supreme Court Associate Justice Elena Kagan to recuse herself from upcoming arguments over ObamaCare, experts say recusals are not uncommon.

Kagan's fellow Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor had to recuse herself from a climate-change case in the previous term. Hans Von Spakovsy of The Heritage Foundation explains.
 
 "This was the American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut case [Docket No. 10-174]. The Supreme Court was reviewing the decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and Sotomayor was on the Second Circuit when that decision was made," he shares. "[Recusal] happens not that rarely."
 
 Spakovksy agrees that Kagan should recuse herself from hearing arguments over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka "ObamaCare"), based on the fact that Kagan's impartiality can be questioned with her having worked as solicitor general when the bill was debated in Congress and signed into law. Terry Jeffrey, author and editor of CNSNews.com, agrees.
 
"Thurgood Marshall, who was solicitor general of the United States -- the same position that Elena Kagan was and for whom Elena Kagan clerked -- recused himself from many cases that came before the Supreme Court," Jeffrey tells OneNewsNow.
 
 The journalist explains that U.S. Code Title 28, Section 28 "dictates when a Supreme Court justice must recuse from a case when their impartiality can be reasonably questioned, and if they ever expressed an opinion about the merits of the case while in governmental employment."
 
 Prior to becoming solicitor general, Thurgood Marshall worked for the NAACP.

Contact: Chris Woodward
Source: OneNewsNow

New York's high rate of disabled deaths prompts outcry

    

Reports that one in six disabled persons in New York over the last decade have died from preventable causes has drawn sharp criticism from local media and disability advocates.

"We are devaluing these people," Bobby Schindler of the Life and Hope Network told CNA, and "we are seeing" this kind of treatment "rationalized and justified everyday."

 The New York Times outlined death reports on Nov. 5 of developmentally disabled persons throughout the last 10 years. The newspaper found that those receiving care in New York died from unnatural causes at what appears to be an unusually high rate.

One in six deaths, around 1,200 total, within state and privately run homes were blamed on unnatural or unknown causes. These numbers compare with one in 25 in Massachusetts and Connecticut which are two of the few states that track similar data.

 The New York case files suggest that the deaths were caused by neglect and could have been easily prevented, as they involved scenarios of disabled persons drowning, choking on food or falling down stairs.

 The paper profiled a story of 41-year-old James Michael Taylor, whose evening bath in 2005 "became a death sentence" when a caretaker placed him in a tub, turned on the water and left the room.

 Taylor, a quadriplegic who had the ability of a newborn to lift his head, slowly drowned in the next 15 minutes as the water rose over his body. 

Editors from Albany's Times Union newspaper called the situation a "disgrace," especially given that the state spends $10 billion a year in attempt to take care of the developmentally disabled. 

"New York should be doing more than just starting to catch up to other states," the editors said in a Nov. 9 blog post. "Its system should be a national model."

 In an interview with CNA, Bobby Schindler—whose sister Terri Schiavo died of starvation in 2005 after her husband won the right in court to remove her feeding tube—said that the figures reflect society's growing callousness toward the disability community.

"It's always really disturbed and troubled me that because a person's physical appearance changes, because a person isn't able to do all the things an able bodied person can do, somehow their life is devalued," he said.

"We saw this in Terri's case," Schindler added. "She was simply a woman with a disability and something that would have been thought of as barbaric not even that long ago happens every day and is ordinary today, sadly enough."

 Schindler founded the Life and Hope Network soon after Schiavo's death, which has given legal help over the last several years to more than 1,000 families of disabled persons facing similar issues.

Source: CNA

Report suggests US funds illegally promoted abortion in Kenya

     

An investigation into U.S. funds given to Kenya during the country's 2010 constitutional referendum suggests that the Obama administration gave $400,000 to an organization that promoted increased abortion access in the country.

Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health and Human Rights, said that the report "raises red flags" about the use of U.S. taxpayer money in foreign countries.

Rep. Smith argued that "at a minimum the Obama Administration ignored" the Siljander Amendment, an annually renewed law that prohibits U.S. foreign assistance funds from being used to lobby for or against abortion in other countries.

An investigation into the use of U.S. taxpayer money in Kenya surrounding the constitutional referendum was requested in May 2010 by Smith, as well as by Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress that works to improve the accountability of the federal government, conducted the investigation and released a report on Nov. 14 detailing its findings.

The report indicated that the U.S. Agency for International Development gave $400,000 to the International Development Law Organization to offer analyses to aid those working to draft and finalize Kenya's new constitution.

According to the report, the International Development Law Organization gave "advice on the issues of fetal rights and abortion, though the draft had not mentioned either issue" at that point.

The organization suggested that the Committee of Experts – those charged with drafting the constitution –  "consider adding language to make clear that the fetus lacks constitutional standing, and that the rights of women under these articles therefore take priority."

The organization also gave examples of countries in which acknowledging a fetal right to life has posed an obstacle to abortion access. It suggested that Kenya may wish to take measures to protect "the legal right of access to abortion."

One way to do so, it said, would be to clarify in the constitution that "a person is a human being who has been born."

Congressman Smith criticized the Obama administration's decision to fund the International Development Law Organization.

"If this isn't lobbying, what is?" he asked, noting that the organization continues to receive American taxpayer money to help create laws to implement the constitution.

Smith acknowledged the importance of political reform in Kenya, where approximately 1,300 people were killed and tens of thousands more displaced in violent clashes surrounding the country's 2007 elections.

"However, this needed reform should not be used by pro-abortion groups funded by the Obama Administration to rewrite the pro-life laws of Kenya," he said.

Source: CNA

Geron Abandons Embryonic Stem Cell Research!

     

This is huge. Geron, which has spent many years touting its embryonic stem cell program as the future of regenerative medicine, is abandoning the field.  From the Washington Post story:

The company doing the first government-approved test of embryonic stem cell therapy is discontinuing further stem cell work, a move with stark implications for a field offering hope of future medicines for conditions with inadequate or no current treatments.

And, there's a bias penalty flag on the field!  Geron's decision does not provide "stark implications" given the tremendous advances made in ethical stem cell research, such as adult, induced pluripotent stem cell, umbilical cord stem cell, direct reprogramming from one type of cell to another, etc.  Back to the story:

Geron Corp., a pioneer in stem cell research that has been testing a spinal cord injury treatment, said late Monday that it's halting development of its stem cell programs to conserve funds. It is seeking partners to take on the programs' assets and is laying off much of its staff…In a statement, the company said the decision to narrow its focus "was made after a strategic review of the costs, … timelines and clinical, manufacturing and regulatory complexities associated with the company's research and clinical-stage assets."

Gobbledygook.

I am sorry, but this momentous decision deserves far more attention than a relatively short story in the business section. The media has been utterly fawning in its promotion of embryonic stem cell research for more than ten years, and still often reports that it is the best hope for regenerative treatments, when that is clearly no longer true.  Indeed, the media has been so in the tank that it has often ignored far superior results from ethical approaches, as I have repeatedly detailed over the years.

That being so, Geron and the media have an obligation to explain the why of this story in some detail and without spin. Was it the recent European ruling banning the patenting of embryonic stem cell products (about which I wrote) a factor?  Was its human trial a disappointment?  If it is out of money, why aren't venture capitalists more willing to invest more in the fielf if it is so promising? I am sure you all have questions of your own.

Like I said, the issuance of a terse, jargon filled statement and a folding of tents is unacceptable.  Time for the media to stop being suppine and dig into what actually happened here.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke

Congress Reveals Short-Term Spending Bill

     
 
The U.S. Senate could vote as early as today on a minibus spending bill that includes four measures that deeply concern pro-life advocates.

One is that the State/Foreign Operations section of the bill (S 1601) includes an amendment to permanently ban any future president from issuing an executive order to eliminate funding for groups that perform or promote abortions in other countries. The "Mexico City Policy" has been a political football between pro-abortion  and pro-life  presidents since Ronald Reagan established it through an executive order; now the Obama administration is hoping to enforce its abortion-friendly vision on all future administrations by making it a law.

The same section of the bill also sets aside $40 million for UNFPA, a non-governmental organization that supports and advocates for one-child abortion and sterilization policies abroad. The House State and Foreign Appropriations committee prohibits UNFPA funding for those reasons.

The Financial Services section of the bill (S 1573) allows local taxpayer funds from the District of Columbia to be used to subsidize elective abortions in the city. It also eliminates an amendment banning funding for abortions and abortion coverage in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program.

The Senate voted 81-14 last week to limit debate and move forward with the measure. Debate began Monday in the Senate; if it passes the minibus, the bill will have to meet the approval of the more pro-life House before it can be signed into law.

Either way, the bill faces a contentious few days in the Senate.

"This is one of the more pro-abortion pieces of legislation since I've arrived here," Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., told Congressional Quarterly last week, noting that he'll make efforts to add pro-life amendments. "There's a half a dozen areas that would have problems in my judgment, so if this goes to the floor for debate, then my amendments would be to try to deal with one or more of those issues."

Should the House and Senate pass different versions of the bill this week, they will meet in a conference committee to work them out before voting on the final version.

Contact: Karla Dial
Source: CitizenLink

Fate of Rockford abortion clinic to be decided

     

The region's sole abortion clinic, which has been shut down by order of the state since Sept. 30, believes its suspension was unwarranted, lacked factual basis and violated the constitutional rights of the clinic and its patients.

According to the Northern Illinois Women's Center's Oct. 28 answer to the suspension, the clinic disagrees that it posed any direct threat to the public interest, health, safety and welfare.

The Illinois Department of Public Health cited the Northern Illinois Women's Center, 1400 Broadway, for several health and safety violations in June and September.
According to records from the state, most of the violations observed in a June inspection report were corrected later that month. But some violations — such as not having a registered nurse in the operating room and directing patient care — remained, and new ones — like doctors not having surgical privileges with a licensed Illinois hospital and not having a written agreement with a local laboratory — were noted when the state reinspected the clinic in September.

In the clinic's answer, the clinic states the necessity of a registered nurse for certain procedures is not apparent, that it has an agreement with a Rockford physician with admitting privileges at a Rockford hospital if the need arises and that there is no evidence that the clinic's failures in these areas threatened the health, safety or welfare of its patients.

At a hearing last month, attorneys for the clinic and state said they were reaching a settlement in the case. The attorneys will return to court Monday morning.

Resolution could range from revocation of the clinic's license to allowing the clinic to reopen. The Northern Illinois Women's Center first opened in 1974.

Contact: Corina Curry
Source: Rockford Star

News links for November 11th, 2011

Pro-lifer: Abortion records destroyed twice

Another guilty plea in abortion case

Fifth Abortion Clinic Worker Pleads Guilty to Murder

Doctors, Uninformed Women Harmed by Abortion and Pregnancy Medical Centers Move to Intervene in NC 'Women's Right to Know Act'

Abortion Clinic Gives Sunday Discounts

Court: NY can choose pro-life tags

Alleged fraud added to Planned Parenthood's repertoire

Sister abortuaries temporarily out of business

Judge prevents New Jersey hospital from forcing nurses to assist abortions

Case against Tiller associate Neuhaus could cost her license

City of Austin Suspends Enforcement of Ordinance that Targets Pregnancy Resource Centers

They Still Really Want to Kill for Organs

Conscience rights for nurses

Dangerous abortuary hopes to reopen

Pro-life prayer sparks familiar legal issue

Abortion politics trump serving people

Effect of death penalty moratorium

Witness: Teen forced into abortuary

Attorney general vs. Michigan abortuary

Austrian Law Banning Egg and Sperm Donation In a Single IVF Procedure Upheld

Family groups call Argentinean politicians to reject abortion

Chicago cardinal softens wording, but maintains criticism against Illinois Gov’s pro-abort award

     
     Catholic Illinois Governor Pat Quinn
     had presented the award on behalf
     of Personal PAC, a group dedicated
     to getting pro-abortion politicians elected.

Cardinal Francis George of Chicago slightly softened his criticism of Catholic Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn for agreeing to present a pro-abortion political group's award, after learning that the award was presented to a rape victim.

Cardinal George, who had condemned Quinn's decision to "publicly [present] awards to ... advocates" of pro-abortion legislation, indicated remorse over the weekend after learning that the recipient of the award was rape victim and advocate Jennie Goodman.

"That Ms. Goodman would feel attacked, I regret that very much," George said on Sunday, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Join a Facebook page to end abortion here. 

However, the cardinal emphasized that he and the five other Illinois bishops who joined the criticism did not regret chastising the governor for his pro-abortion advocacy.

"The statement is not about her, it is about Gov. Quinn, who on one hand identifies himself as a member of the Catholic Church and on the other hand is identifying himself strongly with a group that supports the killing of unborn children in their mothers' wombs," he said.

Quinn presented the award on behalf of Personal PAC, a group dedicated to supporting pro-abortion candidates for political office.

The governor, a Catholic politician known for espousing pro-abortion policy, complained that George had not communicated with him prior to issuing the critical statement.

"I always feel that when you have an issue that you're concerned about, the best thing to do is pick up the phone, set up a time, an appointment, and come on in and have a face-to-face dialogue," said Quinn in another Tribune article Tuesday.

Quinn had initially responded to the criticism by saying that honoring Goodman was "a proper Christian thing to do."

Terry Cosgrove, president of Personal PAC and former advisor to NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and NOW, said that George had reached a "new low" by "accusing women of killing their children," and said Catholic Church leaders were merely angry that Quinn had triumphed over a pro-life opponent in the last gubernatorial race thanks in part to Personal PAC's involvement.

Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com

Former Democrat candidate guilty of assault after ramming car into March for Life participant

     

A well-backed Democrat candidate who ran for a position on the board of a top beltway-area school system has been found guilty of assault for ramming a pro-lifer with her car during this year's national March for Life on January 24, LifeSiteNews has learned.

Charisse Espy Glassman, the niece of former U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy, withdrew her candidacy for the Fairfax County Public School board after the charges were revealed by the Washington Post this summer.

Glassman was convicted of one charge of simple assault, and found not guilty of a second charge of possession of a prohibited weapon.

According to court records, Glassman was driving out of an alley near the Supreme Court building on the day of the March for Life when a woman stepped in front of the car, yelling at her to stop because of the crowd.  Glassman allegedly laughed and kept moving forward until she hit the woman.

Glassman's attorney appealed the ruling on Oct 26.

The plaintiff in the case told LifeSiteNews.com this month that she suffered two herniated disks from the impact, and was compelled to file the suit for medical compensation after Glassman didn't return calls from her insurance company. Her attorney declined to discuss the case because it is still active.

Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com

New Technique Reveals that People Categorized to be in Persistent Vegetative State May Be Fully Conscious

     

Last night, Rob Stein of the Washington Post published a fascinating piece on new technology that can potentially measure a person's level of consciousness by examining electrical activity in the brain.

Disturbingly, those conducting the research have found that numerous patients diagnosed to be in a persistent vegetative state are in fact, fully conscious according to their brain electrical activity. This obviously begs many bioethical questions about the capacity to diagnose persistent vegetative state. The article is worth reading in full, but below are a few quotes capturing the main points:

[In the experiment] "All the patients had the same terrible diagnosis: brain damage that marooned them in a "vegetative state" — alive but without any sense of awareness of themselves or the world around them."

"But then an international team of scientists tried an ambitious experiment: By measuring electrical activity in the patients' brains with a relatively simple technique, the researchers attempted to discern whether, in fact, they were conscious and able to communicate."

"…[O]ne man, and another, and, surprisingly, a third repeatedly generated brain activity identical to that of healthy volunteers when they were asked to imagine two simple things: clenching a fist and wiggling their toes."

"You spend a week with one of these patients and at no point does it seem at all they know what you are saying when you are talking to them. Then you do this experiment and find it's the exact opposite — they do know what's going on," said Damian Cruse, a postdoctoral neuroscientist at the University of Western Ontario in Canada who helped conduct the research. "That's quite a profound feeling."

"In 2006, Owen [a senior researcher in this study] and his colleagues described a young woman thought to be in a vegetative state. Her brain responded identically to a normal brain when scanned with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as researchers asked her to imagine playing tennis or exploring her home. The case electrified neuroscientists. But it remained unclear whether it was a fluke… [I]n February 2010, Owen's team reported similar testing on 23 vegetative patients and 31 minimally conscious patients. Five repeatedly fired their brains in precisely the same way as normal volunteers as they underwent
fMRIs while being asked to imagine hitting a tennis ball and wandering through their homes. One patient was able to answer yes or no to a series of questions by thinking about tennis for yes and touring his home for no."

"The research inevitably raises questions about patients such as Terri Schiavo, a Florida woman in a persistent vegetative state whose family's dispute over whether to discontinue her care ignited a national debate over the right-to-die issue and congressional intervention in 2005. Schiavo's brother, Bobby Schindler, said the new study highlights the limits of medicine in providing an accurate diagnosis."

"Regrettably, Terri was never afforded these types of exams," Schindler wrote in an e-mail to The Washington Post. "Such testing could not have hurt Terri but could have helped her." Schindler and others called for a reconsideration of such diagnoses. These findings only reinforce our family's contention that the PVS diagnosis needs to be eliminated — particularly given the fact that it not only dehumanizes the cognitively disabled, but it is being used in some instances to decide whether or not a person should live or die, as it was used in Terri's case. None of us deserves to be deprived of food and water," he said."

Contact: Jeanne Monahan
Source: FRCBlog

Legislative efforts to protect the unborn will not be set back by Mississippi Personhood Amendment's defeat

     

Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest said Wednesday that the "long and noble legal precedent for the personhood of unborn children did not suffer harm by the defeat of the ballot initiative in Mississippi. This measure would not have led to the overturn of Roe v. Wade, but had a symbolic appeal for pro-life Americans. It was not drafted in such a way that it would conflict with Roe."

Dr. Yoest made the following observations about the hotly contested initiative:

"Once again we witnessed the willingness of the abortion lobby to fight with every dollar it possesses, with half-truths and with mud-against-the-wall tactics, misrepresenting the real impact of personhood as an issue under the law. The loss has no immediate implications as the initiative restricted what the government could do, not what individuals could do. The measure would have restrained government actions - government-funded abortions - and not abortions conducted by individuals or enterprises such as Planned Parenthood.

"The unborn child as a person under the law, who can be recognized in civil and criminal statutes, is a tradition stretching back to English law. Today, 38 states have wrongful death statutes so that grieving parents have a means of addressing the loss of a child in civil courts, and 37 states have fetal homicide laws on the books that carry criminal penalties. AUL has been on the forefront of these efforts as a source of model legislation for the two-pronged protections and recognitions of the personhood of the unborn.

"Pro-life Americans celebrated a significant number of successes during state legislative sessions this year. AUL's campaign to accumulate victories through strategic legislative gains led to 28 pieces of legislation alone. Despite the loss in Mississippi, a number of new pro-life pieces of legislation have taken their place in the law in defense of life.

"In Mississippi, abortion advocates confused voters with the impact, breadth and legal abstractions of this issue, which was vulnerable to attack in part because of its complex legal realities. But the importance of the recognition of the humanity of a child in the womb will not falter as a result of this vote."

For more information on personhood, click here.

Source: Americans United for Life

'Personhood' defeated in Miss.

     

Voters in Mississippi have turned away an initiative that would have defined an unborn child in the womb as a "person" and effectively would have made abortion illegal in that state.
 
Amendment 26, a historic pro-life initiative that attracted attention nationwide, went down to defeat convincingly Tuesday night (58% to 42% at press time). The measure would have amended the state constitution to affirm that personhood begins at conception. If it had passed, Mississippi would have become the first state to successfully declare "civil rights" for the unborn.
 
Proponents had argued a vote for Amendment 26 was a vote for life and against abortion, while opponents -- apparently successfully -- convinced voters that the wording of the amendment was ambiguous and could result in unintended consequences, such as restricting certain types of birth control.

Contact: Jody Brown
Source: OneNewsNow

SB 1313 Fails to have Hearing

SB 1313 - Illinois Health Benefits Exchange Board bill for ObamaCare fails to have hearing and vote in House Insurance Committee yesterday.

SB 1313 (Mautino) will be amended (House Amendment #4 and more to come) to create an Illinois Health Benefits Exchange Board to comply with the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA or ObamaCare).  The Exchange Board will oversee the "qualified health plans" that will provide health insurance under ObamaCare.  

In addition to the pro-life concerns that any bill to establish the PPACA requirements in Illinois must contain a provision to prohibit abortion coverage [abortion opt-out] on any health plans that are paid for by tax dollars, there were issues from the business community and the insurance industry in Illinois.  The sponsor has thus decided not to move on the bill until next year.

Some legislators and staff told me that our demand that Illinois must contain an abortion opt-out provision was important to have been made now so that legislators and the administration understand this must be reckoned with before any major part of PPACA passes. This is a complicated universal health insurance law.  Leading up to 2014, when ObamaCare is supposed to come into full force, there will be a number of pieces of legislation to make it work in Illinois and nationally.  This is fluid, so bill numbers may change over time, but for now it is SB 1313 and House Amendment #4.

Please continue to spread the word that legislators need to know that Illinois does not want to use any tax dollars to pay for abortion coverage under the PPACA.

Contact: Ralph Rivera

Source: Illinois Citizens for Life

ACTION ALERT on SB 1313 -- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

SB 1313 -- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) Exchanges Board bill will be heard in the House Insurance Committee this afternoon as the second week of the Illinois Veto Session begins [Tuesday through Thursday].  It will set up the Health Exchanges board and its powers for Illinois and ObamaCare.  

We are trying to convince legislators that now is the time to put an "abortion opt-out" provision that will prohibit exchanges from allowing any insurance plans to cover abortion.

Call your representatives and urge them to VOTE "NO" ON SB 1313 AS AMENDED WITHOUT A PROVISION THAT OPTS-OUT ILLINOIS FROM ABORTION COVERAGE

AND PLEASE SUPPORT THE ABORTION OPT-OUT AMENDMENT TO SB 1313 AND VOTE "NO" ON SB 1313 UNTIL THIS AMENDMENT IS ADDED TO THE BILL.

Click here for contact information for your representative.

PLEASE VOTE "NO" ON SB 1313 AS AMENDED (MAUTINO) THE ILLINOIS HEALTH BENEFITS EXCHANGE BOARD FOR THE FEDERAL PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE) WITHOUT A PROVISION THAT OPTS-OUT ILLINOIS FROM ABORTION COVERAGE

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

(1)   "Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148), federal tax dollars, via affordability credits (subsidies provided to individuals between 150-400% of the federal poverty level), are routed to Exchange participating health insurance plans, including plans that provide coverage for abortions.

(2)   Federal funding of insurance plans that provide abortions is an unprecedented change in federal abortion funding policy.  The Hyde Amendment, as passed each year in the Labor Health and Human Services Appropriations bill, and the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) prohibit federal funds from subsidizing health plans that provide abortion. Under this new law, however, Exchange participating health plans that provide abortions can receive federal funds.

(3)   The provision of federal funding for health plans that provide abortion coverage is nothing short of taxpayer funded and government endorsed abortion.

(4)   However, P.L. 111-148 allows a state to "opt out" of permitting insurance plans that cover abortions to participate in the Exchanges within that state, and thereby prohibit taxpayer money from subsidizing plans that cover abortions within that state.

(5)   It is the long-standing policy of the State of Illinois through several statutes of Illinois Compiled Statutes that abortions are not to be funded with state taxpayer dollars under Medicaid and state employees insurance policies.
 
(6)   The decision not to fund abortion places no governmental obstacle in the path of a woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy.  Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 201 (1991).

(7)   Moreover, it is permissible for a State to engage in unequal subsidization of abortion and other medical services to encourage alternative activity deemed in the public interest.  Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 198 (1991).

(8)   Citizens of the State of Illinois, like other Americans, oppose the use of public funds – both federal and state – to pay for abortions.  For example, a January 2010 Quinnipiac poll showed that 7 in 10 Americans were opposed to provisions in federal health care reform that use federal funds to pay for abortions and abortion coverage.

(9)   The Guttmacher Institute which advocates for unfettered and taxpayer-funded access to abortion confirms that, based on Medicaid studies, more women have abortions when it is covered by private or public insurance programs.

Thus, the following amendment should be adopted to SB 313 to affirmatively opt out of allowing qualified health plans that cover abortions to participate in Exchanges within the State of Illinois:

(a)    No abortion coverage may be provided by a qualified health plan offered through an Exchange created pursuant to PL 111-148 within the State of Illinois.
 
(b)   This limitation shall not apply to an abortion performed when the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

PLEASE SUPPORT THE ABORTION OPT-OUT AMENDMENT TO SB 1313 AND VOTE "NO" ON SB 1313 UNTIL THIS AMENDMENT IS ADDED TO THE BILL.

Source: Illinois Federation for Right to Life, Illinois Citizens for Life,
Contact: Dawn Behnke, Ralph Rivera

Letter All Illinois House Members

SB 1313 -- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) Exchanges Board bill will be heard in the House Insurance Committee this afternoon as the second week of the Illinois Veto Session begins [Tuesday through Thursday].  It will set up the Health Exchanges board and its powers for Illinois and ObamaCare.   

We are trying to convince legislators that now is the time to put an "abortion opt-out" provision that will prohibit exchanges from allowing any insurance plans to cover abortion. I will testify on this in committee this afternoon.

     

PLEASE VOTE "NO" ON SB 1313 AS AMENDED (MAUTINO) THE ILLINOS HEALTH BENEFITS EXCHANGE BOARD FOR THE FEDERAL PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE) WITHOUT A PROVISION THAT OPTS-OUT ILLINOIS FROM ABORTION COVERAGE

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

(1)   "Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148), federal tax dollars, via affordability credits (subsidies provided to individuals between 150-400% of the federal poverty level), are routed to Exchange participating health insurance plans, including plans that provide coverage for abortions.

(2)   Federal funding of insurance plans that provide abortions is an unprecedented change in federal abortion funding policy.  The Hyde Amendment, as passed each year in the Labor Health and Human Services Appropriations bill, and the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) prohibit federal funds from subsidizing health plans that provide abortion. Under this new law, however, Exchange participating health plans that provide abortions can receive federal funds.

(3)   The provision of federal funding for health plans that provide abortion coverage is nothing short of taxpayer funded and government endorsed abortion.

(4)   However, P.L. 111-148 allows a state to "opt out" of permitting insurance plans that cover abortions to participate in the Exchanges within that state, and thereby prohibit taxpayer money from subsidizing plans that cover abortions within that state.

(5)   It is the long-standing policy of the State of Illinois through several statutes of Illinois Compiled Statutes that abortions are not to be funded with state taxpayer dollars under Medicaid and state employees insurance policies.
 
(6)   The decision not to fund abortion places no governmental obstacle in the path of a woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy.  Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 201 (1991).

(7)   Moreover, it is permissible for a State to engage in unequal subsidization of abortion and other medical services to encourage alternative activity deemed in the public interest.  Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173, 198 (1991).

(8)   Citizens of the State of Illinois, like other Americans, oppose the use of public funds – both federal and state – to pay for abortions.  For example, a January 2010 Quinnipiac poll showed that 7 in 10 Americans were opposed to provisions in federal health care reform that use federal funds to pay for abortions and abortion coverage.

(9)   The Guttmacher Institute which advocates for unfettered and taxpayer-funded access to abortion confirms that, based on Medicaid studies, more women have abortions when it is covered by private or public insurance programs.

Thus, the following amendment should be adopted to SB 313 to affirmatively opt out of allowing qualified health plans that cover abortions to participate in Exchanges within the State of Illinois:

(a)    No abortion coverage may be provided by a qualified health plan offered through an Exchange created pursuant to PL 111-148 within the State of Illinois.
 
(b)   This limitation shall not apply to an abortion performed when the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

PLEASE SUPPORT THE ABORTION OPT-OUT AMENDMENT TO SB 1313 AND VOTE "NO" ON SB 1313 UNTIL THIS AMENDMENT IS ADDED TO THE BILL.

Source: Illinois Federation for Right to Life, Illinois Citizens for Life,
Contact: Dawn Behnke, Ralph Rivera

SBA List looking forward to 6th Circuit

    

The Susan B. Anthony List is pleased that the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear a defeated Democratic congressman's lawsuit as he tries to squelch the pro-life organization's free-speech rights.

Former Ohio Representative Steve Driehaus's defamation suit against the Susan B. Anthony List alleges that the pro-life group's billboard campaign that educated constituents about his vote in favor of taxpayer funding for abortion, which is included in the healthcare bill, cost him his job, which resulted in a "loss of livelihood" (see earlier story).

In August, U.S. District Judge Timothy Black refused to dismiss the case and prepared to allow it to go to trial. Now, SBA List executive director Emily Buchanan says her organization is pleased that the Sixth Circuit has taken the case away from Judge Black, an Obama appointee.

Emily Buchanan (SBA List)"We were expecting that the discovery and trial was going to be a long process, very taxing on both our time and resources," the pro-lifer notes. "Judge Black, as we discovered, was a former director of Cincinnati Planned Parenthood, and that is certainly not a court that we were looking forward to being in."

The SBA List hopes to make progress in its challenge to Ohio's False Statement Law, which empowers state officials to enforce stiff fines -- even prison time -- for criticism of candidates they deem to be "false."

"That had already been moved to the Sixth Circuit, and so we are going to look into having the two cases joined back together," Buchanan reports.

She believes the appeals court will follow previous rulings that protect First Amendment rights and ultimately end the defamation case against the SBA List.

Contact: Chad Groening
Source: OneNewsNow

IFRL News Links for Friday, November 4th

     

Illinois bishops decry Catholic governor's participation in pro-choice award

Contraceptive linked to memory loss

Governor Haley Barbour Votes 'Yes!' on Mississippi Personhood Amendment; Planned Parenthood Continues Running Deceptive Ads

Why they're really, really scared about the Mississippi Personhood Amendment

Call reveals Medicaid willing to pay $16K to abort 30-week baby with Down syndrome

12 nurses sue NJ hospital for forcing them to participate in abortions

Protected From Forced Participation in Abortion

Reject Peter Singer's Utilitarianism As Justification for Death Penalty

Should Fix Anti Assisted Suicide Statute in Wake of Final Exit Network Defendants' Appeal

Pro-Life Activists Sue Jacksonville in Federal Court for Attempting to Control Their Free Speech

Herman Cain is Right, Planned Parenthood is Planned Genocide

Abortion Workers Plead Guilty to Murder

Wisconsin Senate Passes Conservative Sex Ed Bill

Ordinance against pro-life centers