But 154 Lawmakers vote to Defend Current D.C. Policy of Legal Abortion for any Reason Until Birth
In a landmark vote, a solid majority of the U.S. House of
Representatives today voted to reject the current abortion policy of the
District of Columbia, which permits legal abortion for any reason until
birth, and to replace it with a law that would generally prevent
abortion after 20 weeks fetal age.
The legislation is the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child
Protection Act (H.R. 3803). The vote was 220-154 in favor of the bill – a
strong majority (a 66 vote margin), although short of the two-thirds
vote required under the fast-track procedure utilized today (“suspension
of the rules”).
“Today’s groundbreaking majority vote constitutes a giant step towards
this bill ultimately becoming law -- perhaps after the replacement of
some of the lawmakers who today were unwilling to protect pain-capable
unborn children in the sixth month of pregnancy and later,” said Douglas
Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee
(NRLC), the national federation of state right-to-life organizations.
“154 House members will have to explain to their constituents why they
voted to endorse a policy of legal abortion for any reason, until the
moment of birth, in their nation’s capital.”
H.R. 3803 contains findings that by 20 weeks after fertilization (if not
earlier), the unborn child has the capacity to experience great pain.
(This is equivalent to 22 weeks in the alternate “LMP” or “weeks of
pregnancy” dating system used by ob-gyns and abortion providers.) The
bill prohibits abortion after that point, except when an acute physical
condition endangers the life of the mother. Nine states have already
enacted abortion limitations based on the pain suffered by unborn
children; no court orders have blocked enforcement of any of those laws.
The District Clause of the U.S. Constitution (found in Article I,
Section 8) provides that “Congress shall . . . exercise exclusive
legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District . . .” Like any
other “legislation,” of course, laws pertaining to the federal district
are subject to the president’s review. Asked about H.R. 3803 today,
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded, “The president’s
position on a woman’s reproductive freedom is well known,” and went on
to refer to the legislation as “controversial, divisive social
legislation.”
On July 30, a federal judge in Arizona upheld as constitutional a new
state law that generally prohibits abortion after 18 weeks fetal age (20
weeks of pregnancy) – two weeks earlier than H.R. 3803. U.S. District
Judge James A. Teilborg, a Clinton appointee, found that “by 20 weeks,
sensory receptors develop all over the child’s body” and “when provoked
by painful stimuli, such as a needle, the child reacts, as measured by
increases in the child’s stress hormones, heart rate, and blood
pressure.” Judge Teilborg also noted, “Given the nature of D&Es and
induction abortions . . . this Court concludes that the State has shown a
legitimate interest in limiting abortions past 20 weeks gestational
age.”
Also today, Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah), the prime sponsor of the Senate
companion bill (S. 2103, which has 30 cosponsors), filed the bill as an
amendment to an unrelated bill that is currently pending on the Senate
floor, S. 3414.
The death of 24 year-old Tonya Reaves on Friday, July 20, following an
abortion at the Chicago Loop Planned Parenthood has prompted a renewed
call for accountability in Illinois' currently unregulated abortion
industry.
Pastor Ceasar LeFlore, Midwest Director of Life Education and Resource
Network (L.E.A.R.N.), appealed via letter to Illinois' President of the
Senate John Cullerton, Speaker of the House Michael Madigan, and House
Republican Leader Tom Cross to increase abortion clinic regulation.
Reaves' death following her abortion in a facility not regulated by the
State of Illinois is a tragedy, but the letter to Illinois' legislative
leaders points out that "this state's lack of even the most basic health
regulation of abortion providers and clinics is setting the stage for
it to happen again."
Illinois law does not require Planned Parenthood's clinics to be
inspected by the state's Department of Public Health. This lack of
oversight is particularly negligent in light of the fact that Reaves'
second trimester abortion was performed in Planned Parenthood's Loop
Health Center in Chicago, a facility that, according to its own website,
refers all surgical procedures to two other abortion clinics, only
offering "medication abortion," commonly known as the "abortion pill,"
at the downtown site.
LeFlore's missive implores the lawmakers to join the twenty other states
that mandate counseling for women who are scheduled to undergo an
abortion. Often referred to as "Informed Consent" laws or "Women's Right
to Know" laws, these measures require the physician to inform the
pregnant woman of the many risks involved in an abortion. More than half
of the states require at least a 24-hour waiting period between
receiving counseling for the abortion and completing the procedure.
"Planned Parenthood's Loop Health Center is clearly not equipped to
provide a second trimester abortion or to respond to an emergency
situation such as the one that resulted in the tragic death of an
otherwise healthy young woman," explains LeFlore. "A woman who goes to
an abortion provider naturally assumes that she is going to a medically
approved facility and not to a company that is operating an unlicensed,
uninspected, and unregulated surgery."
L.E.A.R.N. is the nation's largest black pro-life organization and its
Midwest Director is not alone in sounding this clarion call for
increased abortion clinic regulation. The letter is cosigned by leaders
from the Illinois' broader pro-life community, including Aid for Women
of Northern Lake County, Belleville Area Right to Life, Catholic
Citizens of Illinois, Concerned Women for America of Illinois, Illinois
Citizens for Ethics PAC, Illinois Family Institute, Illinois Federation
for Right to Life, Illinois Review, Illinois Right to Life Committee,
Knox County Right to Life, Lake County Right to Life. Life Advocacy
Resource Project, Lutherans for Life, McHenry County Right to Life,
Professional Women's Network, Pro-Life Action League,
Pro-Life/Pro-Family Coalition, Students for Life of Illinois, Tradition
Family and Property, and Word of Hope.
The coalition insists that, "The Illinois General Assembly must take
seriously the health and safety of the women of Illinois... [and]
immediately enact laws and policies that insure the protection of
women."
It is noteworthy that in the last legislative session, the Illinois
legislature failed to call for a vote on H.B. 4117 which would have
required all abortion clinics to meet the same health and safety
standards as all other ambulatory surgical treatment centers, including
those run by Planned Parenthood.
One day before the U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on
a bill to overturn the current policy in the District of Columbia of
allowing legal abortion, for any reason, until the moment of birth, a
federal judge in Arizona today upheld a new state law generally
prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy (18 weeks fetal age),
based primarily on “the substantial and well-documented evidence that an
unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at
least twenty weeks gestational age.”
The ruling by U.S. District Judge James A. Teilborg came in a legal
challenge brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the ACLU on
behalf of abortion providers, which asserted that the law was
unconstitutional because it restricted abortions prior to “viability.”
The Arizona law generally allows abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy
(18 weeks after fertilization) only when necessary to prevent the
mother’s death or “serious risk of substantial and irreversible
impairment of a major bodily function.”
Judge Teilborg specifically found that “by 20 weeks, sensory receptors
develop all over the child’s body” and “when provoked by painful
stimuli, such as a needle, the child reacts, as measured by increases in
the child’s stress hormones, heart rate, and blood pressure.” Teilborg
quoted a U.S. Supreme Court decision describing the D&E method of
abortion used at this age: “[F]riction causes the fetus to tear apart.
For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus . . .” He described
another method also used: “In an induction procedure, the fetus is
injected with a medication that induces a heart attack.’”
Judge Teilborg continued, “Given the nature of D&Es and induction
abortions, . . . this Court concludes that the State has shown a
legitimate interest in limiting abortions past 20 weeks gestational
age.”
“This recognition by a federal court that a general prohibition on
abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy is constitutional, based chiefly on
‘substantial and well-documented evidence that an unborn child has the
capacity to feel pain during an abortion,’ makes it even more
indefensible for any House member to vote to continue the current policy
of legal abortion for any reason until the moment of birth in our
nation’s capital,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the
National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).
The bill to be voted on Tuesday by the U.S. House, the District of
Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803), is
strongly backed by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the
nationwide federation of state right-to-life organizations.
The Council of the District of Columbia, employing authority delegated
by Congress, repealed the entire D.C. abortion law. Thus, in the
nation’s capital, abortion is currently legal for any reason through all
nine months of pregnancy. (See confirmation by the Associated Press, here.)
H.R. 3803, sponsored by Congressman Trent Franks (R-Az.), was approved
by the House Judiciary Committee on July 18, and is being brought to the
House floor on a fast-track procedure. In the bill, Congress adopts
findings that by 22 weeks of pregnancy (20 weeks after fertilization),
the unborn child has the capacity to experience great pain. (Note that
this is two weeks later than the line established in the Arizona law
upheld today.) The bill prohibits abortion after that point, except when
an acute physical condition endangers the life of the mother. Seven
states have already enacted legislation very similar to H.R. 3803
(Nebraska, Kansas, Idaho, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana); no
court orders have blocked enforcement of any of those laws.
“This roll call will be a landmark – the House has never before voted on
the question of whether to endorse legal abortion for any reason until
birth,” said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. “Under the
Constitution, members of Congress and the President are ultimately
accountable for the current abortion-until-birth policy. Any lawmaker
who votes against this bill is voting to ratify the extreme policy
currently in effect in the nation’s capital, where abortion is perfectly
legal for any reason until the moment of birth.”
"If we can achieve a big majority on this groundbreaking initial vote,
it will lay the foundation to achieve legal protection for pain-capable
unborn babies in the not-distant future,” Johnson said.
The District Clause of the U.S. Constitution (found in Article I,
Section 8) provides that “Congress shall . . . exercise exclusive
legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District . . .” Like any
other “legislation,” of course, it is subject to the president’s review.
The White House has not yet taken any position on H.R. 3803, although
it has 223 House cosponsors.
According to a nationwide live telephone poll of 1,000 adults (MOE
+/-3.1%), conducted July 12-15, 2012 by The Polling Company,
Inc./WomanTrend, 58% of American adults would be more likely to vote for
lawmakers who support this legislation (62% of women were more likely).
In a separate question, 63% favored a policy of not permitting abortion
anywhere "after the point where substantial evidence says that the
unborn child can feel pain unless it is "necessary to save a mother's
life." (The questions and response totals are available in a document here.)
The NRLC website provides links to abundant documentation on the
scientific authorities that support the bill’s findings that unborn
children, by 20 weeks fetal age if not before, have the capacity to
experience great pain, here. A compilation of citations to medical journal articles on the subject is posted here. The abortion method most often used at this stage, the "D&E," is depicted in a medical illustration, here. The poll results and other information on the legislation is also posted at http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/Fetal_Pain/index.html
The U.S. House of Representatives will vote on Tuesday, July 31, 2012,
on legislation that would end the current legal policy allowing
abortion, for any reason, until the moment of birth in the nation's
capital.
The legislation, the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child
Protection Act (H.R. 3803), is strongly backed by the National Right to
Life Committee (NRLC), the nationwide federation of state right-to-life
organizations.
The Council of the District of Columbia, employing authority delegated
by Congress, repealed the entire D.C. abortion law. Thus, in the
nation's capital, abortion is currently legal for any reason through all
nine months of pregnancy. (See confirmation by the Associated Press, here.)
"This roll call will be a landmark - the House has never before voted on
the question of whether to endorse legal abortion for any reason until
birth," said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. "Under the
Constitution, members of Congress and the President are ultimately
accountable for the current abortion-until-birth policy. Any lawmaker
who votes against this bill is voting to ratify the extreme policy
currently in effect in the nation's capital, where abortion is perfectly
legal for any reason until the moment of birth."
"If we can achieve a big majority on this groundbreaking initial vote,
it will lay the foundation to achieve legal protection for pain-capable
unborn babies in the not-distant future," Johnson said.
The bill, sponsored by Congressman Trent Franks (R-Az.), was approved by
the House Judiciary Committee just last week, and is being brought to
the House floor on a fast-track procedure. In the bill, Congress adopts
findings that by 20 weeks after fertilization (if not earlier), the
unborn child has the capacity to experience great pain. (This is
equivalent to 22 weeks in the alternate "LMP" or "weeks of pregnancy"
dating system used by ob-gyns and abortion providers.) The bill
prohibits abortion after that point, except when an acute physical
condition endangers the life of the mother. Seven states have already
enacted very similar legislation; no court orders have blocked
enforcement of any of those laws.
The District Clause of the U.S. Constitution (found in Article I,
Section 8) provides that "Congress shall . . . exercise exclusive
legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District . . ." Like any
other "legislation," of course, it is subject to the president's
review.
H.R. 3803 currently has 223 House cosponsors. (218 constitutes a House majority when all seats are filled and all members vote.)
According to a nationwide live telephone poll of 1,000 adults (MOE
+/-3.1%), conducted July 12-15, 2012 by The Polling Company,
Inc./WomanTrend, by more than a 2-to-1 margin (58-27%), American adults
would be more likely to vote for lawmakers who support this
legislation. Women were more likely by 62-27%, and men more likely by
53-27%. (The questions and response totals are available in a document here.)
In response to a separate poll question, respondents favored, by a
3-to-1 margin (63-21%), a policy of not permitting abortion anywhere
"after the point where substantial medical evidence says that the unborn
child can feel pain," unless it is "necessary to save a mother's
life." Women said "should not be permitted" by a margin of 70-18%
percent. Men said "should not be permitted" by a margin of 55-25%.
The NRLC website provides links to abundant documentation on the
scientific authorities that support the bill's findings that unborn
children, by 20 weeks fetal age if not before, have the capacity to
experience great pain, here. The abortion method most often used at this stage, the "D&E," is depicted in a medical illustration, here. The poll results and other information on the legislation is also posted at www.nrlc.org/abortion/Fetal_Pain/index.html.
Contact: Megan McCrum, Jessica Rodgers
Source: National Right to Life Committee
A federal court ordered an injunction Friday halting the implementation
of a mandate that would require a Catholic-owned business in Denver to
offer insurance coverage for contraception and potential
abortion-inducing drugs as a federal court case proceeds.
The Newland family owns a private company that makes heating and air
conditioning units. The Obama administration has given all secular
businesses a deadline of Aug. 1 to begin offering the insurance when
their next enrollment period begins, which people of faith say violates
their consciences. Faith-based groups, such as Catholic hospitals,
universities and nonprofit ministries, have until August 2013 to comply.
“Every American, including family business owners, should be free to
live and do business according to their faith,” said Alliance Defending
Freedom Legal Counsel Matt Bowman, who is representing the Newland
family. “For the time being, Hercules Industries will be able to do just
that.”
Bowman said the mandate could harm the Newland family business.
“The cost of freedom for this family could be millions of dollars per
year in fines that will cripple their business if the Obama
administration ultimately has its way,” Bowman said. “This lawsuit seeks
to ensure that Washington bureaucrats cannot force families to abandon
their faith just to earn a living. Americans don’t want politicians and
bureaucrats deciding what faith is, who the faithful are, and where and
how that faith may be lived out.”
National pro-life leaders are calling on fellow pro-life believers to
join them in Washington, DC, next year for the National Memorial for the
Pre-Born. It will be the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme
Court decision that legalized abortion.
Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life explains that the 2013 event in January will focus on prayer and repentance.
"Repentance has to come to us as a nation for all that we have failed to
do to protect our unborn brothers and sisters in these 40 years of
legalized killing," he says. "Prayer, of course, that we not go too much
longer in this state and that the healing begin. So much healing has to
take place and in so many ways."
Pavone tells OneNewsNow there is nothing that takes more life than abortion.
"No crime or disease, no national disaster or war, not terrorism, not
AIDS, not poverty, not drug abuse -- it [abortion] has taken and
continues to take more life than anything else precisely because Roe v.
Wade allowed it throughout all nine months of pregnancy," he declares.
"It's an incredible thing."
Pavone points out the January observance of the 40th anniversary will
launch a full year of activities related to ending abortion and a
special website has been set up to draw attention to it.
National pro-life leaders are calling on fellow pro-life believers to join them in Washington, DC, next year for the National Memorial for the Pre-Born. It will be the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.
Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life explains that the 2013 event in January will focus on prayer and repentance.
"Repentance has to come to us as a nation for all that we have failed to do to protect our unborn brothers and sisters in these 40 years of legalized killing," he says. "Prayer, of course, that we not go too much longer in this state and that the healing begin. So much healing has to take place and in so many ways."
Pavone tells OneNewsNow there is nothing that takes more life than abortion.
"No crime or disease, no national disaster or war, not terrorism, not AIDS, not poverty, not drug abuse -- it [abortion] has taken and continues to take more life than anything else precisely because Roe v. Wade allowed it throughout all nine months of pregnancy," he declares. "It's an incredible thing."
Pavone points out the January observance of the 40th anniversary will launch a full year of activities related to ending abortion and a special website has been set up to draw attention to it.
The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, today announced it has filed an emergency motion asking that Federal District Judge Robert H. Cleland of the Eastern District of Michigan stop the HHS Mandate which goes into effect on August 1, 2012. The motion was filed late yesterday afternoon.
The backdrop for the Law Center's motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is one of the U.S. Supreme Court's greatest statements on our fundamental rights recognized by the Bill of Rights: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."
Thomas More Law Center attorney, Erin Mersino, is the lead counsel in the lawsuit. Joining as co-counsel is Charles LiMandri, the Law Center's West Coast Regional Director.
Mersino stated, "We have asked Judge Cleland to set a court hearing on our motion for the earliest possible time to prevent immediate injury to our clients' right of conscience. Without the Court's intervention, the HHS mandate effectively penalizes their free exercise of religion."
The Thomas More Law Center filed its federal lawsuit on May 6, 2012 against the Obama administration on behalf of Legatus, the Nation's largest organization of top Catholic business leaders, and the Ann Arbor-based Weingartz Supply Company, and its president Daniel Weingartz, also a member of Legatus.
The purpose of the lawsuit is to permanently block the implementation of the HHS Mandate which requires employers and individuals to obtain insurance coverage for abortions and contraception on the grounds that it imposes clear violations of conscience on Americans who morally object to abortion and contraception.
The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the HHS Mandate under the First Amendment rights to the Free Exercise of Religion and Free Speech and the Establishment Clause. It also claims that the HHS Mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center commented, "The Obama administration deliberately declared war on the Catholic Church by promulgating the HHS Mandate. And contrary to what they want you to believe, this case is not about contraception. It is about the religious freedom of Christians, in this case Catholics, to peaceably practice their faith free from government coercion. If the government succeeds in this case, the religious freedom of all Christians is in danger."
The motion for a temporary restraining order focuses on violations of the Plaintiffs' rights guaranteed by the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.
"Legatus" is the Latin word for "ambassador", and its members are called upon to become "ambassadors for Christ" in living and sharing their Catholic Faith in their business, professional and personal lives. It currently has over 4,000 members in 73 chapters located in 31 states. It was founded in 1987 by Tom Monaghan, the former owner of Domino's Pizza, to bring together the three key areas of a Catholic business leader's life -- Faith, Family and Business.
Named as Defendants in the lawsuit are Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the of the Department of Health and Human Services; Hilda Solis, Secretary of the Department of Labor; Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Department of the Treasury; and their respective departments.
Contact: Erin Mersino Source: Thomas More Law Center
There’s a two-tier system of abortions in the U.S.: those for the haves, and those for the have-nots. President Obama may fundraise for Planned Parenthood, but he’d never send his daughters there. Who would, if they could send them anywhere else?
The Left’s public enthusiasm for Sanger’s brainchild plasters splashy wallpaper on prison walls and plants a smiley face on an urn.
Planned Parenthood is corrupt to the core. Just look at their marketing. The more sexually active the population, the more Planned Parenthood stands to profit. Expecting Planned Parenthood to give abstinence information is like waiting for McDonald’s to hand out dieting advice. It may talk about “safe sex,” but not even “protected sex” halts the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. No matter. This isn’t about health; it’s about sales. If people want birth control, Planned Parenthood can sell it to them. When the birth control fails, they can sell them an abortion. And, while Planned Parenthood promotes equal opportunity sexual activity (females with females, males with males) we can’t neglect females-with-males, because that’s what keeps the abortion stream going.
It gets worse. The standard of care is that if a patient is going to undergo a procedure, they should give informed consent. This implies two things: that the patient has been adequately informed of the risks and benefits of the procedure, and that they are freely choosing to carry out the procedure. Planned Parenthood can market to the desperate mother who feels she must have an abortion at any cost, or the mother who needs convincing.
Former Planned Parenthood staff have confessed the levels of manipulation they have used to convince a woman to abort. Even when this line isn’t crossed, there’s still a highly emotional decision happening, with possible pressure from family, friends, husband, boyfriend, or pimp. But if you have been sexually exploited or emotionally manipulated, don’t expect Planned Parenthood to help you. As Live Action has abundantly demonstrated, implausible deniability even in cases as clear-cut as sex trafficking is alive and well at Planned Parenthood.
Adequate information is another fiction. While claiming “We're here to give you the medically-accurate information you need to decide what is best for you,” Planned Parenthood misrepresents the inherent risk involved in having an abortion. Their website states, “Abortion is legal in the U.S. and is one of medicine's safest procedures.”
Given the fact that many medical procedures are no more than skin deep, such as removing a mole, it’s surprising that the organization would make such a bald-faced claim. But then, those kinds are less likely to be suspected. No supporting information is given to support this claim, and the probability of various complications from abortion is not presented. One key risk factor that gets inadequate treatment is late-term abortions. All of the women and girls presented in Planned Parenthood’s featured tutorial video on in-clinic abortions are 14 weeks or less pregnant, and none has even an inkling of a baby bump.
While 88% of abortions are done within the first trimester of a child’s life, Planned Parenthood provides abortions through the third trimester. It makes sense to have one tutorial directed toward women at an earlier stage of pregnancy, but where is the tutorial for women further along? Toward the end of the video, the calm, measured voice of the narrator promises that Planned Parenthood will provide referrals for women who experience complications from their abortion.
Elsewhere, it’s claimed that abortions through 20 weeks are 11 times safer than childbirth, but that after that abortion and natural childbirth have equal risk. Again, no evidence is given to substantiate this claim. Instead of bracing for serious complications, wouldn’t it be better if women were told there are viable options beyond abortion?
The results of a procedure depend not only on the inherent risk, but also on the skill of the individual physician. The average rate of mishap for a certain procedure may be very low, but with a careless physician it will be very high. But a Planned Parenthood patient shouldn’t expect to know anything about their abortionist before they show up. If she was going to a doctor or a dentist for the first time, she could look up their name, specialty, and most likely even their picture online. Not with Planned Parenthood. The Illinois Planned Parenthood website assures potential clients:
“For nearly 90 years Planned Parenthood of Illinois (PPIL) has been Illinois' most trusted provider of reproductive health care. Our skilled health care professionals in the Chicago area and central Illinois work to ensure that each woman receives personal, sensitive and confidential care in a professional setting. All of our physicians are board certified or board eligible in Obstetrics and Gynecology or board certified in Family Medicine.”
It declines to list anything more than this, so it’s impossible for a first-time visitor to research their physician by name. Clients put their lives into the hands of a complete stranger. If abortionists were gifted physicians, wouldn’t they be proud to list their credentials publicly?
Placing clinics in low-income neighborhoods increases Planned Parenthood’s access to minorities, but it also removes accountability and ready access to emergency personnel and resources. Of course, even great physicians sometimes make mistakes, which is why hospitals regularly hold Morbidity & Mortality conferences. It’s here that the medical staff discusses cases that went wrong so that the core issues can be identified and mended.
For abortionists running solo practices, who provides this level of accountability? Are they ever questioned by their medical peers on their techniques, or botches? The ghastly findings in Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s abortion practice in Philadelphia last year spurred nine abortion clinic inspections in Illinois. Some hadn’t been inspected for over 15 years, and two were closed because of what was found. The inspections stopped short of any Planned Parenthood clinics, however, because these clinics are not licensed or inspected due to their similarity to doctor’s offices. This includes the clinic where Tonya Reaves was treated.
If the Planned Parenthood clinics had been adequately monitored, might Tonya Reaves be alive today? How many abortion clinics have emergency plans? Who vets the skill levels of physicians applying for jobs? Is the convenient location of clinics enough justification for their isolation from trauma units?
If Planned Parenthood of Illinois had fully informed Tonya Reaves of the risks she faced in her second-trimester abortion, would she have continued with her decision? It’s a question we will never know. But each woman should be given a fully informed choice. When it comes to abortion, it’s not just a woman’s body that’s at stake: it can be her life.
The Washington Surgi-Clinic, located just five blocks west of the White House, advertises on its website that it performs abortions 26 weeks (6 months) into pregnancy. The website of another clinic advertises second- and third-trimester abortions involving the "intercardiac injection of medication into the fetal heart" at a "private facility in the Washington, D.C. area." All of this is perfectly legal.
Abortions may be performed in the nation's capital for any reason during all nine months of pregnancy. But a bill passed by the House Judiciary Committee last week would curb D.C.'s abortion-until-birth policy by putting a limit on abortions at 20 weeks after fertilization, when science suggests an unborn child can feel pain. And national grassroots pro-life groups are making a strong push to bring the bill to the House floor.
"There is ample biologic, physiologic, hormonal, and behavioral evidence for fetal and neonatal pain," Dr. Colleen A. Malloy, assistant professor at Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine, said during congressional testimony in May. Malloy, who works in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, said that infants born 20-weeks and later "are the patients that I perform procedures on every day and I can guarantee you that when I put a test tube in and I incubate a patient or put an IV in, they feel it."
The modest restriction would still leave Washington's abortion law more liberal than many western European nations, which restrict abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy. But the D.C. late-term abortion ban would present a challenge Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade's 1973 companion case, Doe v. Bolton, that there must be "emotional, psychological, [and] familial" health exceptions to late-term bans. The D.C. ban has exceptions if a late-term abortion is necessary to save the life of the pregnant women or prevent the "substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, not including psychological or emotional conditions, of the pregnant woman." (Read the text of the bill here.)
Democrats have focused their attacks on the bill by pointing out it does not allow a late-term abortion of a severely disabled child who is not expected to live long after birth. "These are really arguments for prenatal euthanasia," says Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. Johnson says that in light of the Supreme Court's 2007 decision upholding the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, "we think that the court majority has opened the door to defer more to elected lawmakers on extended protections." The partial-birth abortion ban prohibited abortions when an unborn child had been delivered past its navel. But it did not ban any abortions based on an unborn child's gestational age or development.
"The American public's been actively misinformed for decades about the status of late-term abortion by shoddy journalism and misleading propaganda from pro-abortion advocacy groups," says Johnson. "I do think a great number of Americans believe that you can't get a late abortion unless there's a very compelling reason.
"This is news even to some members of Congress that it is only one method that has been banned by federal law. That involves the partial-live delivery before being killed," Johnson continues. "For everything else it still depends on state law. Or in the case of the federal enclave, Congress."
A poll conducted by the Polling Company for the National Right to Life Committee found strong support for a ban on late-term abortion. The poll asked Americans: "Unless an abortion is necessary to save a mother's life, do you think abortion should be permitted after the point where substantial medical evidence says that the unborn child can feel pain?" Sixty-three percent said abortion should not be permitted, while 21 percent said it should be permitted.
Of course, pro-choice Democrats point to some studies that contend unborn children can't feel pain until a few weeks beyond what the D.C. bill would ban. They also argue that the issue should be left to the D.C. city council (supporters of the ban point out the law would be perfectly constitutional; Congress has explicit constitutional authority over the District and banned slavery there during the Civil War). But this isn't an argument Democrats want to have.
Nancy Pelosi declined to comment on the bill last Thursday, after the Judiciary Committee had passed the bill. "I'm just not familiar with it. I'm sorry," Pelosi told THE WEEKLY STANDARD following her weekly press conference. During a subcommittee on the hearing in May, New York Democrat Jerrold Nadler slipped up and accidentally referred to an unborn child protected by the bill as "a preemie at 20 weeks in utero" before catching himself. "Excuse me," Nadler said, "a fetus at 20 weeks in utero."
The White House has not yet issued a statement on the bill. The issue of late-term abortion has tripped up Obama in the past. "I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother," Obama said in 2008. "Now, I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother." But days later he backtracked on the issue.
Despite the law's popularity—there are 221 cosponsors in the House—it's not clear that the House GOP leadership will bring the bill to the floor. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has not scheduled a vote on it.
"We are urging strongly for there to be a vote," says NRLC's Douglas Johnson. "If it's not brought up and passed in the House, it's going to be viewed by many Americans as a dereliction or some kind of a ratification of this policy that they've learned about and are outraged by."
Contact: John McCormack Source: The Weekly Standard via National Right to Life
Pro-life groups are calling for an investigation into the death of a woman who just underwent an abortion procedure at a Chicago Planned Parenthood.
Tonya Reaves, 24, the mother of a one-year-old son, recently visited the Loop Health Center Planned Parenthood clinic to abort her latest child. But Cheryl Sullenger of Operation Rescue tells OneNewsNow there were complications, resulting in Reaves being rushed to Northwestern Memorial Hospital.
"She died later that evening of hemorrhage related to a D&E (dilation and evacuation) abortion," the pro-lifer reports. "They did the autopsy the following day, and they confirmed that this was an abortion-related death."
A D&E procedure, done in the second trimester of a pregnancy, involves dismembering the baby to remove him/her from the womb. Reaves' family members are demanding answers -- none of which, according to Operation Rescue, are coming from Planned Parenthood.
"We believe this is most likely an error on the part of the abortionist, because women do not hemorrhage to death unless there has been some misadventure during the abortion, and if there's a delay in calling 9-1-1," Sullenger asserts. "We know that she was finally pronounced dead at 11:20 pm."
She goes on to add that "abortion deaths like this are completely avoidable," and Planned Parenthood should be held accountable.
Aside from the fact that an ambulance was called to a Planned Parenthood in Aurora, Illinois, and did not transport a patient, no further information has been made available.
Ann Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League wonders if this and another case will be investigated. (Listen to audio report)
She tells OneNewsNow there are two different types of abortion clinic in The Prairie State. The first is "pregnancy termination specialty centers, which don't have to meet the same standards as an ordinary ambulatory surgical center," Scheidler explains. "And then we have the ambulatory surgical centers that meet higher standards, closer to what a hospital would have to meet."
But Planned Parenthood does not fit in either category, "because they claim that a very tiny percentage of their business is abortion, which is only true if you counted in a peculiar way which only Planned Parenthood can figure out," the League vice president details. "So they don't ever get inspected."
That, according to Scheidler, puts any woman seeking an abortion at an Illinois Planned Parenthood at risk. But she asserts that the Pro-Life Action League will again be at the legislature's doorstep pressing for a change in current laws to require the regular inspection of Planned Parenthood facilities.
A CBS news affiliate in Chicago reported over the weekend that a 24 year old woman died Friday, July 20, 2012, following an abortion at the Planned Parenthood clinic located at 18 S. Michigan Ave. in Chicago, Illinois.
The woman, Tonya Reaves, was transported from the Loop Health Center Planned Parenthood abortion clinic to Northwestern Memorial Hospital, where she was pronounced dead at 11:20 P.M. .
An autopsy conducted Saturday determined that Reaves died from hemorrhage following a Dilation and Evacuation abortion. The D&E abortion method is one employed in pregnancies that have advanced beyond the first trimester. It involves opening the cervix and removing the pre-born baby by dismembering him or her. The Loop Health Center Planned Parenthood advertises aborting babies up to 18 weeks.
The Tribune reports Planned Parenthood issued a statement of condolence after the Cook County coroner ruled the death an accident. The Tribune did not publish the statement's contents and it is not available on their website.
"Abortion deaths like this are completely avoidable. When a woman bleeds to death after an abortion, it is usually an indication of error on the part of the abortionist coupled with a delay in calling for emergency assistance. Planned Parenthood should be held accountable," said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue and Pro-Life Nation. "Our heartfelt prayers go out to the victim's family at this time of tragic loss."
This incident follows a report published in the Chicago Tribune in June, 2011, that took to task abortionists in Illinois for failing to report abortion complications and exposed the fact that some abortionists did not report complications at all, in violation of the law. At that time, Illinois officials made no attempt to enforce abortion laws in that state.
While the name of the abortionist responsible for this patient death is currently unknown, Planned Parenthood's most recent 990 Tax Forms list abortionist Caroline M. Hoke as its Medical Director. Hoke is reported to be currently under investigation by the Illinois Department of Public Health for charging the state $3 million for services through Illinois Planned Parenthood facilities.
The abortion death took place in Obama's adopted hometown of Chicago at a time when his administration is working to preserve funding to Planned Parenthood through the federalized health care system.
"In light of this tragedy, which is yet another in a long list of Planned Parenthood abuses, we call on President Obama to immediately withdraw all Federal funding and personal support from Planned Parenthood," said Newman. "Friday's death is yet another reason why men and women of conscience across this nation cannot and will not comply with the forced funding of abortion and its intentional violation of religious liberties."
Human Life International has launched a program in response to the Gates Foundation's push for birth control for the developing world. Gates raised $4.6 billion to push family planning in Third World countries.
Stephen Phelan of Human Life International says there are many other needs Africans have, especially related to healthcare.
"They need hospitals, improved clinics close to people," he tells OneNewsNow. "They need medicine for malaria, for tuberculosis, and instead what they're getting is $4.6 billion, like you said, for family planning that is only going to prevent Africans from being born. Babies are not the threat to their future. They have many other threats to their future [that] they can address without controversy, as Melinda Gates and her partners say they want to do."
So Human Life International has started the "No Controversy?" campaign in defense of women and children and to teach Gates and others the truth.
"There are many things to know about contraception, many of them having to do with the fact that contraception is a cancer-causing agent as determined by the World Health Organization; and that hormonal contraception can actually double the spread of HIV/AIDS, which is a huge problem that continues in Africa," Phelan explains.
Some of Gates' partners in the project are groups such as International Planned Parenthood and Marie Stokes, which are major proponents of abortion. A website, Facts for Melinda Gates.com, has been set up to provide the factual dangers of the Gates project.
Women who received support from pregnancy help centers and rejected abortion are bringing their children to meet with U.S. lawmakers as part of Heartbeat's Babies Go to Congress® on July 19.
"Every woman deserves support during an unexpected pregnancy," said Heartbeat International President Peggy Hartshorn, Ph.D. "And when women receive unconditional love along with the practical help necessary to welcome new life, they want policy makers to know that they are grateful. Because of this, Heartbeat International developed Babies Go to Congress® to give moms, served by a pregnancy help center, the opportunity to introduce their babies, who were at risk of abortion, to their elected officials."
Women have been thanking pregnancy help organizations for their support for decades and these moms are thrilled to have an opportunity to tell their stories to national leaders. Courageous women like Jessica Gore, who is excited to bring her eight-year-old daughter to meet her elected officials, will testify to the fact that pregnancy help organizations provide a life-changing experience.
"I went to the sonogram appointment at Burleson Pregnancy Aid Center even though I had already been to Planned Parenthood and thought that abortion was right for me," said Jessica, Burleson, Texas. "But when I looked at the sonogram screen, I knew that I had been lied to. What I saw on the screen was not a 'piece of tissue' like Planned Parenthood had told me. The tiny flicker of light, a heartbeat, was my child. I was instantly in love."
"I would have been lost without the guidance of the Pregnancy Aid Center," said Jessica. "Through their programs I learned how to care for my infant daughter. I would not be the person I am today if it hadn't been for the caring people of the Burleson Pregnancy Aid Center and the experiences I've had there. Without them, my daughter would not be alive and I cannot imagine my life without her."
Heartbeat's pregnancy help network provides all the facts on abortion -- from post-abortion stress to possible medical complications -- facts that abortion facilities often leave out. Heartbeat's compassionate network is dedicated to safeguarding maternal health and protecting child wellbeing necessary to sustain a healthy pregnancy.
Contact: Virginia Cline Source: Heartbeat International
On July 13 FBI agents Conrad Rodriguez and William Sivley paid a visit to my son-in-law, Andy Moore, at his home.
Andy is a pro-life activist who prays and protests outside the Southwest Women's Surgery Center abortion mill in Dallas, where late-term abortionist Curtis Boyd freely acknowledges he "kill[s]" children.
Agents Rodriguez and Sivley told Andy three red flags prompted their visit:
His use of a megaphone outside the mill, a one-time event on March 31, which he stopped and never repeated after police told him he was violating a noise ordinance. A complaint by the clinic manager that Andy trespassed, which he did not. There was no evidence, yet police gave Andy a warning: "I asked the officer multiple times, 'Why are you giving me this warning, as I did not trespass?' All he would tell me was, 'I'm giving you this warning.' He did not answer my question." Unsubstantiated complaints that Andy may be too aggressive. "One of the agents told me it is acceptable to be aggressive, however there is a line. He gave examples of things which would cross the line, such as making threats of violence, or obstructing vehicle access – violations of the FACE act. I told him in no uncertain terms that I had never done anything like this and had not considered anything like this either."
Obviously, the charges rose to the level of nada to begin with, certainly not above local law enforcement's pay grade. Andy videotaped his one and only foray into megaphoning, which was obviously tame and polite:
But the FBI used them as an excuse to knock on the door, nerve-wracking to begin with, and followed by asking totally inappropriate questions clearly aimed at intimidating Andy, while also launching into a fishing expedition about me.
Per Andy and my daughter, who was home at the time, here were questions the agents asked:
What affiliations do you have including church groups? How long have you known your wife? What belief system makes you believe in your cause? What is your goal in protesting? Do you know why people would make complaints against you? Are there friends of yours or people you're connected with that you could confidentially tell us are aggressive or abrasive? "Don't be afraid to tell us." Are you involved in activism in Austin, since we noticed some entries on abortionwiki? They were REALLY interested in the connection to Jill Stanek – details of internship, New Zealand speaking tour visit, did you get your activist and pro-life ideas from her? Did she train or teach you? Did you meet Jill before or after you became involved in the movement? Was it Jill who "fired you up" to become so active in the movement? They were overly nice saying he wasn't in trouble and feel free to tell us anything. Encouraged him to keep going back out there, that they represent both sides. ++they are protecting his freedom of speech++ is what they kept saying. They said their task force that deals with these abortion cases also handles Hate Crimes and White Supremacy. Odd grouping with pro-lifers. They knew he was an immigrant. They said a felony on his record could/would get him deported. "You wouldn't want to be apart from your wife and newborn."
Life Legal Defense Fund, one of the pro-life legal firms that has successfully defended pro-lifers against prosecution by Obama's Department of Justice, has now taken Andy under its wing. Senior Staff Counsel, Allison Aranda, shared her insights in an email:
The Obama administration is essentially engaging in a witch hunt. From the moment the new administration took office, the DOJ has been targeting peaceful pro-life sidewalk counselors. They have come out guns blazing on several occasions often bringing allegations that could later not be substantiated or in some cases clearly proven to be false. Their weapon of choice – the FACE act. The DOJ is using tactics that amount to legal extortion. They have filed these frivolous claims against innocent people who don't have the finances to hire big shot attorneys. The DOJ then kindly offers to settle the case if the counselor simply agrees to stay so many yards away and pay a couple thousand dollar fine.
Pro-bono legal foundations like LLDF, Alliance Defending Freedom, and Liberty Counsel have taken a stand to defend these innocent pro-lifers. Thankfully the sidewalk counselors have either had witnesses or video evidence to defend their actions. The DOJ has outright dismissed charges in two cases, walking away with egg on their face. In one case, a federal court judge issued a scathing opinion questioning the motives of the DOJ for bringing such unsubstantiated charges in the first place. The judge suggested that there might have been a conspiracy between the government and the abortion clinic to violate the free speech rights of the pro-life advocates.
It now seems that the unscrupulous Eric Holder is at it again. This time when the government determined that the evidence wasn't quite what they thought it would be to proceed on a FACE claim against Andy, they turned their intimidating interrogation into a fishing expedition about the personal life of Jill Stanek. Targeted bullying by our government because of an individual's viewpoint and willingness to share that message in the public square is intolerable. LLDF is committed to aggressively defending the rights of pro-life advocates. We will not back down, and we will not be threatened. We will continue to fight so that the freedoms of all are protected and preserved.
It stands to reason that the Obama administration would be interested in me. This has probably been a long time coming. But to reiterate Allison's point, we will not back down, and we will not be threatened.
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by seven states and joined by religious plaintiffs seeking to block the contraceptive coverage mandate in the federal healthcare law.
The lawsuit was filed by attorneys general from Nebraska, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas.
Plaintiffs also include three Catholic employers, a nun and a female missionary. They argued that the rule violates the rights of employers who object to the use of contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.
Judge Warren Urbom ruled Tuesday that the states had no standing in the lawsuit, because they had failed to prove they would suffer immediate harm once the rule is enacted.
He also dismissed the religious groups' complaints, saying they could be exempted from the mandate because the Obama administration has agreed to try to address their concerns.
In the nation's capital, the District of Columbia, abortion is now legal for any reason, until the moment of birth. Babies are being aborted far past the point in pregnancy at which medical science has demonstrated that they will suffer excruciating pain as they are dismembered by brute force, using stainless steel tools.
Now, National Right to Life has won approval by the powerful House Judiciary Committee of a bill, H.R. 3803, the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, that would end abortion in D.C. after 20 weeks fetal age (i.e., in the sixth month, and later), except to save a mother's life. But only two weeks remain before the House goes into recess. The bill will die, unless it is acted on immediately. Urge your representative in the House to press for an immediate vote by the full House on this bill.
There is a mountain of scientific evidence that 26 weeks is far past the point at which the unborn baby will feel excruciating pain as the abortionist twists off his or her little arms and legs, using a long steel tool called a "Sopher clamp." And abortions in the District may well be occurring even later -- because it is perfectly legal until birth, and no reporting is required.
Since January, National Right to Life has been urging Congress to act to stop the abortion of pain-capable babies in the nation's capital. Yesterday (July 18), the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives finally approved, 18-14, a bill conceived by NRLC, the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803). The bill will ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks fetal age, except to save a mother's life.
The bill is now eligible for action by the full House of Representatives. But this must happen fast, or it will not happen at all! And we are encountering fierce opposition. Well-funded pro-abortion groups such as NARAL and Planned Parenthood are mobilizing their resources to defend D.C.'s abortion-until-birth policy. They know that if they can delay the bill for even two weeks, it will die, because only two weeks remain before Congress goes into recess. The bill must pass the House before August 3 to have a chance of consideration by the Senate in September.
The bottom line is this: We have the votes on the House floor to pass this bill -- but it will die without a vote, unless House Leaders disregard the protests of opponents and put the bill on a fast track immediately.
I am asking you to urge your representative in the U.S. House to demand immediate action on H.R. 3803.
A new report on one of the world's largest funders of stem cell research reveals that an emphasis on results has led to a shift in funding towards morally-acceptable work with adult stem cells.
In the field of stem cell research, the “predominant progress” is being made by non-controversial adult stem cells, said Chuck Donovan, president of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, which serves as the education and research arm of pro-life Susan B. Anthony List.
Donovan told CNA on July 16 that an analysis of scientific funding over several years suggests that morally acceptable types of stem cell research offer the greatest promise for a wide variety of effective therapies and treatments.
Research on adult stem cells does not require the destruction of a human embryo and therefore does not pose the ethical difficulties associated with embryonic stem cell research. In addition, adult stem cell research has already contributed to advancing therapies for various diseases.
On July 12, the Lozier Institute released a report titled “The Ethical Stems of Good Science,” which examined changes in the funding offered by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine since 2007.
The California institute was created after President George W. Bush announced in 2001 that his administration would become the first to provide federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research, although this funding was limited to stem cell lines that had already been developed.
Dissatisfied with the limits put in place by the president, California established its own Institute for Regenerative Medicine to distribute $3 billion to stem cell research efforts, with a particular emphasis on human embryonic stem cells and other types of research that received limited or no federal funding.
One calculation found that the institute was “the largest funder of overall stem cell research in the world” from 2007, when it first began issuing grants, to February 2011.
According to the recent Lozier report, the California institute funded more than 100 projects in 2007 involving embryonic research and cloning, while giving virtually no funding to adult or other non-embryonic avenues of stem cell research.
In the years that followed, however, the organization’s grants increasingly went to fund projects using non-controversial forms of research.
A new category of grants in 2009 was specifically awarded to projects with “the best chance of resulting in clinical trials,” the report observed. Of these grants, only four went to human embryonic stem cell research, while the remaining 10 went to non-embryonic types of research.
This trend has continued every year since 2009, the report found. As grants are awarded “based on their potential to prove therapeutically beneficial,” non-embryonic research receives far more support than embryonic research.
The failure of embryonic stem cell research to yield therapeutic results has also led private investors to put their money elsewhere. Last November, the biopharmecuetical company Geron announced that it had ended a widely publicized embryonic stem cell research study due to “capital scarcity.”
Donovan said that the shift in funding based on results is logical.
In a statement released with the Lozier report, he explained that “despite the millions of dollars spent on this research, cures brought about by embryonic stem cells have continued to prove elusive, while adult stem cell research applications have exploded.”
“As the leading funder of stem cell research, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine has made grant decisions that show where the industry sees promise,” he noted. “In the past six years, where that promise lies has become increasingly clear: ethical adult stem cell research.”
