August 22, 2013

U.S. Supreme Court Orders Oklahoma Supreme Court to Answer Two Certified Questions Regarding State Regulation of Medicated Abortion

Attorneys from the Jubilee Campaign's Law of Life Project (JC-LOLP) yesterday afternoon, as authorized by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, filed a "friend-of-the-court" brief in that court on behalf of Oklahoma doctors specializing in obstetrics and gynecology in the case of Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice.  82 Oklahoma legislators were also permitted to file their "friend of the court" brief supporting Oklahoma's law regulating medication abortions.

In 2011, Oklahoma passed a law banning "off-label" use of the abortion-causing drug regimen known as RU-486.  The law was challenged by the abortion industry and made its way up to the United States Supreme Court, who granted certiorari to review the case this past June.  This past April, representing thousands of medical doctors from around the country, JC-LOLP submitted a "friends of the Court" brief to the United States Supreme Court supporting Oklahoma's law regulating RU-486, as well as Oklahoma's request that the United States Supreme Court grant certiorari and reverse the Oklahoma Supreme Court's cursory memorandum decision, rendered late last year without analysis or discussion, that Oklahoma's law regulating RU-486 constituted an undue burden on women's access to abortion as proscribed in the United States Supreme Court's 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.  

When the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari, it directed the Oklahoma Supreme Court to answer the following two certified questions regarding Oklahoma's law:

Whether H. B. No. 1970, Section 1, Chapter 216, O.S.L. 2011 prohibits: (1) the use of misoprostol to induce abortions, including the use of misoprostol in conjunction with mifepristone according to a protocol approved by the Food and Drug Administration; and (2) the use of methotrexate to treat ectopic pregnancies.

The U.S. Supreme Court has stayed further proceedings in this case until they receive a response from the Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

In response to the Oklahoma Supreme Court's schedule for briefing these certified questions and the invitation to submit a "friend of the court" brief in that court by the Oklahoma Attorney General, who has also filed his own brief, a group of Oklahoma doctors specializing in obstetrics and gynecology, represented by attorneys from JC-LOLP and the Alliance Defending Freedom, yesterday submitted their brief. These Oklahoma doctors advise the Oklahoma Supreme Court that the challenged law is a reasonable medical regulation enacted to protect women's health by requiring that RU-486 be administered consistently with the protocol approved in 2000 by the FDA.  The brief sets forth the substantial medical literature document that the abortion industry's off-label use of RU-486 poses significant well-documented health risks for women.  Based upon the existing state of medical knowledge, the law is rationally related to the protection of a pregnant woman's health and neither bans the use of misoprostol nor restricts the use of methotrexate in the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy.  Thus, the challenged statute does not on its face impose a substantial "undue burden" on a woman's access to abortion since it neither bans the use of RU-486 as approved for use by the FDA, nor does it ban the use at any time of surgical abortion that is always safer than RU-486 to terminate a pregnancy.

As documented by Oklahoma's Attorney General before the United States Supreme Court, eight women have died from bacterial infections following an RU-486 medical abortion administered according to one of the off-label protocols, whereas no women have died from such infections following use of the FDA-approved protocol.  Thus, the Oklahoma Legislature properly acted to address this serious health and safety problem by requiring that RU-486 and other abortion-inducing drugs be administered according to the FDA's prescribed protocol.

JC-LOLP's General Counsel, Sam Casey, said yesterday afternoon at the time the brief was filed:

    "The abortion industry's longstanding opposition and ignorance of any reasonable safety regulation of two powerful drugs never intended by their manufacturers to be used for abortion, because of the industry's selfish desire to make more money while providing less than safe medical supervision for abortion is unconscionable. Hopefully, the Supreme Court of Oklahoma will accept our Oklahoma Doctors' 'friend of the court' advice that Oklahoma law properly reflects the sound medical evidence which demonstrates that the FDA-approved Mifeprex Regimen, including the use of misoprostol as prescribed in the FDA-approved Mifeprex Regimen, is safer than off-label uses of mifepristone and/or misoprostol to induce a medical abortion.  Since surgical abortion is always available as an option throughout the first trimester, and since it is safer and faster than medical abortion, the State's restriction of medical abortions from 63 to 49 days poses no undue burden on access to abortion.  Further, since treatment of ectopic pregnancy and medical abortion are considered separate procedures by the medical community, the Act's restrictions on medical abortions in no way restrict the use of methotrexate to treat ectopic pregnancies.  Consequently, this Oklahoma law best protects women's health while constitutionally posing no undue burden on women's access abortion, as required by the United States Supreme Court."

    Contact: Amy Pedagno, Jubilee Campaign's Law of Life Project (JC-LOLP)

Elgin Escalates Assault on Mobile Pregnancy Services

City Appeals Court Order Protecting Women's Access to Free Services
 
 
Within hours of receiving an additional 30 days from the judge to explore settlement of the case, the City of Elgin filed its appeal of the court's August 8, 2013 injunction order. The court's decision had called Elgin's "effort to curtail private entities from providing free and valuable services to its young women ...ill-advised" and permanently enjoined Elgin's code restrictions which had been used to halt The Life Center's ("TLC") mobile pregnancy services.
 
In March, the Court had found that the young women of Elgin were likely to suffer irreparable harm if Elgin's zoning restrictions were applied to deny them access to the free services and support TLC's mobile ultrasound facility provides. The City then filed a motion to dismiss the case, but the City's motion was denied in its entirety on August 8, 2013. Instead, the court permanently enjoined Elgin from enforcing its "temporary land use" law which it had used to shutdown the mobile ultrasound facility.
 
"We are confident that at the end of the day, the welfare and rights of young women to be fully informed and have access to free pregnancy services will prevail over municipal zoning interests." said TLC's attorney John W. Mauck. "Unfortunately, Elgin taxpayers are going to be paying for the City's ongoing opposition to the rights of a charitable service that is otherwise welcomed in the community."
 
TLC's board chairman John Juergensmeyer added, "In September and October of last year, TLC wrote the City to implore it to accommodate our charitable services to young women. Had Elgin showed it cared for our services, this whole matter could have been avoided at no cost. We regret that Elgin has rejected our multiple attempts to resolve any city concerns and forced us to file this case. While they say they want to resolve our dispute, today's appeal points in the other direction."
 
With the injunction still in place while the case goes up on appeal, TLC's mobile pregnancy services will continue to operate at the usual locations at the Evangelical Covenant Church of Elgin on Fridays from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. and JB's Pub & Bar on Tuesday and Wednesday afternoons and may expand its mobile pregnancy services to other locations.
 
View the Permanent Injunction Order here and the original Complaint here.
 
For additional supporting documents or to schedule an interview, please contact Tom Ciesielka, 312-422-1333, tc@tcpr.net.
 
For Elgin City Council press inquiries, contact Cheri Murphy the Assistant to the City Manager for Community Engagement at 847-931-5667 or Murphy_c@cityofelgin.org.
 
Contact: Tom Ciesielka,  The Life Center (TLC)

August 16, 2013

HHS Mandate Case Appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court

 
A Christian-owned business suing the government over a mandate requiring most businesses to offer potential abortion-inducing drugs is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case.
 
Conestoga Wood Specialties, in Lancaster, Pa., filed the suit last year. Its owners, a Mennonite family, want to run the company according to their faith.
 
"The religious liberty of Americans is not something that should be withheld or dispensed by the government as it arbitrarily sees fit," said Charles W. Proctor III, lead counsel of the Independence Law Center (ILC), representing the Hahn family, along with Alliance Defending Freedom.
 
Earlier this month, the full 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to review an earlier three-judge-panel decision supporting the mandate.
 
The Obama administration required for-profits to comply with the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate by August 2012. Nonprofits get a "safe harbor" until January 2014.
 
"Americans should be free to live out their faith in all areas of life — including the way they run their business," said ILC Chief Counsel Randall Wenger.
 
He's hopeful the Supreme Court will understand this and the "heart-wrenching violation of conscience that it would be to the Hahns to deny them that right."
 
Take Action for Religious Freedom
 
 
Contact: Bethany Monk, Source: CitizenLink

August 15, 2013

8-Year-Old Boy Miraculously Recovers from Brain Damage

Scott & White Children's Hospital in Temple, TX
 
Sometimes, life can change in a moment. For the Carroll family, that moment came on Monday, July 15th, 2013 in the form of an 18-wheeler crashing into the rear of their van on the highway. Thus began the family's greatest test of faith, and the clearest example of God's miraculous power.
 
Nikki Carroll began immediately assessing her children. Their ten month old was dangling in his car seat, pressed between the door and the seat. Their three year old girl's head was millimeters away from being crushed and their 4 year old son was covered in glass, bleeding from his neck. Right away, she knew something was wrong with their oldest son, Cadyn. He was slumped over and unresponsive, and for a moment, Nikki thought he was gone. God didn't wait to show His faithfulness. A paramedic and a nurse were nearby, as well as a pastor. They diligently helped the family until the ambulances arrived. Complete strangers ran to embrace the children, wrapping them up and treating them like they were their own. Nikki's husband Grant suffered a head wound and was laying on the glass covered highway, pale and in shock. Although the scene was chaotic, Nikki embraced the truck driver in forgiveness and prayed with him, all while her son's fate was unknown.
 
Everyone was rushed to the nearest hospital, where most of the family was discharged in a few hours with minor injuries. Given the nature of the accident, that alone is miraculous. The state trooper on the scene said that no one should have walked away. Cadyn, however, was intubated and sent to ICU, still unresponsive. The next several days were a roller coaster of emotions, punctuated by the news that Cadyn had sustained an injury called shear damage, or DAI (Diffuse Axonal Injury). When the neurologist delivered the diagnosis, he warned Nikki not to research it on the web, because the statistics are terrifying. Ninety percent of people with shear damage either die or fall into a vegetative state. Those who do wake up are severely impaired for life. There was absolutely nothing that medicine could do. It would take a miracle for Cadyn to recover.
 
Family, friends and church members rallied to pray, but the prayer didn't stop there. Cadyn's story spread through social media, and soon people from across the country and the world were praying for his healing. Grant shared about the war of faith that waged in their hearts. "We always knew God could miraculously heal people, but knowing something and experiencing something are two very different things. All we could do was pray in the name of Jesus and trust that His power is real."
 
That Saturday, July 20th, Cadyn opened his eyes, setting off a recovery that shocked doctors and proved the power of faith in Christ. As he progressed, doctors warned his parents that he might plateau, and that his recovery would be long and arduous, but Cadyn seemed to defy them on every point. First, he began writing, penning a letter to the truck driver that simply said "I forgive you". His left side was paralyzed, but soon it began to move. He began to walk that afternoon. He spoke just moments after doctors said he wouldn't for months; they said he would have a feeding tube for weeks and he pulled it out himself the next night. The original prognosis was that he would be in ICU for many weeks, and then go through inpatient rehab for many months. Exactly two weeks after the accident, July 29th, Cadyn walked out of the hospital.
 
The miraculous recovery continued once he returned home, and now he is almost fully recovered, all within a month from the accident. Cadyn also told his parents he saw angels in his hospital room, three to be exact, and there were more angels at the accident scene. He also heard Jesus speak to him in his heart, saying that He was going to protect Cadyn. Nikki shared more of his words. "One of Cadyn's life ambitions is to be a pastor and tell people about Jesus. He said the devil tried to kill him because he's special to God, but the devil couldn't kill him, just make him weak for a little bit." One of the doctors thanked Cadyn before he left, saying "thank you for showing me what a miracle looks like."
 
Officials from Scott & White Children's Hospital in Temple, TX have asked the Carroll family to present Cadyn's story to the board of trustees on August 16th, an event they all look forward to as an opportunity to share the miracle God performed.
 
Contact: Grant Carroll, Child Refuge

Pro-Lifers, vegans and Starbucks all need conscience rights

 
A leading religious freedom lawyer says the HHS mandate controversy involves whether government can force businesses and their owners to disregard their own values as they seek to make a living.
 
Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said that businesses frequently make "decisions of conscience."
 
"Starbucks has ethical standards for the coffee beans it buys. Vegan stores refuse to sell animal products because they believe doing so is immoral. Some businesses refuse to invest in sweatshops or pornography companies or polluters," Rienzi said in an Aug. 11 opinion essay for USA Today.
 
"You can agree or disagree with the decisions of these businesses, but they are manifestly acts of conscience, both for the companies and the people who operate them," he said. "Our society is better because people and organizations remain free to have other values while earning a living."
 
The Becket Fund is among the opponents of the Department of Health and Human Services' mandate that requires most employers to provide full insurance coverage for sterilization and contraception, including some drugs that may cause early abortions. The U.S. Catholic bishops' conference has also decried the measure as a massive infringement on religious freedom.
 
Rienzi said that the Obama administration's efforts to compel businesses to purchase coverage for abortifacient drugs reject the idea that one can "make money and be religious."
 
Acts of conscience are informed by religious views about activities in which one can or cannot participate, he explained.
 
"Some Jewish store owners cannot sell leavened bread at certain times of the year. Some Muslim truck drivers cannot transport alcohol. Some Catholic prison workers cannot participate in executions," he said.
 
"If religious freedom means anything, it means that these people – just like Chipotle, Starbucks and everyone else in our society – are allowed to earn a living and run a business according to their values," Rienzi stressed.
 
"In a tolerant society, we should just accept that our neighbors will have different beliefs, and that government-enforced conformity is rarely the best answer to this diversity."
 
Source: CNA

March for Life founder still influencing movement after death

 
A year after her death, Nellie Gray – called the "Joan of Arc of the pro-life movement" – is still having a profound impact on the annual March for Life that she started nearly 40 years ago.
 
"Nellie will always have a strong presence," said Jeannie Monahan, president of the March for Life.
 
She told CNA on Aug. 12 that while the organization is currently "in a time of transition," it is not "doing away with the foundation built by Nellie," but instead "standing on her shoulders" in order to look to the future.
 
Gray started the national March for Life in Washington, D.C., after the Supreme Court decisions Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton made abortion legal throughout the United States. At the time, she was a federal worker in the Department of Labor, but she quit her job to work exclusively with the March for Life, running the annual event until her death on Aug. 13, 2012.
 
"She lived, breathed and slept the March for Life," Monahan said, noting that "her last recorded calls and conversations were about the March for Life."
 
Gray's dedication to the pro-life movement was spiritual as well, Monahan explained, noting that "she prayed for conversion of people who didn't have the same views," such as politicians, abortion doctors and women seeking abortions.
 
"In her own lifetime she did see many conversions," Monahan continued, pointing to one of the marches in the early 1990s when Gray stood alongside Sandra Cano and Norma McCorvey – the two plaintiffs in the cases legalizing abortion – as well as Dr. Bernard Nathanson, an abortion doctor who promoted laws allowing the procedure throughout the U.S. All three of the individuals had become pro-life activists.
 
The March for Life has continued since Gray's passing, with the organization adding additional staff members, expanding its outreach, activating a legislative branch and building an educational segment.
 
January 2013 marked the first time that the annual march has taken place without Gray, but Monahan said the event's "positive, peaceful spirit" reflected the approach that its founder always held.
 
Commenting on the broader society, Monahan said that the past year has seen "the culture moving in a pro-life direction." She pointed to numerous pro-life laws that have been passed in the last year, including a Texas law banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
 
In addition, she referenced media and music as two areas in which a cultural shift is starting to be seen.
 
The goal of the March for Life, she explained, "is not only to change the laws but to change hearts, to create a culture where people wouldn't want to choose abortion."
 
"We are winning in the area of the culture of life in the United States."
 
To commemorate the one-year anniversary of Gray's passing, Monahan and the March for Life are asking pro-life supporters to "do something positive or beautiful for life" and share it via digital media with the label #marchforlife.
 
The March for Life's website explains that these beautiful acts can include "prayer, an act of charity, a donation to a pro-life group, praying in front of an abortion clinic."
 
"If Nellie were here today," the website states, "she would not want to be praised for her work; rather she would want everyone to do something concrete that will help to build a culture of life."
 
Source: CNA/EWTN News

Legal expert: Defunding ObamaCare is possible

 
A legal expert and former Justice Department counsel says the effort to defund ObamaCare through a continuing resolution can work – regardless of what Democrats and Republicans may say.
 
Hans von Spakovsky of The Heritage Foundation tells American Family Radio that one of the things critics have mistakenly said is that what's coming up is a discretionary spending bill, and you can't use that to stop mandatory spending. In this case, the new healthcare law.
 
"Mandatory spending is stuff for entitlements, Social Security, things like that," says von Spakovsky. "But that ignores the fact that the Hyde Amendment, which has been attached every year to discretionary budget spending, has been used for 40 years to prevent funding by Medicaid for abortions."
 
Therefore the Hyde Amendment is a "great example" of how to use the bill to accomplish that, he says.
 
Spakovsky adds that the bill from Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and others might not stop all of the funding for all of the provisions in ObamaCare, but it will stop just about everything.
 
"The only thing it might not be able to stop are things that have already been done, but as we know, 90 percent of this has not yet gotten implemented," says Spakovsky.
 
Meanwhile, Spakovsky rejects the idea that the Obama administration would keep implementing the healthcare law in the event the defund effort is not approved and there is a government shutdown.
 
Spakovsky says a federal law known as the Antideficiency Act requires the government to only spend money on functions that are necessary to preserve property and human life, and makes it illegal for federal employees to spend money that has not been appropriated.
 
Contact: Chris Woodward (OneNewsNow.com)

Court Rules in Favor of Mobile Pregnancy Center in Illinois

Inline image 1

A pro-life outreach in an RV will continue saving babies.

In March, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, temporarily halted the city's restrictions against The Life Center (TLC) Pregnancy Services. This let the mobile facility bring its services back to both of its locations — the Covenant Church of Elgin and JP's Pub & Bar. The new injunction means they can stay permanently.

The RV provides ultrasounds, pregnancy tests and counseling.

"The court was right to stop the city of Elgin from preventing women in need from obtaining free ultrasounds and health information," Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Steven Aden.

The city tried to close down TLC's services in the summer of 2012. TLC then discovered that the city council had amended its zoning code to classify the outreach as a "temporary land use" limited to just four uses per year at each location.

"Life Center's free services help both the city and its citizens, so the city's actions have been both counterproductive and unconstitutional," Aden explained. "Women deserve access to the help they need for themselves and their unborn children without undue interference from the government."

Source: CitizenLink by Bethany Monk

August 9, 2013

Action urged on conscience-protection legislation

 
The National Committee for a Human Life Amendment (NCHLA), which works closely with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on abortion-related legislation, is urging pro-life Americans to speak with members of Congress in support of the Health Care Conscience Rights Act.
 
During the summer recess, members of Congress "will be learning what is important to their constituents, and this will influence their actions when they return in the fall," an NCHLA action alert noted. "Please use this opportunity to ask your Representative and Senators to support H.R. 940/S. 1204."
 
The NCHLA also provides a link to contact representatives and senators by e-mail: http://nchla.org/actiondisplay.asp?ID=292
 
Suggested Message: "Please co-sponsor the Health Care Conscience Rights Act (H.R. 940, S. 1204), and work for its approval in upcoming 'must-pass' legislation. Government must not force Americans to violate their religious and moral beliefs on respect for life when they provide health care or purchase health coverage."
 
Source: Catholic World News/National Committee for a Human Life Amendment (NCHLA)

August 8, 2013

The ten dumbest things said in defense of abortion


 
 

The past few years haven't been great for abortion. More and more people are calling themselves pro-life, including more young Americans than ever before. Pro-life laws are being passed in record numbers each year. While it would be foolish to say that pro-lifers are winning the war on abortion, it wouldn't be wrong to say that we're making progress — and that has the pro-aborts panicking. Some pretty crazy statements are being made in their desperate attempt to keep abortion on demand legal at any time, for any reason. Some are flat-out ridiculous, some are insulting, and others chilling. These are ten of the dumbest things said in defense of abortion.

10. Women shouldn't have to choose between their cell phones and birth control.

In a stunning display of entitlement, students at the University of New Mexico got upset because the school would no longer be subsidizing birth control. While pro-aborts often try to give sad, sad stories about women who need birth control out of medical necessity, or need abortion because they will DIE without it, the truth is, it's often merely a matter of convenience. The reason women should get free birth control? Because otherwise, students might be forced to choose between their birth control and… their cell phones! Or their gym memberships! Oh, cruel world! It is just an unthinkable notion that a college student be forced to work out for free at the icky gym on campus, or go with a cheaper cell phone model — or, even worse, pay for the ultra-cheap generic brand birth control at Wal-Mart. Worst of all is the notion that they might be forced to abstain from sex, since they can't afford birth control and aren't ready for a baby. Because in the pro-abort world, women are merely animals, incapable of controlling their sexual urges, right?

9. Pro-lifers need a lesson on the birds and the bees.

Nancy Pelosi makes her first appearance on our list, where she responded to laws limiting (but not outlawing) abortions in North Carolina and Texas by saying that pro-life politicians needed "a lesson on the birds and the bees". Because the only people who understand sex and pregnancy are the pro-aborts, right? Unfortunately, that has turned out to be less and less true over the years. Pro-lifers have embryology on their side, as well as the science of pregnancy and fetal development. Meanwhile, pro-aborts just try to insist that a baby is just a clump of tissues, or that fetal pain laws are dumb because fetal pain doesn't exist, or that there are no adverse risks that come with abortion. It doesn't matter that the science isn't on their side — they'll still keep claiming, like Nancy Pelosi did, that it's pro-lifers who are the idiots in need of educating.

8. Women should go into debt to have an abortion.

Abortions are often expensive, costing thousands of dollars when late-term. Ripping babies into pieces is hard work, after all. But this can mean finding the money for the abortion is difficult for some women. Thankfully, pro-aborts like Leela Yellesetty are here to help! What does she do when women are struggling to afford an abortion? Why, help put them into debt, of course! Yellesetty bragged about how she would talk women into taking about payday loans with interest rates over 300%, pawning their valuables, and putting the money for their procedure onto already maxed-out credit cards. Who cares that these women will be breaking their backs to pay off a $3,000 abortion funded by a payday loan with a 322% interest rate? The abortionist got their money, and that's all that matters.

7. White people are trying to eliminate abortion to "build up the race".

Pro-lifers have long since spoken out about the overwhelming number of black babies that are aborted. We speak out against the fact that black babies are being aborted at higher rates than other babies, or that many abortion clinics intentionally target minority neighborhoods. And why is this? According to CBS analyst Nancy Giles, this is all because white pro-lifers want to build up the white race. Yep, that's right. Our dastardly plan is to build up the white race by opposing abortions of black babies, therefore leading to… erm… the births of more black babies. Makes perfect sense.

6. Men don't deserve to have a voice on abortion.

According to many pro-aborts, men shouldn't be allowed to talk about abortion, at all (unless they're for abortion, in which case it's totally cool). This is because men can't get pregnant, so as one pro-abortion blogger said, male voices should be silenced in the abortion discussion. Nevermind that the baby is half the father's. Men need to just shut up about abortion! And meanwhile, anyone who isn't black can't speak about slavery, and anyone who isn't Jewish can't talk about the Holocaust. Right? It's the same logic, after all.

5. You're only a person if you can play tennis.

A few years ago, Choice USA released a video about pregnancy that was just hilarious. To show how ridiculous the idea of a fetus being a person is, a pregnant woman is told that she has to play doubles tennis instead of singles, must pay for two tickets to see a movie instead of one, and must split a bill between two people three ways — because her unborn child is a person. Get it?? Because everyone knows that a person is defined by what they can or cannot do. In a wheelchair and can't play tennis? Well, clearly this means you aren't a person worthy of life.
4. As a Catholic, abortion is sacred ground.

Nancy Pelosi makes her second appearance on our list, where she talks about her wackadoodle version of the Catholic faith. Pelosi defended not only abortions, but late-term abortions, by saying that as a practicing Catholic, keeping late-term abortions legal was sacred ground. Abortion may be a sacrament for pro-aborts, but in the actual Catholic church, protecting all human life is what's actual sacred ground. Pelosi's fight to keep abortion legal goes against Catholic teachings, and pretending she's a pro-abortion warrior because she's a Catholic does nothing more than make a mockery of the Church.

3. Women who don't support abortion are men with breasts.

It's not unusual to hear a pro-abortion feminist say that women can't be feminists unless they support abortion. Unless you fall in lockstep with their abortion worship, you can't be a part of their club. But they also insist that they're pro-choice, not pro-abortion. Actually exercise a choice they don't agree with, though, and they'll turn on you before you can blink. Case in point: Pennsylvania State Representative Babette Josephs, who smeared pro-life women by calling them men with breasts. Because you can't be a real woman unless you're willing to advocate for the brutal murder of your unborn child!

2. Women would be nothing without abortion.

Carly Manes is 19-years-old, and defines herself as an abortion activist. She's able to do all kinds of cool stuff, and so are other women. Why? Because of abortion! According to Manes, it is only because abortion is legal that women are able to devote their energy to do things like go to school, work as an activist, be an athlete, or decide to be vegetarians (like Manes!). Women owe everything to abortion. Without the ability to kill our unborn children, women would be able to accomplish nothing. Girl power!

1. Abortion takes a life, but it's a life worth sacrificing.

Salon blogger Mary Elizabeth Williams takes the number one spot on our list, with easily the most chilling statement. According to Williams, abortion is taking a life — but that's OK because it is a life worth sacrificing. Williams claims that an unborn child is a life, just not one worth as much a mother's feeling that a pregnancy is inconvenient. For Williams, some lives simply have more worth than others, with the "others" being disposable. It takes a truly depraved mind to argue that it's acceptable to take a life merely because that person isn't worthy of life.

Contact: Cassy Fiano, Source: Live Action News

Prepare to Win in 2014: Register to Vote

 
One of the most important ways anyone can help save unborn babies is with their vote. The impact pro-life voters make in sending pro-life candidates to Congress and to their state house is immeasurable. Research demonstrates that pro-life legislation saves lives, and every life saved is priceless.
 
The first question is…are you registered to vote?
 
If you have not voted previously, you do have to register. That only makes sense. But many people who have voted before have moved. It's easy to forget that if they have not updated their records, they will be ineligible to vote
 
If you registered to vote for a prior election and still live at the same address, you do not need to register again. However, if you have never voted before, or have not voted while living at your current address, you will need to register.
 
Even if you are not yet 18 years old, if you will be 18 years old by Election Day, you are eligible to register to vote.
 
Imagine getting all excited on Election Day about voting for the first time, or for the first time at a new address, only to find that—through some simple oversight—you're not properly registered. It's too late! Your unhappiness will be compounded by the knowledge that pro-abortion forces are out there working hard to register their own people.
 
Since registration is done through your state, the information you must submit may vary. Registration deadlines also vary widely, with many states setting them about a month in advance of the election.
 
Stay on the safe side by registering now!
 
Perhaps the easiest way to complete a voter registration application is to go through National Right to Life's web site—http://nrlc.capwiz.com/election/register_vote. The process is very user-friendly.
 
 
1) A map of the United States will appear and you will click on your state. At that point you will be able to review the specific rules that apply to you.
 
2) You will be asked to affirm that you are an eligible citizen and to provide your personal information, including an e-mail address. You may register with a party of your choice. (Doing so may be required if you wish to vote in an upcoming primary.)
 
3) A few clicks later you will see all the information you've entered inserted into the proper spaces on the form itself. Print out the form, sign and date it, and affix the proper postage.
 
4) Most applicants will need to enclose a copy of a valid photo ID or a qualified document that indicates your name and address. Again, follow your individual state's instructions.
 
5) Only one step remains. Put all of this in the mail and wait for confirmation from the authorities that you are registered and ready to vote.
 
The second question is… are your pro-life friends registered to vote?
 
1) Ensure that your pro-life friends are also ready to vote. After downloading the form, you will see the "Tell a Friend" section that allows you to notify up to six friends via e-mail of the registration link. Include any Hispanic friends, as they may register "En Español" by clicking the button at the top of the first page.
 
For all those who want to learn more, right above "Tell a Friend" are links to races in your state and to action alerts that will keep you informed of the latest-breaking legislative developments.
 
If you run into difficulties check with your local authorities who are the experts in registration requirements. Your phone book, and certainly your Internet-ready computer, should be able to direct you to your state's elections division. But if you have pertinent and/or general questions, feel free to call National Right to Life at (202) 626-8838.
 
2) Organize a voter registration drive in your church. Several years ago a local pro-life chapter organized a voter registration drive in a small West Virginia church. Fifteen people including the pastor and his wife registered to vote! They meant to get around to registering after they moved but had not found the time. In a close race a few votes may make the difference.
 
Some people aren't registered to vote, others just don't care to vote, still others stay home to "make a statement" and somehow "teach a lesson," and others simply forget to vote. Pro-lifers can never consider that possibility. When we don't vote, babies die and their mothers and families are harmed.
 
Remember, lives are at stake. All eligible pro-life citizens should be prepared to vote.
 
Contact: Karen Cross, National Right to Life Political Director
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Abortion clinic closure #42 ... and counting

 
The abortion industry is setting a new record – one that pro-lifers should consider as a positive sign.
 
Basing its decision on two dozen serious health and safety violations, the North Carolina Department of Health has suspended the license of Femcare, an abortion clinic in Ashville. That marks the 42nd abortion clinic to close so far this year, eclipsing the 24 that closed during all of 2012.
 
Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue, likes the trend.
 
"If you look around at the abortion industry, there's not one single abortion clinic opening – they're all closing," he remarks. "And it shows that from a high watermark in 1991 of about 2,200 abortion clinics, we're down to 625; and the rate of them closing has sped up like never before."
 
The violations at the North Carolina abortuary were revealed during a routine inspection on July 18-19. Those violations ranged from anesthesia masks and tubing being held together with tape, to failure to sweep and mop the operating room floor.
 
While the shuttering of Femcare was not directly related to the state's just-signed law requiring abortion clinics to meet the standards of an outpatient surgery center, Newman believes it is still a good example of how effective state laws are establishing minimum standards for those clinics – if they are enforced.
 
"They cannot comply with normal ambulatory, medical, common-sense standards of medicine," he contends, "and when they're inspected, like this particular one was for the first time in six-and-a-half years, they're forced to close. They lose their medical license."
 
In addition, since the murder conviction earlier this year of Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell and the convictions and plea deals of his employees, abortion clinic workers are leaving the industry believing they might be next.
 
Contact: Charlie Butts, Source: OneNewsNow.com

'Hell' gets worse: pro-life group interviews abortion patient to expose truth

 
More information is surfacing about a Houston abortion clinic, this time from a patient.
 
A video produced and released by Life Dynamics in May prompted a criminal investigation into abortionist Douglas Karpen, when three former clinic workers alleged that he killed toe-wiggling babies with medical instruments or twisted their heads off with his hands.
 
Now, Life Dynamics founder Mark Crutcher tells OneNewsNow his pro-life organization has interviewed a former abortion patient for an expanded DVD called "An American Abortion Clinic."
 
He described the two-hour video as "a look into hell."
 
Crutcher, Mark (Life Dynamics)"What happened to her at that place was on one hand unbelievable," says Crutcher, "but on the other hand we talk to post-abortive women virtually every day, and what she was telling us is what we hear on a routine basis."
 
"It's just that the public doesn't know about it," adds Crutcher, "because the abortion industry's little lap dogs in the secular media won't tell them about it."
 
But Life Dynamics is going to spread the truth through "An American Abortion Clinic," and Crutcher says it's astonishing to hear.
 
The first portion of the DVD is the former clinic workers describing how the aborted babies were handled. In the second portion, they describe how women are treated, which Crutcher says "blows the argument about 'safe and legal' just completely out of the water."
 
Click here for the video: http://youtu.be/fXh2PdqCQpM
 
Contact: Charlie Butts, Source: OneNewsNow.com

Government Office to Investigate Planned Parenthood’s Use of Taxpayer Funds

 
A division of the federal government has accepted a request from lawmakers to investigate the nation's largest abortion seller and its affiliates to determine how they are using taxpayer dollars.
 
Four Republican lawmakers in February asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the use of money for Planned Parenthood and other organizations. More than 50 members of Congress signed the request.
 
Rep. Diane Black said she's pleased with the GAO's decision.
 
"This independent study of how much and for what purpose these dollars are allocated to all abortion providers is necessary for Congress to ensure accountability and oversight," the Tennessee lawmaker said. "I look forward to reviewing the results and ultimately, mobilizing the support needed to stop federal funding of abortion providers once and for all."
 
Planned Parenthood performed a record 333,964 abortions last year — and nearly 1 million in the past three years.
 
"At the same time, they also received more federal taxpayer dollars than ever before — a record $542 million, an 11-percent increase over the last two years," said Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, also one of the four. "Planned Parenthood and other organizations that provide abortions clearly benefit from Uncle Sam, but there's no accounting to prove how they actually use that money. This GAO report would shine a light on how our tax dollars are being spent."
 
Reps. Pete Olson, from Texas, and Chris Smith, from New Jersey, also spearheaded the request.
 
The GAO's announcement comes just two weeks after Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast settled charges of fraudulently overbilling the Medicaid program in Texas.
 
"American taxpayers deserve to know if their hard-earned money is being funneled to groups that are abusing it," said Michael Norton, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). "The GAO is right to investigate the stream of tax dollars going to Planned Parenthood and other specific organizations."
 
Reports suggest that the abortion seller owes millions.
 
"Audits and other reviews of Planned Parenthood affiliates' financial data and practices — as well as 45 audits of state family planning programs and one audit of a family planning organization — found more than $108 million in waste, abuse and potential fraud," Norton explained. "Taxpayer money is only supposed to be used responsibly and for the common good."
 
Contact: Bethany Monk, Source: CitizenLink

Rep. Aaron Schock: Defunding "Wouldn't Necessarily Stop The Affordable Care Act"

 
At a town hall meeting Monday, Illinois Republican congressman Aaron Schock said the effort to defund Obamacare, "wouldn't necessarily stop the Affordable Care Act from being implemented".
 
Currently Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are leading an effort in the Senate, joined by some 100 members of the House of Representatives, to vow not to vote for any continuing resolution or other appropriations bill that contains funding for Obamacare.
 
Congressman Schock said, "Operationally the Affordable Care Act benefits are not actually part of the discretionary line items of our budget. There is money in there for implementation for HHS, that we have access to but in terms of the big behemoth of the federal exchanges and so on that's not in the budget."
 
That statement by congressman Schock is in contradiction to what Senators Lee and Cruz are saying, as well as Heritage Action, which says Obamacare's mandatory spending can be held up in the continuing resolution, which will fund the government after September 30th.
 
Speaking about the fear some Republicans have in Washington about the prospects of President Obama and/or Harry Reid shutting down the government over the defunding of Obamacare congressman Schock said, "I'm not convinced that after a month of a government shutdown, when our seniors don't get their Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the troops don't get paid, that my position would be a sustainable position. At the end of the day this is all a public opinion battle. A better strategy is to expose the law."
 
View Rep. Aaron Schock video here: http://youtu.be/gy04q3-3NWU
 
Contact: Ulysses Arn, Source: Illinois Review

64 lawsuits pending against HHS mandate

 
Surveying the legal landscape surrounding the HHS mandate, the National Law Journal finds that "there are approximately 64 challenges to the contraceptive coverage requirement pending. Of those, 36 were filed by for-profit companies. The remaining number have been brought by religiously affiliated nonprofit organizations."
 
The article reviews conflicting decisions at the US appeals court level, as well as a recent appellate court decision against Liberty University, which has lodged a more general objection to being compelled to provide any health insurance. The university's case, according to the National Law Journal, "is definitely headed to the Supreme Court after a remand by the justices in June 2012."
 
Source: Catholic World News

August 1, 2013

Explaining Abortion to Children

 
I once spoke at a Catholic parish on behalf of the cause–the pro-life cause, that is. I chose my words carefully, as I always do. Uncompromising and compassionate is the tone I strove for, because that's the way I feel.
 
After Mass, a woman approached me, balancing a toddler astride one hip and holding a slightly older child by the hand.
 
"I really liked your talk," she began, and as her voice trailed off, I could sense a "but" hanging in the air.
 
Sure enough.
 
"But," she continued, glancing at her children, "I just don't like my kids hearing about abortion, I try to protect them from things like that, and I'd hope that when I brought them to Mass, I wouldn't be put in this situation."
 
Before I could answer, she rushed on: "See, we're expecting another baby, and they're so excited. It upsets them to know that some people don't want their babies."
 
And it should. I understand this woman's concerns because I've lived with it myself for many years. I, too, protected my children from knowledge about that horrific thing called abortion for as long as possible, but when my oldest finally asked me about it directly, it turned out he was just looking for confirmation of information he'd heard elsewhere.
 
Although legal abortion is a quarter-century old and is performed with horrifying frequency, it's still something we feel children shouldn't know about.
 
Our squeamishness about explaining it to children should tell us something. The reason we protect them from knowledge about abortion is not only because of what it is, but also of how we sense this reality will affect children and their self-understanding.
 
After all, remember how we teach children about pregnancy and childbirth? When small children ask, "Where did I come from?" we usually answer something like:
 
"Mommy and Daddy made you with God's help. At first you were very small and you lived in Mommy's stomach. For nine months you grew and grew. You didn't look like a baby at the very first, but it was still you. Mommy could feel you kick and move, and sometimes we'd even talk to you through Mom's tummy. Finally, you came out so we could hold you in our arms and love you right here and right now."
 
Notice who the center of that conversation is? Not "a pregnancy." Not "a fetus," and not even just any old baby, but a very special "YOU!" When we tell children about the beginning of life, we make it clear that their lives began long before they were born. Their identities as a unique "you" were established from the very beginning.
 
So, when children hear about what abortion is, they are horrified, not just by the thought of babies being killed–and what other way is there to explain it–but also by fears about the solidity of their own existence. Almost every child wonders at some point, rationally or irrationally, if he or she was adopted. Are we raising a generation of children who will now be nagged by fears that their lives were in danger when they were in the womb?
 
Yes, abortion is disturbing to children, and once again, we should learn something from our little ones.
 
When we explain anything to children, we have to put it in simple terms, accessible to them through their own experience of the world. So when we answer the question, "What's abortion?" we are forced to say it like it is, because none of the euphemisms would make any sense to them.
 
It makes it impossible to ignore what abortion is really about–killing real babies as unique and as precious as those little ones who asked that troubling question with trusting, yet worded eyes. Perhaps in forming the answer, we'll be moved to resolve that, through our prayer and our support for pregnant women in need, a few more of those precious eyes might be given the chance to open and wonder in the beauty that is God's gift of life.
 
Reprinted with permission of Our Sunday Visitor.
 
Editor's note. This story from the July 8, 1998, National Right to Life News is our latest installment in the year-long "Roe at 40" where we bring you a sample of the best stories that have appeared in NRL News going all the way back to 1973. My guess is you will quickly understand why this story is among my favorites.
 
Contact: Amy Welborn, Source National Right to Life

336 million forced abortions are enough: Littlejohn files UN complaint over China’s one-child policy

Human rights activist Reggie Littlejohn has filed a complaint with the UN body that oversees women's rights, asking that it crack down on China's one-child policy and its totalitarian regime of forced abortion, gendercide, and human trafficking.
 
Women's Rights Without Frontiers, of which she is president, filed a "Complaint Concerning Coercive Population Control" with the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW) today.
 
Reggie Littlejohn
 
The document cites the "Agreed Conclusions" from the UNCSW's recent meeting in March, in which the world body vowed to "condemn and take action to prevent violence against women and girls in health-care settings, including...forced medical procedures," specifically including "forced sterilization, forced abortion, and forced use of contraceptives."
 
"The Chinese government," Littlejohn wrote, "is the major perpetrator in the world of 'forced medical procedures' of the kind set forth in the UNCSW Agreed Conclusions."
 
China, which boasts of preventing 400 million births since instituting the coercive population control policy in 1979, continues to forcibly sterilize women who have had one child (or in rare cases, two), and to abort any children beyond the government-prescribed limit, in defiance of international human rights norms.
 
Littlejohn recounts 13 incidents since the beginning of this year alone, including:
 
• In February, Family Planning officials ran over a 13-month-old child, the family's third, after getting into an argument with the family;
 
• In March, 42-year-old Yang Yuzhi committed suicide after enduring two forced sterilizations that went wrong, leaving her in excruciating pain;
 
• On May 23, 26-year-old pregnant mother Zhang Yinping died after a forced abortion that occurred six months into her pregnancy;
 
• Just two days later, a 22-year-old woman gave birth to "Baby 59" and "accidentally" flushed the child down the toilet. The fact that the single mother did not have a birth permit is believed to have played a role in the "accident"; and
 
• In July, Family Planning officials reportedly broke one of Li Fengfei's teeth, forced her to give "consent" to a forced abortion, and left her in critical condition after her abortion at 18 weeks.
 
"Forced abortion is official government rape," Littlejohn wrote.
 
She added that, due to the sexual imbalance created through sex-selective abortions that favor male children, China ranks as a Tier-3 nation on the State Department's Trafficking in Persons or TIP Report.
 
In addition to demanding that Beijing answer for its population policies, Littlejohn asked the world body to investigate its own UN Population Fund (UNFPA) for complicity in the one-child policy.
 
The complaint reads in full:
 
Women's Rights Without Frontiers today lodged the following "Complaint Concerning Coercive Population Control" with the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women:
 
To the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW):
 
I am the founder and president of Women's Rights Without Frontiers, a non-profit, non-partisan international coalition to combat forced abortion, gendercide and sexual slavery in China. I write to complain about coercive family planning in China.
 
As you know, WRWF has submitted Complaints for the past two years. While the UNCSW acknowledged receipt of these Complaints, China has never responded to them. We believe that, given the international outrage generated by forced abortion and gendercide in China, it behooves China to respond to our official Complaints.
 
UNCSW's "Agreed Conclusion" Condemns Coercive Family Planning
 
The UNCSW's topic for this year was "Elimination and Prevention of All Forms of Violence Against Women and Girls." There is no greater violence against women than forced abortion, up to the ninth month of pregnancy. As demonstrated in the cases set forth below, the women themselves sometimes die as a result of these violent procedures. There is no greater violence against girls than gendercide, which has claimed up to 200 million lives of girls selected for abortion solely because they are girls.
 
Women's Rights Without Frontiers was honored to make four presentations about forced abortion and gendercide in China at the UNCSW in March of this year. At three of them, we screened the "It's a Girl" film, the authoritative documentary about gendercide in India and China. While WRWF does not support all the "Agreed Conclusions" that came out of the UNCSW 2013, we do commend the following language:
 
34. The Commission urges government, at all levels, and as appropriate, with the relevant entities of the United Nations system, international and regional organizations . . . to take the following actions:
 
...(aaa) Condemn and take action to prevent violence against women and girls in health-care settings, including . . . forced medical procedures, or those conducted without informed consent, and which may be irreversible, such as forced hysterectomy, forced caesarean section, forced sterilization, forced abortion, and forced use of contraceptives . . .[1]
 
These Agreed Conclusions represent the acknowledgement that forced medical procedures are a form of violence against women and call for an international condemnation of such procedures. WRWF feels that the voices of hundreds of millions of suffering Chinese women and girls were heard by the UNCSW, and for this we are grateful.
 
At the same time, these Agreed Conclusions are but the first step to end this form of gender violence. While the Agreed Conclusions condemn coercive family planning in the form of forced medical procedures, they take no stand on gendercide, the sex-selective abortion, abandonment and fatal neglect of baby girls. If the UNCSW stands for women's rights, it must take a stand against the selective abortion of up to 200 million baby girls.
 
The Chinese government, moreover, is the major perpetrator in the world of "forced medical procedures" of the kind set forth in the UNCSW Agreed Conclusions. The UNCSW should put teeth into its Agreed Conclusions by presenting this Complaint to the Chinese government and requiring a response.
 
WRWF Calls for an Investigation of UNFPA
 
The UNCSW, moreover, should follow its own advice to "condemn and take action to prevent violence against women . . ." by thoroughly investigating the activities of the UNFPA in China. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell found the UNFPA to be complicit with coercive family planning in China. WRWF believes that any independent investigation of the UNFPA's current practices would arrive at the same conclusion.
 
The UNCSW would not be the first to undertake such an investigation. In a striking blow against China's One Child Policy, the European Parliament passed a resolution strongly condemning forced abortion and involuntary sterilization in China and globally, citing Feng Jianmei, who was forcibly aborted at seven months in June, 2012. Specifically, the resolution, 2012/2712 (RSP) "strongly condemns the decision to force Ms. Feng to have an abortion and condemns the practice of forced abortions and sterilizations globally, especially in the context of the one-child policy." The resolution further states that "the EU has provided, and still provides, funds for organizations involved in family planning policies in China," and "urges the Commission to ensure that its funding of projects does not breach" the European Parliament's commitment against coercive population control.
 
It is significant that the European Parliament has acknowledged that it provides funding for family planning in China and has urged the Commission to ensure that this funding is not associated with coercion.  For decades, the UNFPA has worked hand in hand with the Chinese population control machine, which is coercive.  We have no doubt that any unbiased investigation by the European Parliament, the United Nations, or any other governmental body will reveal that UNFPA is complicit with coercive family planning in China. The UNCSW should likewise undertake such an investigation.
 
The One Child Policy causes more violence against women and girls than any other official policy on earth.
 
It is China's war on women. Any discussion of women's rights, or human rights, would be a charade if forced abortion in China is not front and center. It does not matter whether you are pro-life or pro-choice on this issue. No one supports forced abortion, because it is not a choice. Here is a video in which former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, strongly condemns coercive family planning in China. http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/index.php?nav=hillary_clinton
 
This violence became increasingly evident in the past year, giving rise to both international and domestic criticism of the One Child Policy. We had hoped that when President Xi Jinping succeeded former President Hu Jintao, we would see reform of violent family planning practices. Unfortunately, such has not been the case.
 
To the contrary, just this year there has been much suffering caused by the One Child Policy.  We are aware that the cases that make it to the West are just the tip of the iceberg.  For every family that posts their experience of heartbreak on the internet, there are thousands or millions that suffer silently. Every month has brought a fresh atrocity:
 
• On January 14, 2013, Wang Xia, the Chair of the National Population and Family Planning Commission, stated that China "must unwaveringly adhere to the One Child Policy as a national policy to stabilize the low birth rate as the primary task."  See, "Chinese Official Plans to Keep the One Child Policy, Says Maintaining Low Birth Rate is a Priority." http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=904
 
• On February 4, 2013, Family Planning Officials got into an argument with a couple who had three children.  In the tussle that followed, these Officials ran over the couple's thirteen month old baby with their car, killing him.  See, "Father's Interview about baby crushed to death during One Child Policy enforcement confirms violent coercion." http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=938
 
• On March 14, 2013, it was reported that Yang Yuzhi hung herself in the Family Planning Office of Beizhanglou Village, Taikang County, Henan Province.  Forcibly sterilized twice, she had for years suffered chronic pain from these traumatic procedures.  Her medication drained the family finances, so she regularly petitioned the Family Planning Office for compensation, to no avail.  Yang's death also emphasizes the absence of the rule of law in China.  She died while petitioning for justice.  See, "Woman's death by hanging at Family Planning Office – Suicide or Something Else?  [Warning, Graphic Photo]," http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=986
 
• On March 19, 2013, in Dabancheng Village, Hubei Province, a mother of two died after a forced sterilization, which took place against a doctor's orders.  See, "Woman dies after forced sterilization." http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1010
 
• Also in March, the Health Ministry reported that since the Chinese Communist Party started implementing coercive population control measure, doctors have performed 336 million abortions, 196 million sterilizations, and 403 millionn insertions of intrauterine devices.  See, "Data reveal scale of China abortions."http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/6724580a-8d64-11e2-82d2-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2VVYauyQb
 
• On April 24, 2013, Congressman Chris Smith and Women's Rights Without Frontiers attempted to deliver to the Chinese Embassy in Washington, DC 200,000 signatures on petitions against forced abortion and gendercide in China.  The Embassy would not open its door to accept the signatures, but rather refused them.  See, "Chinese Embassy refuses petition on gendercide, forced abortion in China."  http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1109
 
• On April 25, 2013, the relatives of blind forced abortion opponent Chen Guangcheng received death threats.  Chen's nephew, Chen Kegui, had acute appendicitis, for which he was not allowed out of the prison for possible surgery.  Kegui had been detained in 2012 for defending himself with a kitchen knife when government thugs attacked him and his family upon the discovery that Chen Guangcheng had escaped.  See, "Blind activist Chen Guangcheng's relatives receive death threats." http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1058
 
• On May 15, 2013, in Xinyi City, Jiangsu Province, more than 20 Family Planning Officials beat a farmer almost to death, because he and his wife have three children.  Zhang Futao suffered severe head injuries and is in critical condition from the beating.  According to the family, he has a fractured skull and a brain hemorrhage. His three children are ages 12, 6 and 4.  See, "Family Planning Officials Fracture Skull of Family of Three." http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1136
 
• On May 25, 2013, a woman from Yuyue Town, Hubei Province, died after a forced abortion.  She was six months' pregnant. See, "Woman dies of forced abortion, six months pregnant." http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1141
 
• On May 29, 2013, it was reported that a 22 year old woman flushed her newborn baby boy down a toilet.  We believe that this desperate act was not unrelated to the fact that she was 22 years old, unmarried, and without a birth permit.  See, "Flushed down toilet, Chinese baby survives." http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/28/world/asia/china-baby-rescue
 
• On June 1, 2013, a woman from Yuyue City in Hubei Province, was forcibly aborted at six months of pregnancy. She died of a hemorrhage. This case was reported briefly in Chinese on a micro-blog, which posting was quickly removed.http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1141
 
• On June 3, 2013, the China Daily reported that a city in central China is considering the implementation of a new law that would fine unwed mothers up to three times their annual income.  This law would likely increase the incidence of forced abortions for those women who could not afford to pay such a steep fine on an emergency basis.  See, "New law would fine unmarried mothers." http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2013-06/03/content_16558001.htm
 
• On July 9, 2013, Li Fengfei, of Bijie City, Guizhou Province was forcibly aborted at nearly 18 weeks of pregnancy. Family Planning Officials beat her breaking one of her teeth, forced her fingerprint onto the consent form for an abortion, and injected her with potentially lethal dosages of abortion-inducing drugs. She was last seen in the hospital in critical condition. Original Chinese source:http://www.chinaaid.net/2013/07/blog-post_1312.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+chinaaid%2FdpAY+%28对华援助协会%29
 
China's One Child Policy Causes Sexual Slavery
 
The State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons or TIP Report recently downgraded China to a Tier 3 nation – a status it now shares with Iran, Sudan and North Korea. Tier 3 nations may be subject to sanctions, if approved by the U.S. President. http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2013/
 
The TIP Report discusses how China's One Child Policy, combined with son preference, has caused a gender imbalance that is driving human trafficking and sexual slavery, not only within China but from the surrounding countries as well. The Report lists the many nations from which women and girls are trafficked into China: "Women and children from neighboring Asian countries, including Burma, Vietnam, Laos, Singapore, Mongolia, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), as well as from Russia, Europe, Africa, and the Americas, are reportedly trafficked to China for commercial sexual exploitation and forced labor."
 
The TIP Report finds that, despite the prevalence of human trafficking and sexual slavery, the Chinese government's efforts at prevention fall below minimum standards. In fact, the Report finds that many state-run institutions were complicit in the trafficking: " . . . The Chinese government did not demonstrate significant efforts to comprehensively prohibit and punish all forms of trafficking and to prosecute traffickers. The government continued to perpetuate human trafficking in at least 320 state-run institutions, while helping victims of human trafficking in only seven."
 
The TIP Report further criticizes the Chinese government for failing to "address the effects its birth limitation policy had in creating a gender imbalance and fuelingtrafficking, particularly through bride trafficking and forced marriage."
 
Forced Abortion in China: Study finds Correlation with Low Birth Weight, Increased Chance of Death in Subsequent Pregnancies
 
A dissertation submitted to the University of Hong Kong found that children in China are more likely to face serious health complications, including death, if their mothers have had multiple induced abortions. The study concluded that having more than one abortion increases the risk of low birth weight in subsequent pregnancies. Indeed, women who have had three or more induced abortions are at five times the risk of preterm birth in a subsequent pregnancy.
 
The study, conducted by Cui Limin, explained that nearly two thirds of neonatal deaths are related to low birth weight. For children surviving infancy, LBW increases the risk of neuron-developmental problems, respiratory tract infections, and behavioral problems.[2] According to the study, those with very LBW suffer from conditions including cerebral palsy, blindness, impaired hearing and learning disabilities. Besides harming the child, these health problems put extra financial strain on parents, the study noted.
 
Women in China are forced into induced-labor abortions, up to the ninth month of pregnancy. This is a violation of women's rights of the first degree. We are now learning that these forced abortions also put their future children at risk for respiratory complications, cerebral palsy, and even death related to low birth weight. They also may damage a woman's future reproductive and general health. This is a violation of the women's rights and the rights of their future children.  Forced abortion must be stopped, and families should be compensated if their children experience health problems caused by previous induced labor forced abortions.
 
According to the study, 14.37 million induced abortions were performed in 2012 – one quarter of the abortions in the world — many of which were repeat abortions. The study credited the One-Child Policy as "one of the most important factors for the increased induced abortion rate," and cited the prevalence of forced and sex-selective abortions in China.
 
On April 24, 2013, Congressman Chris Smith, "It's a Girl" film director Evan Grae Davis and I attempted to deliver these petition signatures to the Chinese Embassy in Washington D.C. The Embassy refused to accept the signatures. This refusal is symbolic of the way that the Chinese Communist Party turns a deaf ear to all those who criticize its human rights record. They may have refused to accept our petition, but they will not silence the growing international outcry against this brutal crime against humanity. http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/blog/?p=1109
 
Forced Abortion Is Official Government Rape
 
The Chinese forced abortion policy is systematic, institutionalized violence against women. Because of the sheer numbers involved, it is the most massive women's rights issue in the world today, and it must be stopped.
 
I hope to work with you to help end this extremely serious violation of the rights of women and girls in China. Please feel free to contact me should you require any further information.
 
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.
 
Very truly yours,
 
Reggie Littlejohn, President
 
Women's Rights Without Frontiers
 
Stop Forced Abortion – China's War on Women! Video (4 mins)
 
[1] Agreed conclusions on the elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls, UNCSW 2013, pp. 5, 14.http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/csw57/CSW57_Agreed_Conclusions_%28CSW_report_excerpt%29.pdf
 
 
[2] Read the Study: The Effect of Induced Abortion on the Risk of Low Birth Weight, Cui Limin http://hub.hku.hk/bitstream/10722/183648/1/FullText.pdf?accept=1
 
Contact: Ben Johnson, Source: LifeSiteNews.com

Cutting-edge technology meets the pro-life movement: New Save the Storks buses set a new standard

 
A massage chair? iPad-controlled music and lighting? Sonograms that are sent directly and automatically to a physician? These are just a few of the jaw-dropping features that Joe Baker of Save the Storks excitedly enumerated during a casual phone conversation last week. When I asked him what was so special about the new Stork bus, I wasn't prepared for his answer.
 
In the past, the pro-life movement has sometimes lagged behind up-to-date marketing, technology, and outreach technologies. Save the Storks, along with other impressive technological endeavors like the iIncarnate app and Online for Life, has firmly and definitively put that stigma to rest. The newly-released video below explains how the pro-life movement, affected by technology, is changing.
 
Joe explained how the Stork buses, which are a specially-designed and fuel-efficient version of the Mercedez Sprinter with a diesel engine, are created from the inside-out specifically with a pregnant woman's comfort in mind. (As a pregnant woman living in a world that is not usually designed for our convenience, I can vouch for how great this is.) "The vehicle is designed to be atmosphere controlled," he said. "It blocks out sound, and on the iPad we check the girls in on, we can change the temperature and lighting, the music playing, everything. We can even turn on the girl's massage chair."
 
The sonogram system in the Stork buses is also state-of-the-art. They are emailed automatically to a cooperating physician who will review them promptly. "If there's something wrong with the baby," Joe says for example, "then it gets reviewed and addressed right away."
 
Stork-LogoStork buses are very different from typical, traditional "sonogram RVs," which are overly large, often not in compliance with zoning restrictions (making it difficult to maneuver and operate in the crowded urban areas where abortion mills tend to be situated), and carry many features that are unnecessary and non-conducive to the needs of a mobile pregnancy clinic.
 
The Stork bus is much smaller, sleek, and designed to carry solely what is needed to carry out sonogram and counseling services needed.
 
Save the Storks partners their buses with nationally-known pregnancy centers, and their goal is to eventually have a bus in every major city.
 
Contact: Lauren Enriquez, Source National Right to Life News

Judge: Asking doctors to have admitting privileges does ‘irreparable harm’ to women seeking abortion

 
The federal judge who blocked enforcement of Wisconsin's new abortion safety regulations last month has given himself one more week to make a decision on whether to extend the hold until November, when Planned Parenthood's lawsuit seeking to overturn the law goes to trial.
 
Planned Parenthood sued in July to overturn the law, which requires abortionists to maintain admitting privileges at local hospitals in case women are injured during botched abortions.
 
The abortion giant says the requirement would force two of the state's abortion centers to close, because their abortionists don't have admitting privileges, placing an undue burden on women who would have to drive further to get an abortion.
 
Judge William Conley, who was appointed by President Obama, granted Planned Parenthood's request for a temporary injunction against the bill on July 9, saying that he saw no medically justifiable reason for the restriction.
 
"The record to date strongly supports a finding that no medical purpose is served by this requirement," Conley wrote in his decision. "The current system already handles efficiently the very low percentage of women seeking abortions with serious complications."
 
The judge was sympathetic to Planned Parenthood's complaint that one clinic would have had to cancel 30 abortions in the week after the law was signed, with additional cancellations needed at other abortion facilities.
 
"There will almost certainly be irreparable harm to those women who will be foreclosed from having an abortion," he wrote while granting the injunction, "because of the undue burden of travel or the late stage of pregnancy, as well as facing increasing health risks caused by delay."
 
"Since the state has failed to date to demonstrate any benefit to maternal health of imposing this restriction, there is no meaningful counterweight recognized by the United States Supreme Court to justify the act's immediate enforcement," he said.
 
Conley said he intends to make a decision about whether to extend the injunction through the November trial within the week.
 
Contact: Kirsten Andersen, Source: LifeSiteNews.com