ACLU helping underage girls circumvent Illinois' new parental notification law

 

A child wanting to get an abortion without notifying her parents has become the first to challenge a state law that took effect Aug. 15 after pro-abortion activists delayed enforcement with nearly two decades of litigation.

 

Richard Muniz, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said he expects, and is encouraging, many more minor children to bypass the parent notification law, which state legislators approved in 1995.

 

The ACLU of Illinois has created a hotline and has has trained 30-40 volunteers on how to circumvent the statute, as well as the steps required for girls to obtain a judicial bypass. They've also been inculcating primary care providers and clinics about their ACLU-defined role in the process.

 

While the left-wing ACLU has between 60-70 lawyers, they are actively recruiting more, "especially Downstate," said Muniz.

 

Source: Illinois Review

52 abortion clinics close nationwide, none shutter in Illinois

 

During Women's Equality Day Monday, abortion activists angrily tied celebrating women's right to vote to women's right to abort, and bemoaned the number of states that have successfully passed constitutional restrictions on certain types of abortions. Those efforts in individual states have have contributed to 52 abortion clinics being closed.

 

A Huffington Post graphic, circulated by The Progress Report, showed the states that have moved legislatively to protect unborn children and their mothers and those who've successfully protected the right to abort anytime, for any reason. See graphic below the fold:

 

 

Source: Illinois Review

Illinois Abandons Abstinence-Only Program

 

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn recently signed a bill into law requiring public schools to teach Planned Parenthood's version of sex education. Students in sixth through 12th grade will receive comprehensive sex education, which includes information about birth control and sexually transmitted diseases.

 

This will only give young people a false sense of safety.

 

"The type of education that the Illinois governor is lauding here actually teaches that abstinence is simply one option on a continuum of choices," said Mary Ann Mosack, a member of the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA) board of directors. "That really gives young people the false information and the false sense of security that if they use protection, as they call it, or contraception, that that makes sex safe."

 

For decades, the state sex education curricula focused on encouraging abstinence until marriage. State and federal agencies even subsidized groups promoting such programs.

 

Planned Parenthood claims that when comprehensive sex education is taught, that kids wait to have sex until later.

 

"We would really like to see the definitive studies and the documented studies that show that," Mosack told CitizenLink. "We know that Planned Parenthood sex education has had the lion's share of money for the last 30 years. And they have a dearth of studies that would really validate that claim. But it's a good sound bite, and it makes sense to the public."

 

Abstinence education, however, is affirmed by 26 peer-reviewed studies.

 

"(They) show not only that students are likely to delay sex, but they're also no less likely to use a condom if they do become sexually active — which is only a myth portrayed by those who believe abstinence education is ineffective."

 

Most parents support abstinence education.

 

In fact, "Parents Speak Out," a national survey released by NAEA last year, shows that nearly 76 percent of Democrat parents with school-aged children support it; the poll found that about 87 percent of Republican parents of school-aged children support it.

 

The survey also shows that 85 percent of parents believe that all youth — including those with same-sex attractions — benefit from skills that help them choose to wait to have sex.

 

The Illinois law is not a "done deal," Mosack explained.

 

"As long as parents speak up and become the squeaky wheel in their school districts, I believe that they can thwart those attempts to really force their schools and their districts to mandate this kind of education."

 

Contact: Bethany Monk, CitizenLink

Quest for ethical stem cells prompts moral questions

Embryonic Stem Cells

 

The first human trials for the treatment of blindness using induced pluripotent stem cells has brought the hope of creating stem cell therapies that do not rely upon destroy embryos back in the public eye.

 

However, moral and medical questions surrounding the research on "iPSCs" have raised questions about whether the process is living up to its hopes of providing an innovative advance in biotechnology without relying on the destruction of embryos.

 

"Morally, there is no doubt that iPSC technology is a huge improvement over destroying IVF embryos or cloning embryos to gain pluripotent stem cells," Rebecca H. Taylor, a molecular biologist and author of the Catholic bioethics website "Mary Meets Dolly," told CNA, "but they are not totally free from ethical issues."

 

Taylor pointed to the widespread use of some "morally tainted" cell lines – that is, cells taken from aborted human beings – in various branches of scientific research, including in the creation of induced pluripotent stem cells.

 

The upcoming medical trial, approved by the Japanese government in late July, will be the first human trials using induced pluripotent stem cells.

 

To treat the patients' macular degeneration, scientists will take cells from tissue elsewhere in the patients' bodies and introduce genetic factors that allow the adult cells to become pluripotent stem cells: a type of cell capable of turning into a wide variety of tissues.

 

Having converted the cells into stem cells, the scientists will program the cells to grow new retinal material which can then be transferred back into the patients' eyes. Since the tissue comes from the patient's own body, scientists expect that there will be little or no chance of rejection of the new retina pieces.

 

The scientists anticipate that this therapy will be able to stop damage and vision loss caused by macular degeneration, while current drug therapies can only slow the disease's progress.

 

The technique used in these human trials differs greatly from other stem cell techniques used in the past. Unlike adult stem cells, which are already coded to make only certain kinds of cells, the induced pluripotent cells can be harvested from a number of tissue sources, and turned into almost any other kind of tissue in the body.

 

The only other kind of tissue with such diverse potential is embryonic stem cells, which have been the subject of research hopes for decades.

 

Since embryonic stem cells come from "a human organism that is genetically different" than the subject who will be treated with them, Taylor explained, they are more likely to be rejected by the subject than are tissues grown from induced pluripotent stem cells.

 

"If proven safe to use in patients, iPSC technology may mean genetically-matched stem cell therapy for a variety of diseases," she added.

 

The creation of induced pluripotent stem cells also offers the hope of a morally superior means of advancing stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells have been the subject of controversy for nearly two decades because the harvesting of embryonic stem cells requires the controlled creation and subsequent destruction of human life in its earliest stages.

 

Since induced pluripotent stem cells offer "patient-specific pluripotent stem cells without creating and destroying a cloned embryo," Taylor said, they offer a "huge improvement over destroying" human embryos for stem cell research.

 

However, norms surrounding the way scientists induce a pluripotent state introduce moral concerns to induced pluripotent stem cell research.

 

In order to induce a pluripotent state in adult cells, two things must typically happen: genetic factors must be introduced into the cell, and the factors must be activated. However, the current standard processes to achieve both of these steps involve the use and destruction of human embryos.

 

Dr. Mahendra Rao, director of the Center for Regenerative Medicine at the National Institutes of Health, explained to CNA that "the Yamanaka protocol is routine" in the medical community.

 

This process, created by Nobel laureate Shinya Yamanaka, was used as a means of limiting the creation and destruction of embryos for research. His technique calls for the growth of factors in a human cell line, Hek293, and  the activation of those factors by a virus in order to induce a pluripotent state. This process will be used in the Japanese human trials.

 

However, the Hek293 cell line was begun with tissue taken from the kidney of a human person who was aborted in the Netherlands during the early 1970s.

 

"The fact that a cell line of illicit origin was used as a tool in this technique does morally taint the research," Taylor explained.

 

She added that this cell line is "ubiquitous in labs all over the world," and that it and other "cell lines derived from abortions that occurred decades ago are common tools in biotechnology." Taylor added that it is so common, that she was "sure many researchers have no idea where these cell lines originated or that they are morally tainted."

 

The use of this cell line and other research derived from aborted subjects has been addressed by Vatican theologians. In its 2005 "Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived from Aborted Human Foetuses," the Pontifical Academy for Life noted that even though the abortions occurred over 40 years ago, "they do not cease to pose ethical problems."

 

They concluded that "vaccines with moral problems pertaining to them may also be used on a temporary basis" if it is a life-threatening disease and there are no alternative vaccines.

 

Otherwise, Catholics and others who wish to respect life at all stages ought to abstain from their use, as well as further research using that technique.

 

The Pontifical Academy for Life emphasized, "there remains a moral duty to continue to fight and to employ every lawful means in order to make life difficult for the pharmaceutical industries which act unscrupulously and unethically," and encouraged the creation and investigation of morally sound research alternatives.

 

In the years since the creation of induced pluripotent stem cells, there has been the creation of morally sound research alternatives, and new techniques that do not depend upon the destruction of embryos are in development.

 

The genetic factors used in the Yamanaka process can be cultured in "other cell lines, that were obtained morally," Taylor clarified.

 

Brendan Foht, assistant editor of the bioethics journal The New Atlantis, explained to CNA that "there are other ways of getting those genes expressed and reprogrammed" that avoid the use of genetic factors and proteins altogether.

 

He noted that research has been done on moving past the Yamanaka process because of the virus' tendency to mutate cells during the activation of the genetic factors, thus potentially creating cancers.

 

In 2008 Yamanaka discovered that pluripotent stem cells could be created through the introduction of plasmids – a ring of genetic material – into an adult cell. These rings of genetic code are easily grown in bacterial cells, and would not rely upon embryo destruction at all.

 

Scientists are also looking now to replace the use of the genetic factors with drug-like chemicals, which are created in a lab and do not depend upon growth in the objectionable embryonic cell line or any other living cell.

 

Given the forward steps toward creating ethically-produced induced pluripotent stem cells, the moral standing of the induced pluripotent stem cell trial in Japan is thrown into serious doubt.

 

Pointing to the Vatican's statements on the use of vaccines relying on embryo-destructive research and their permissibility only in in life-threatening cases with no other moral alternatives, Foht suggested that the Japanese trial is immoral.

 

Even with the alternatives and breakthroughs present, however, Foht said pro-life advocates "need to persuade the scientific community to do ethical research," and continue to speak against unethical and objectionable research.

 

Taylor echoed the need to speak out against induced pluripotent stem cell research that uses embryonic cells.

 

"We need to make sure that we object to cell lines of illicit origin whenever we hear of their use in science or medicine," so that investigation of moral research will be continued and that "iPSC technology may soon be free of that particular moral stain."

 

Source: CNA/EWTN News

Proponents of Plan B restriction undeterred

 

A lawmaker in Oklahoma says her state is likely to restrict use of the "morning-after" pill for minors in spite of an initial court ruling.

 

Earlier this week a federal judge blocked today's implementation of a law that would have required minors in Oklahoma to obtain a prescription for Plan B, which is otherwise sold over the counter. The Center for Reproductive Rights, a pro-abortion group, obtained the order based on a technical issue that state law bars legislation covering more than one subject.

 

Oklahoma Senator AJ Griffin believes the court won't have the last word on the substance of the measure. "I feel very confident that if this ruling is held up, we will run the same language during our next session in a standalone bill so that it cannot be challenged because of the loophole in our rule," she tells OneNewsNow.

 

As the Republican lawmaker points out, Plan B is nothing more than a mega-dose of birth-control medication. "All other forms of chemical birth control that use hormones are only available by prescription – for numerous reasons," she notes. "They have potential side effects, especially if used incorrectly."

 

In addition, says Griffin, there is no research to prove that it's safe for minors. "We [also] have the issue of the potential pregnancy," she adds, "but more importantly we have the issue of the behavior that puts a young person in a position to need this medication."

 

Over the counter availability, she argues, will not change that behavior.

 

Charlie Butts (OneNewsNow.com)

Living a double life? Doc balances pre-natal work with abortions

Dr. Larry Leeman

 

A pro-life group in New Mexico says it is alarmed that a physician who delivers babies at the University of New Mexico Hospital crosses town to kill babies in the womb.

 

Tara Shaver of Defending Life identifies the physician as Larry Leeman, whose UNM biography states that he is co-director of the Mother-Baby Unit at the hospital.

 

"Dr. Leeman practices the family medicine with a special interest in the care of pregnant women and newborns," the website states.

 

However, few people realize that Leeman performs abortions at the hospital's Center for Reproductive Health, Shaver tells OneNewsNow.

 

"It's the University of New Mexico's own free-standing abortion clinic," she says.

 

Dr. Leeman's work at the abortion clinic is not listed in his 169-word biography, though it does refer to "family planning" among his "areas of research."

 

"And he is also involved in training what they hope to be up-and-coming abortionists," Shaver alleges.

 

Shaver suggests it's hypocrisy on the part of Leeman who should be above the less educated view of life.

 

"They really just are living under the myth and the lie that life begins when a baby is born," says Shaver. "And it's just not scientific and it's certainly not the moral position to take, when we all know that life does begin at conception in the womb."

 

Shaver is hopeful there will be an opportunity for someone with a pro-life view, perhaps a pro-life physician, who sits down with Leeman "to see if he is conflicted at all."

 

Contact: Charlie Butts (OneNewsNow.com)

Federal dollars flow to Planned Parenthood to trumpet ObamaCare

 

 

Planned Parenthood is the beneficiary now of even more federal funds than the $500 million it already receives annually from the federal government.

 

Estimates suggest 40,000 uninsured people live in Washington, D.C., but 100,000 need to sign up to qualify for an insurance exchange under ObamCare. So the government is providing grants, including to Planned Parenthood, to sign up the abortion business's clients.

 

"This is just the latest installation of getting Planned Parenthood involved in running our national health care," says Paul Rondeau of American Life League, noting that the pro-abortion organization spent $14 million to get Obama re-elected.

 

"Just about everything in Obamacare, in the Affordable Care Act, which Planned Parenthood proudly advertises they helped write, creates more customers, more revenue and more wreckage for Planned Parenthood," Rondeau tells OneNewsNow.

 

Planned Parenthood will not only profit from $1 billion for abortions but also from free birth control coverage, ignoring the fact birth control has been linked to breast and cervical cancers.

 

"And yet we are pushing free contraception and free morning-after pills," says Rondeau, "which is a megadose of the same artificial steroids that the World Health Organization has classified as a Class 1 carcinogen."

Rondeau adds Obamacare "is written and driven by a Planned Parenthood population control, contraceptive mentality and ideology."

 

Contact: Charlie Butts (OneNewsNow.com)

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)

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

 

Urge Obama to stop the HHS mandate requiring businesses to provide contraceptives and possible abortion-inducing drugs to their employee health plans.

 

Contact: Bethany Monk, Source: CitizenLink

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

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

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)

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.

 

Okay, when you go to http://nrlc.capwiz.com/election/register_vote

 

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