September 24, 2013

Government Asks Supreme Court to Hear Hobby Lobby Case

 
The Obama administration wants the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether Hobby Lobby should be forced to comply with its mandate requiring for-profit businesses and other employers to offer possible abortion-inducing drugs in their employee health plans.
 
In July, a federal court granted the Christian-owned arts-and-crafts chain temporary relief from the mandate. This decision came one day after an appeals court issued an opinion favoring such a reprieve.
 
"The United States government is taking the remarkable position that private individuals lose their religious freedom when they make a living," said Kyle Duncan, general counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, who is representing Hobby Lobby.
 
The Obama administration required for-profit businesses to comply with the Health and Human Services mandate by August 2012. Nonprofits — many of which are faith-based — have a "safe harbor" until Jan. 1.
 
Kyle is hopeful the Court will rule favorably.
 
"We're confident that the Supreme Court will reject the government's extreme position and hold that religious liberty is for everyone — including people who run a business."
 
Contact: Bethany Monk, CitizenLInk

September 23, 2013

New study says abortion is economic issue, costing America $37 trillion

 
What impact has this massive destruction of human life had on our current economic situation? A RealCatholicTV.com study called "The Cost of Abortion" estimates that America's GDP is currently deficit $37 trillion, due to the millions of Americans that are missing from contributing to the nation's economy.
 
The study looked at abortion statistics from between 1973 (when abortions became legal) and 2007 (the latest year abortion figures are available) to find over 48 million "missing" Americans. In addition, statistics say that half of those aborted would have been females that likely would have had at least one child by the time they reached age 25.
 
Using the number of first and second generation aborted Americans would project to a total of 54,853,850 missing persons, who would have interpreted to $37,642,025,464,469.90 in 2013 U.S. dollars. Because of abortion, America has 52 million fewer taxpayers that would have provided a strong economic foundation for the nation, the study report says. And since the stats are seven years old, the real fiscal impact is significantly more since abortion numbers have not dramatically decreased since 2007.
 
"Because of abortion we have lost millions of successful entrepreneurs, inventors, business owners, physicians, lawyers, teachers, venture capitalists , investors, artists, and, of course, mothers and fathers who would have birthed children whose descendants would have become productive citizens contributing to a robust economy."
 
Source: Illinois Review

Supreme Court review of HHS mandate likely

 
The Obama administration's controversial abortion/contraception mandate has moved a step closer to Supreme Court scrutiny.
 
Both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a business owned by pro-life Christians, asked the high court Sept. 19 to review separate lower court decisions regarding a rule issued to implement the 2010 health care reform law. The regulation from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requires employers to pay for coverage of workers' contraceptives, including medications that can cause abortions.
 
The mandate, as well as the administration's failure to provide adequate conscience protections for pro-life institutions and businesses, has resulted in 71 federal lawsuits.
 
DOJ filed a petition urging the justices to review an appeals court ruling that favored the arts and crafts chain Hobby Lobby, which is owned by evangelical Christians who object to the mandate. On the same day, Conestoga Wood Specialties, a Pennsylvania company owned by a Mennonite family that opposes the rule, petitioned the high court to accept a case it lost in another federal appeals court.
 
If the Supreme Court grants review in either or both cases, it is likely to hear oral arguments early in 2014 and render a decision on the abortion/contraception mandate before it ends its term in late June or early July.
 
Drugs covered by the mandate include Plan B and other "morning-after" pills that possess a post-fertilization mechanism that can cause an abortion by preventing implantation of tiny embryos. The rule also covers "ella," which -- in a fashion similar to the abortion drug RU 486 -- can even act after implantation to end the life of the child.
 
In both cases, the business owners are pro-life and object to providing funds for drugs that can cause abortions. They contend the mandate violates their religious freedom rights. The owners in both cases argue religious liberty protections extend to corporations established for profit.
 
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver agreed in June with Hobby Lobby that the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) applies to businesses established for profit, but the Third Circuit Court in Philadelphia rejected in July Conestoga's RFRA argument, saying "for-profit, secular organizations cannot engage in religious exercise." On Sept. 17, the Sixth Circuit Court in Cincinnati also spurned the religious freedom arguments of another firm, Autocam.
 
Supreme Court review is more likely, given the division among the appeals court circuits.
 
The Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission has filed friend-of-the-court briefs defending the businesses' religious freedom in both cases. The Christian Legal Society wrote both briefs.
 
A lawyer for Hobby Lobby charged the Obama administration with "taking the remarkable position that private individuals lose their religious freedom when they make a living."
 
"We're confident that the Supreme Court will reject the government's extreme position and hold that religious liberty is for everyone -- including people who run a business," said Kyle Duncan, general counsel with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents Hobby Lobby.
 
Members of the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, challenged the abortion/contraception mandate based on their belief life begins at conception. The suit involves both Hobby Lobby, which has more than 550 stores in the United States, and Mardel, a sister Christian bookstore chain. Protected for now by a preliminary injunction, the Greens have said they will not comply with the mandate, even as their refusal could cost them $1.3 million a day in penalties.
 
The Hahns, who own Conestoga Wood Specialties and also believe life begins at conception, have been living under the mandate since its group health plan was renewed in January.
 
"The question is whether the government can pick and choose what faith is, who the faithful are, and when and where they can exercise that faith," said Matt Bowman, senior legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Conestoga.
 
The ERLC and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops lead a coalition of diverse religious organizations that have urged the Obama administration to protect freedom of conscience under the mandate.
 
HHS issued a final rule on the mandate June 28, but its foes found it inadequate. The rule did not provide a religious liberty accommodation to for-profit companies such as Hobby Lobby and Conestoga, and religious freedom advocates said it failed to remedy the conscience problems for objecting non-profit organizations, such as evangelical and Roman Catholic universities.
 
The 10th Circuit case is Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius, while the Third Circuit case is Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius. Kathleen Sebelius is the HHS secretary.
 
Compiled by Tom Strode, Baptist Press

Pro-lifer: When abortion clinics hide statutory rape, where are the police?

 
The abortion industry is continuing to protect pedophiles, and there is no evidence that will change.
 
Case in point is a complaint filed with the Medical Licensing Board against an Indiana abortionist who, based on documentation, performed an abortion on a 13-year-old girl and did not report it to authorities.
 
Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics tells OneNewsNow that a pregnant teen is "evidence of sexual abuse" and is supposed to be reported to authorities.
 
"I've said it before and I'll say it again: the American abortion industry is running a pedophile protection racket and they've been doing it for years," says Crutcher. "And they're often getting federal tax dollars to run this thing."
 
That's a reference to the more than half-billion federal tax dollars alone going to Planned Parenthood, which has been a major player.
 
Crutcher contends the answer is "for the law enforcement community to do its job," which is to "start going after" people who fail to follow Indiana's mandatory reporting laws.
 
"And until they do these, little girls are sitting targets," Crutcher claims. "They're sitting ducks for these men who rape little girls…"
 
In 2002, Life Dynamics conducted an undercover phone investigation of over 800 abortion clinics and was appalled to learn that the majority were willing to cover up for pedophiles and do underage abortions.
 
Contact: Charlie Butts, OneNewsNow.com

New Poll shows majority of the public dislikes ObamaCare, even more feel uninformed

 
As the United States House and Senate jockey over funding ObamaCare and the "health insurance exchanges" it created are about to launch, a Washington Post/ABC News poll released today speaks volumes about how the public sees the "Affordable Care Act" three years later.
 
Overall the results show opposition to ObamaCare and a deep conviction neither the federal government nor the states are prepared. The headline to the ABC News story explaining the results is "Obamacare Arrives 3 Years Later, Little Understood and Not Well-Liked." What do the results tell us?
 
First, by a ten point margin (52% to 42%), the public opposes ObamaCare. "The 52% level of opposition to the law is the highest level since April 2012 in this polling series," writes Ed Morrissey. (ABC News's Damla Ergun adds, "In 16 ABC-Post polls since August 2009, it has never received majority support.") Among independents, there is slightly greater opposition—54% to 42%.
 
Second, women are very unhappy. While 46% of  men support the law,  only 38% of women support ObamaCare. Significantly while Obama's job performance continues to receive near unanimous support (7 out of 8) from African-Americans, not even half-48%–support what is often called Obama's "signature domestic accomplishment."
 
"Fifty-five percent, further, disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling implementation of the law, with 'strong' disapprovers outnumbering strong approvers by a 23-point margin," Ergun writes.
 
Asked what effect ObamaCare has had thus far, almost twice as many (36%)  say the law it's worsened the health care system overall as say it has improved the health care system (19%). The remaining 39% saw no effect as yet.
 
And the worse number of all is when respondents were asked if felt they have adequate information on the law. Barely a third (35%) said yes, while 62% said no.
 
Contact: Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life

September 22, 2013

40 Days for Life 2013

 
On Wednesday, September 25, it all begins again. On that day, 40 Days for Life vigils will begin in 306 cities from coast to coast in North America — and in eight other countries around the world. This figure does not include the non Planned Parenthood facilities that have closed across the US!
 
The following are the 40 Day locations for Illinois. Please make every effort to sign up for a time slot! If for some reason you are unable to attend personally, due to location or health, plan on spending some extra time in Prayer to end abortion during these 40 Days!
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
AURORA
 
Planned Parenthood
3051 East New York Street
Aurora, Illinois
 
Please do not park in the parking lot belonging to Planned Parenthood. Your vehicle may be towed. Park in public spaces.
 
Contact us
 
Karen Moore
karen40days@gmail.com
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
CHAMPAIGN
Planned Parenthood
302 East Stoughton
Champaign, Illinois
 
Contact us
 
Laura Gallant
40days@prolifeillinois.com
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
CHICAGO
Albany Medical Surgical Center / Family Planning Associates
5086 North Elston Avenue
Chicago, Illinois
 
Contact us
 
Victor Vallejo
Respect Life Office
Archdiocese of Chicago
312-534-5355
vvallejo@archchicago.org
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
DOWNERS GROVE
 
Access Health Clinic
1700 75th Street
Downers Grove, Illinois
 
Contact us
 
40DaysDG@gmail.com
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
GLEN ELLYN
 
Aanchor Health Center
1186 Roosevelt Road
Glen Ellyn, Illinois
 
Contact us
 
Ava Voissem
glenellynfortydaysforlife@gmail.com
 
Campaign events
 
Kickoff Rally
Wednesday, September 25, 7:30 pm
Outside Aanchor Health Center
1186 Roosevelt Road
Glen Ellyn, Illinois
 
Confirmed speakers will be Bishop Joseph Siegel of the Diocese of Joliet; Nancy Kreuzer, Chicagoland coordinator of Silent No More Awareness; Matt Woodley of the Church of the Ressurrection in Wheaton; and other local prolife and religious leaders.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
OTTAWA
Jordan Block Park
119 West Main Street
Ottawa, Illinois
 
Main Street between La Salle Street (Route 23 southbound) and Columbus Street (Route 23 northbound), across from the downtown courthouse. This is 1/2 block south of the Planned Parenthood office.
 
Contact us
 
Amy Kimura-Bayley
amykimurarn@gmail.com
 
Campaign events
 
Kickoff Rally
Tuesday, September 24, 4-7 PM
Midpoint Rally
Saturday, October 19, 5-7 PM
Victory Rally
Sunday, November 3, 6-7 PM
All events are at Jordan Block Park.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
PEORIA
National Health Care
7405 North University Street
Peoria, Ilinois
 
Between the Women's Care Center and the Early Learning Center.
 
Contact us
 
Karen Guth
309-453-7493
peoria40daysforlife@gmail.com
 
Campaign events
 
Midpoint Rally
Sunday, October 13, 5 pm
Parking lot of the Women's Care Center
7319 North University Street
Peoria, Illinois
 
Rain location: St. Vincent de Paul - old gym
6001 North University Street
Peoria, Ilinois
Closing Rally
Sunday, November 3, 5 pm
Outside National Health Care
7405 North University Street
Peoria, Ilinois
 
Parking in the Women's Care Center lot.

September 20, 2013

Mandated waiting period for a tattoo ... but not for abortion?

 
While the practice of abortion is wide open and available on a walk-in basis in Washington, DC, the District's government is considering a waiting period to decorate one's body.
 
While tattoo artists are complaining that a proposed ordinance will damage their "walk-in" business, a spokeswoman for the DC Health Department says a 24-hour waiting period for tattoos or body piercings is necessary so people are in the "right frame of mind" and don't regret their decision afterwards. The suggested waiting period is found among 65 pages of proposed regulations for tattoo parlors handed down recently by that department.
 
Brad Mattes of Life Issues Institute sees a bit of hypocrisy in the proposed ordinance for the nation's capital.
 
"One of the main things is they don't want people staggering into these places drunk or high on drugs or whatever and regretting their decision," he explains. "But then I thought, Well, why not have a 24-hour waiting period for abortion? – because the ramifications of that decision are so much more severe than a tattoo or a piercing."
 
As the pro-life spokesman points out, a woman or young girl in the capital city can get an abortion at any time during the pregnancy and for any reason. "And the tragic statistics of the District show that 41 percent of all pregnancies there end in abortion, which is twice the national average," he laments.
 
Tattoo parlors object to the waiting period because they fear it will hurt business. As Mattes notes, that's what happens to abortion facilities as well.
 
"When we say women need a 24-hour waiting period, they say, Well, this is going to be a hardship on women – and that's not the case at all," he tells OneNewsNow. "They're just not going to make as much money if she changes her mind in the meantime."
 
Mattes says the DC Council should be more interested in protecting the unborn and their mothers than in preventing people from making impulse decisions to get tattoos and piercings.
 
Contact: Charlie Butts, OneNewsNow

Pro-Life Efforts Provide Care and Protection for Women and Children

 
Recently, the Christian Science Monitor published an op-ed by Elizabeth Jahr, in which she asserts "pro-life groups funnel tremendous resources into a legal war against abortion in the US without providing adequate practical support for women to maintain pregnancies. Yet not being able to afford a child is one of the main reasons women have abortions."

In fact, the legal victories Ms. Jahr criticizes have saved many lives, and pro-life events, like March for Life, serve to establish new and continuing support for Pregnancy Resource Centers and other organizations that care for women and children.

Dr. Michael New, assistant professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn and Jeanneane Maxon, vice president for external affairs and corporate counsel at Americans United for Life, both presented well-reasoned responses to the misguided assertion that resources spent on legal battles and pro-life rallies are a disservice to the unborn.

New, using a resource published by the Family Research Council, pointed out that Jahr:

… seems oblivious to the fact that pro-lifers fund a vast network of pregnancy resource centers that provide medical, emotional, and financial support to thousands of women facing unplanned pregnancies every year. A 2010 study by the Family Research Council identified nearly 2,000 US pregnancy care centers that annually assist more than 2.3 million women with pregnancy support, abstinence counseling, and public health access. A conservative estimate of community cost savings for these services, which are predominantly privately funded, during 2010 is more than $100 million annually." The number of pregnancy resources centers continues to grow exponentially while the number of abortion facilities reaches historic lows, many closing due to safety concerns.

New also makes a strong point correlating stricter abortion regulation and protection of the unborn, noting "[t]hese incremental laws serve both a protective and an educational purpose. For instance, the debate over banning partial-birth abortion clearly demonstrated the extremely permissive nature of abortion policy in theUnited States. Perhaps pro-life efforts to protect the unborn are more extensive than Jahr realizes."

Jeanneane Maxon responded eloquently by highlighting her experience working with Pregnancy Resource Centers. She recounted that at the time Jahr's op-ed was published Maxon was attending a CareNet conference, an organization that supports over 1,000 pregnancy resource centers around the country.

I was surrounded by more than a thousand staff members and volunteers who have given countless hours of time, and countless dollars, to compassionately care for women facing an abortion decision. From age seven, I've witnessed and shared in the loving responsibility of providing whatever assistance a pregnant mother might need, as my own mother worked tirelessly as an executive director of a pregnancy care center. Pro-life Americans understand this kind of daily dedication -- responding with money, time and treasure to nurture the potential of every unborn life with tangible resources.

I, too, have been involved with Pregnancy Resource Centers since I was a child and as an adult, became a trained counselor. There are no more selfless, caring, and loving people than the men and women I served with at Pregnancy Resource Centers. We worked not only to promote life, but we also provided a shoulder to cry on, transportation, clothing, diapers, and countless other resources to women throughout pregnancy and well beyond.

Women in crisis pregnancies and their unborn children are also protected by the very laws groups like the Family Research Council and Americans United for Life advocate. Maxon notes that legislation pushing for stronger clinic regulations and more informed consent for women serves to create effective and much-needed protections.

Maxon also noted that events such as the March for Life are a necessary component in effectively aiding women and children in crisis: "(A)t the March for Life thousands upon thousands of people from all walks of life -- charities, churches, synagogues, non-profits, individuals, and business leaders -- join together to reconfirm their belief in something larger than themselves. Family celebrations are a perfect way to recommit to the reality of life and all it demands. Sometimes the best way to show your love for people is a party or a memorial, a celebration of the hope that draws us together."

Far from being a disservice to women or the unborn, pro-life legal efforts and pro-life events serve to create stronger protections for women and unborn children and also serve to educate the public -- generating more supporters, funds, and loving care.

Contact: Anna Higgins, FRC Blog

Seminar at UN to push for pro-life, pro-family development efforts

 
A U.S. religious liberty group and a Mexican development organization held a seminar at the United Nations to advocate the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals in a way that respects human life and the family.
 
"At this crucial time in history when the sanctity of life and the human family are assaulted at every turn, there is an urgent need to address delegates of the United Nation and make them aware of the importance of protecting the dignity and freedom of every human being," Alan Sears, the president, CEO and general counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom, said Sept. 18.
 
"Every innocent life deserves to be protected," he added.
 
The Sept. 19 event, in the Conference Building at the United Nations, aimed to present solid research and development paths to U.N. delegates, dignitaries and other decision makers.
 
The seminar, titled "Life and Family: A Real Approach to Millennium Development Goals," was webcast live at webtv.un.org. The Alliance Defending Freedom and Incluyendo Mexico are co-sponsoring the event.
 
The seminar focuses on the four international development goals concerning education, poverty, maternal health and infant mortality.
 
Dr. Elard Koch, director of the Chile-based MELISA Institute, presented research showing that countries with abortion prohibitions like Chile and Ireland have witnessed dramatic improvements in maternal health and significant decreases in infant mortality.
 
Sociology professor Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin presented case studies on the link between strong family bonds and a solid education in poverty reduction.
 
The event sponsors say that development goals can be reached while strengthening the early personal formation of children and protecting the lives of the innocent unborn.
 
Sears strongly criticized efforts at the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva that seek to decriminalize abortion worldwide.
 
"This is a blatant attack on the sanctity of life," said Sears, who will speak at the seminar.
 
Rosa Leal de Pérez, First Lady of Guatemala, also addressed the gathering.
 
After the seminar, a reception at the Millennium Hotel at One United Nations Plaza honored Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina.
 
The Alliance Defending Freedom has a special website on the Millennium Development Goals and the Thursday seminar at www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/MDGs.
 
Source: CNA

September 19, 2013

DEFUND OBAMACARE - call your Senator today!

 
 
 

Democratic Leader Harry Reid needs 60 votes to fund Obamacare, but there are only 54 Democrats in the Senate! If Republicans hold strong, they can stop it. This is the last opportunity we're going to have to stop Obamacare - CALL & EMAIL YOUR SENATORS and demand they REPEAL Obamacare! USE THIS LINK:
 
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

September 17, 2013

Thousands of pro-life mourners gathered at hundreds of graves of aborted babies on Saturday

 
On Saturday, September 14, thousands of pro-lifers gathered at over 100 gravesites of aborted babies and other memorials to the unborn located nationwide to observe the first annual National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children.
 
With attendance figures still being tallied, the current total stands at over 2,300 attendees nationwide.
 
The date of September 14, 2013, was chosen for this event because it marks the 25th anniversary of the burial of several hundred abortion victims at Holy Cross Cemetery in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where a crowd of 300 mourners attended a memorial service this past Saturday. Among the speakers at this service were Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, bishop emeritus of the Catholic Diocese of Lincoln (Nebraska), and Bishop Donald Hying, auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee.
 
Several other Catholic bishops took part in memorial services held within their dioceses, including Cardinal Francis George, the Archbishop of Chicago, who spoke at a service held at the gravesite of 2,033 aborted babies buried at Queen of Heaven Cemetery in Hillside, Illinois, and Bishop Earl Boyea of the Diocese of Lansing, who spoke at a service at the gravesite of 17 aborted babies at St. Joseph's Cemetery in Lansing, Michigan.
 
Reactions from attendees at memorial services across the country were overwhelmingly positive, with many reporting that they were moved to tears. One woman who contacted us spoke for many when she wrote:
 
A heartfelt thank you to all those who planned and organized the National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children. After reviewing the website, I cried both tears of joy and sorrow. I am so grateful to those clergy, especially Bishops and Cardinals, participating in the Memorials. Of all the children aborted and discarded in our Diocese, we have but one known gravesite, and that little one will witness to the Truth, helping to expose the horrific holocaust of abortion. I am deeply moved that so many Holy Innocents will be loved and remembered. A beautiful and amazing effort; God bless you all!
 
From an organizer's standpoint, it was particularly edifying to have the opportunity to work with several individuals who, having learned of the National Day of Remembrance just a few days beforehand, jumped at the chance to spearhead the planning of a memorial service in their local area on extremely short notice.
 
If We Don't Visit the Gravesites of Aborted Children, Who Will?
 
The National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children stands as a testament to the humanity of the millions of babies whose lives have been tragically cut short before they were born. Although they have been discarded and abandoned, we as members of the pro-life community must mourn their loss as we would mourn the loss of one of our own loved ones. For if we do not mourn them, who will?
 
Members of the three organizations that co-sponsored the National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children—Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, Priests for Life, and the Pro-Life Action League—believe that pro-lifers should be visiting the gravesites of aborted babies, and other memorial sites dedicated to aborted babies, as a habitual part of their pro-life witness.
 
Fostering these regular visits is what the National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children is all about, and what it will continue to be about, as plans are already in the works for the second annual National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children in 2014.
 
Source: Prolife Action League

Here's how to stop ObamaCare

 
Rep. Tom Graves (R-Ga.) has authored a Continuing Resolution, the Security, Stability, and Fairness Resolution (H.J.RES. 62), that will defund ObamaCare in its entirety for the coming fiscal year. His bill will fund the rest of government with the sole exception of ObamaCare.
 
This means that if there is a shutdown of government, it will be done by those who want to continue to fund ObamaCare.
 
Congress must pass a Continuing Resolution (CR) by September 30 to avoid a government shutdown. The House may vote AS SOON AS TOMORROW on whether to continue funding for ObamaCare or cut it off.
 
This law is so bad that congressional staff have exempted themselves from it.
 
This is the best chance we may ever have to defund the gargantuan and hopelessly misguided piece of legislation that is ObamaCare.
 
TAKE ACTION
 
Call the Capitol Hill switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for your congressman by name. Urge him to co-sponsor H.J.RES. 62, a CR that does not contain a single penny of funding for ObamaCare.
 
Remember that according to the Constitution all appropriations bills must start in the House. This means that the House can stop ObamaCare in its tracks this week. No money, no ObamaCare.
 
ObamaCare:
 
-Is so bad that congressional staff have exempted themselves from it
-Violates freedom of religion and conscience by requiring Christian businesses to pay for abortifacients
-Will send your tax dollars to health care providers who perform abortions
 
Source: American Family Association

Support for ObamaCare plunges to 39%

 
It's never been a secret that ObamaCare has long been unpopular. But as the components of the "Affordable Care Act" are rolled out, the numbers who oppose ObamaCare grow larger. (See also "NBC's Chuck Todd: Bad PR To Blame For ObamaCare's Unpopularity.")
 
The latest evidence of popular discontent is evidenced by a new CNN/ORC International survey where 57% oppose all or most of the provisions of ObamaCare. Not only has the percentage in favor shrunk to 39%, the President's signature domestic achievement is taking a hit among key Democratic constituencies.
 
CNN Political Editor Paul Steinhauser writes
 
"Support has dropped in virtually all demographic categories, but it has fallen the farthest among two core Democratic groups – women and Americans who make less than $50,000."
 
CNN Polling Director Keating Holland told Steinhauser
 
"Those are also the two groups that are most likely to pay attention to health insurance issues, and possibly the ones most likely to be affected by any changes," adds Holland. "That may be particularly true for lower-income Americans who are most likely to have part-time jobs, be on Medicaid, or not currently have health insurance and thus be the first to have to navigate the new system."
 
National Right to Life vigorously opposes ObamaCare because of its abortion subsidies and provisions for abortion-expanding administrative mandates, and because it will lead to rationing of life-saving medical treatment.
 
Earlier this week, NRLC formally urged the director of the Office of Personnel Management "to tell the White House that the agency cannot break the law by paying for health plans for federal employees that cover elective abortion – not even to accommodate the White House's desire to placate pro-abortion pressure groups."
 
Contact: Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life

No Illinois U.S. House members sign onto bill that would defund Obamacare

 
Despite an ongoing efforts to defund the unpopular Obamacare, not a single Illinois Congressman is listed among the 42 co-sponsors on U.S. Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) bill introduced Thursday that would fully delay and defund Obamacare until 2015, while funding the government for FY 2014.
 
The 42 members that have signed onto Graves' "Stability, Security and Fairness Resolution" (H.J.Res. 62 - See attachment below) are significant in that House Republicans must have no more than 16 defections on any legislation to pass a continuing budget resolution to keep the federal government funded beginning October 1. Groups such as Heritage Action that have been calling for Congress to defund Obamacare are endorsing Graves' plan.
 
"After weeks of working with and listening to members on how to approach the government funding deadline, it's clear that House Republicans are united around two goals: keeping the government open and protecting our constituents from the harmful effects of Obamacare. Today, my 42 cosponsors and I are putting forward a plan that achieves both goals," said Rep. Graves.
 
"This plan is straightforward. We will achieve long-term stability by funding the government for the next fiscal year. Additionally, the resolution includes the three House-passed appropriations bills that affect our national security and our veterans. Our troops, their families and our veterans should not have their priorities put on hold," Graves continued. "Finally, our plan will achieve fairness for every American by fully delaying and defunding Obamacare until 2015. This approach builds upon the Obama Administration's policy of delaying portions of Obamacare and relieves taxpayers of the burden of funding a program that is not being implemented."
 
Stability, Security and Fairness Resolution Summary
 
Stability: Keeps the government open for FY2014.
 
· A Continuing Resolution for FY2014 for the nine non-security bills, with overall spending for the entire bill, security and non-security, at the post-sequestration number of $967.4 billion.
 
Security: Prioritizes funding for national security and veterans.
 
· Includes the Defense, Homeland Security and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bills for FY2014 as passed by the House.
 
Fairness: Provides healthcare fairness and taxpayer relief by defunding and delaying Obamacare until 2015.
 
UPDATE: The following was taken from THOMAS.gov at 4:00 PM CST - September 13, 2013 - 42 co-sponsors are listed and none from Illinois.
 
 
Source: Illinois Review

September 13, 2013

No to Ad Hoc Death Panels

 
JAMA has editorialized concerning Futile Care Theory, aka medical futility. The idea is that when a doctor or bioethics committee believes that wanted life-sustaining treatment isn't worth the suffering or cost, they should be able to veto a family or patient's decision to stay alive and limit treatment to comfort care.
 
The journal is reacting to a study finding that ICU doctors believe that 20% of ICU care is "futile." JAMA cogently notes that the study is of limited value, since it only records the perceptions of one doctor per patient, and does not include the views of nurses, families, etc.
 
It then makes some editorial recommendations that I think are worth considering. From "Futile Treatments in Intensive Care Units:"
 
First, we believe that clinicians should generally avoid using the term futile to describe such treatment and instead use the term potentially inappropriate. It is exceedingly rare for surrogates in ICUs to request treatments that are strictly futile (ie, stand no chance of achieving their intended goal). Instead, disputes generally arise from requests for treatments that stand at least some chance of accomplishing the patient's goal but for which the clinician believes that there are competing ethical considerations that may justify treatment refusal, such as the low likelihood of benefit or the high cost.
 
Whatever you call it, to use a widely deployed polemic, that amounts to an ad hoc death panel.
 
Second, from an ethical and legal standpoint, these disputes are often more complicated than they seem. Although in some cases clinicians may believe strongly that it would be wrong to administer the requested treatments, there is ongoing debate about the boundaries of acceptable practice near the end of life. Short of brain death, there are no criteria or rules to which clinicians can appeal to justify decisions to refuse life support, at least when those treatments hold even a small chance of achieving the patient's goals.
 
Indeed.
 
Third, clinicians' initial response to requests for treatments that they believe are wrong should be to increase communication with the patient or the patient's surrogate rather than simply to refuse the request.
 
No question.
 
Fourth, if the conflict becomes intractable despite intensive communication, clinicians should pursue a fair process of dispute resolution rather than refusing unilaterally to provide treatment…Important components of a fair process include seeking a second opinion from a qualified physician, case review by the hospital ethics committee, attempts to transfer the patient to another institution when such a transfer might be appropriate, and informing surrogates of their right to seek judicial intervention.
 
No. I am all in favor of dispute resolution processes. But they must be mediating as distinguished from quasi-judicial. The committee cannot have the final say.
 
I have attended these meetings, and they can be very intimidating. Everyone in the room tends to know each other–and usually interact often with the doctor, who may be a hospital employee known as a hospitalist–leading to a real (if unintended) stacked deck favoring the institutional culture.
 
I do agree that intractable disputes belong in open court, with a right to discovery, deposition, cross examination, appeal–and press coverage. But the hospital should have the burden of proof and the duty to take the matter to court, not the family.
 
So let us say no to ad hoc death panels. Allowing imposed withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment at the bedside–whatever it is called–would further undermine the people's already waning faith in the health care system.
 
Contact: Wesley J. Smith, National Right to Life/nationalreview.com
 
Editor's note. This appeared on Wesley's blog at nationalreview.com.

2/3rds oppose physician-assisted suicide in poll conducted by New England Journal of Medicine surveying its own members

 
The headline on the story is encouraging enough—"Most Doctors Oppose Physician-Assisted Suicide, Poll Finds"—but that's only the beginning. Here's the opening paragraph of Steve Reinberg's story for HealthDay.
 
He is writing about a poll conducted by the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) of the journal's readers, mostly health-care providers.
 
"Whether doctors should help patients die continues to be a hotly debated topic within the medical community, a New England Journal of Medicine poll finds. The journal questioned readers about a hypothetical near-death case and received more than 2,000 valid responses. Roughly two-thirds worldwide — including 67 percent of replies from the United States — said they disapprove of physician-assisted suicide. Most readers of the journal are doctors."
 
Okay, what else?
 
·   That 2/3rds "no" vote came even though the case was really designed to get agreement: a 72-year-old man with incurable metastatic prostate cancer. I'm guessing the authors were not happy with the results, for they wrote that "online voting . . . is prone to bias and is likely not to be scientifically valid."
 
·   Likewise with Barbara Coombs Lee, president of the pro-euthanasia Compassion & Choices. Coombs said that while she doesn't believe doctors should be forced to do something they have an objection to, "neither should patients be held hostage to the moral objection of a dissenting physician."
 
·   Ditto for Marcia Angell, MD, a former editor of the NEJM and a proponent of physician-assisted suicide. She told Robert Lowes of Medscape Medical News, "[The survey] doesn't tell me much," said Dr. Angell, who is a senior lecturer on medical ethics at Harvard Medical School, in Boston. "These are the people who chose to respond. They're not all practicing physicians."
 
·   While it is regrettable that a majority of respondents from 18 states supported physician-assisted suicide, it is significant that respondents from the first two states to first legalize physician-assisted suicide– Oregon and Washington—did not.
 
·   Reinberg provides the needed context. He wrote, "The American Medical Association strongly objects to physician-assisted suicide. 'Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally inconsistent with the physician's professional role,' the association states. 'Requests for physician-assisted suicide should be a signal to the physician that the patient's needs are unmet and further evaluation to identify the elements contributing to the patient's suffering is necessary.'"
 
·   Of the more than 200 comments the NEJM received, many referenced the traditional argument that this would be violating their Hippocratic duty to do no harm and warned of a "slippery slope." One of the interesting responses Lowes chose to highlight really cut to the chase:
 
"I'm struck that my aboriginal patients never ask about euthanasia," wrote a reader identifying herself as a Canadian internist in a remote area of the country. "I am realizing that our focus on individual autonomy is a culture-specific one, and occurs at the expense of other values such as connection to other people, valuing of the full human experience, and the ability to receive our life's trajectory without always controlling it.
 
"To raise my hand to kill…never for me, and never (I hope) for my profession."
 
Contact: Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life

“I Just Wanted My Pregnancy”: Women duped into aborting her baby gives first interview to CNN’s “New Day”

Remee Lee
 
The interview Tuesday with CNN's Chris Cuomo lasted only a few minutes, but no viewer could watch Remee Lee tearfully recall how she had been duped into chemically aborting her child and not be deeply moved.
 
Andrew Welden pled guilty this week to lesser charges in exchange for the prosecution dropping the murder charge made possible by the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act legislation that was instigated by NRLC and signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2004.
 
In a complicated and duplicitous ploy, Welden convinced Lee that Welden's father, an obstetrician, had diagnosed her with a bacterial infection and had prescribed a common antibiotic. In truth, "Weldon stole his father's prescription pad to obtain Cytotec, the abortion pill, and disguised it as the antibiotic," according to CNN. "He even forged a phony label."
 
To the best of my knowledge Cuomo, the son of pro-abortion former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, has never displayed any sympathy to our cause. But his questions of Lee were very empathetic.
 
He asked if Lee would want further contact with Welden, who faces a jail sentence of up to 15 years.
 
Lee: "I always wanted there to be. This isn't what I wanted, none of this is what I wanted. I just wanted my pregnancy. Even if he would have left me alone and never seen me again or never seen the child, I just wanted that, that's it."
 
Cuomo: "The baby mattered the most?"
 
Lee: "Yes."
 
Cuomo: "It's all politics and math until you have something growing inside you, isn't it? When you had that baby growing inside of you and you lost it, what did it make your realize about when it was your child?"
 
Lee: "Nothing else matters in the world to me. Everything I thought was important before this took a really big change when this blessing came into my life. …There's no words for the horror I wake up to every day, that this is my reality. There's no escaping it, there's no turning it off."
 
Cuomo—"And as difficult as it is for you to deal with this and watch the case, what brings you here, what gives you energy, you say, is that you want to fight for the life of the unborn child."
 
Lee: Long answer in one word. Yes! "I never want this to happen to anyone else."
 
Contact: Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life

Abortion clinic closings on rise in U.S., 44 tallied year to date

 
For Abby Johnson, the closing of a single Planned Parenthood center demonstrated her dramatic reversal from abortion clinic director to leading pro-life advocate.
 
But for pro-lifers throughout the United States, it marked another exhibit in a hopeful trend -- abortion centers are shutting down at an unprecedented rate. The total so far this year is 44, according to a pro-life organization that tracks clinic operations.
 
None was more telling for Johnson than the mid-July closing of the Planned Parenthood center in Bryan, Texas. It came less than four years after Johnson, burdened by her involvement with abortion, walked out of that clinic as its director and into the offices of the Coalition for Life.
 
"Knowing that the former abortion clinic I once ran is now closing is the biggest personal victory of my life," Johnson said in a written statement after the announcement of the shutdown. "From running that facility, to then advocating for its closure, and now celebrating that dream ... it shows that my life has indeed come full circle."
 
Since her celebrated conversion from Planned Parenthood director, Johnson has started a ministry to help workers leave the abortion industry. She has pledged, as she said in July, to "fight until every abortion clinic in this country has shut its doors."
 
This year, 42 clinics that provided surgical abortions have shut their doors, and two that offered chemical abortions by drugs also have closed, according to Operation Rescue, which monitors closings and health and safety violations by clinics nationwide. That number far surpasses the 25 surgical clinics shutdown last year and the 30 in 2011, by Operation Rescue's count. While others estimate a smaller number of closings, the pattern is clear.
 
Some of the shutdowns have been of major clinics. For instance, Virginia's No. 1 abortion provider closed, The Washington Post reported in July. NOVA Women's Healthcare in Fairfax, Va., shut down after state and local governments enacted regulations the abortion provider appeared unable to meet. The northern Virginia clinic performed 3,066 abortions in 2012 and 3,567 in 2011.
 
The reasons given for the upswing in closings are varied even among pro-lifers. They include:
 
-- the increasing state regulation and oversight of clinics;
 
-- a growth in pro-life opinion and activity, and
 
-- a decline in the abortion rate.
 
In some cases, clinics have shut down when abortion doctors retired or were no longer licensed.
 
State legislatures enacted 69 pro-life laws this year, according to a report released Thursday (Sept. 5) by Americans United for Life. In all, 48 states considered about 360 such proposals in 2013, AUL reported.
 
The legislative action this year continued a recent trend in states: 70 "life-affirming measures" became law in 2011 and 38 in 2012, according to AUL.
 
Some measures have targeted making the procedure and clinics safer for women, and have helped escalate the number of clinic shutdowns. This year, states such as Alabama, North Carolina and Texas passed varied laws either requiring abortion clinics to meet the same health and safety standards as outpatient surgical centers, or authorizing the state to enforce such requirements. Also, in 2013, North Dakota and Wisconsin joined Alabama and Texas in mandating abortion doctors have admitting privileges at local hospitals.
 
While pro-lifers assert the laws are for the protection of women, abortion rights advocates argue their purpose is to stop abortion. Regardless, the result appears to be abortion clinics are being held accountable in ways they have not been previously.
 
"Considering the growing body of medical evidence confirming the health risks of abortion for women, abortion cannot be left in the hands of an unmonitored, unregulated and uncaring industry feeding off fear and federal subsidies," AUL President Charmaine Yoest said in a written statement.
 
The Guttmacher Institute, a research organization affiliated with the abortion rights movement, charged in June such laws "are a solution in search of a problem, a cynical ploy to advance an agenda that seeks to make it more and more difficult for women to obtain an abortion, with the ultimate goal of eliminating U.S. women's access to safe and legal abortion."
 
The increased state government oversight of clinics is a response to pro-lifers spotlighting abuses by abortion providers, and to the scandals uncovered in recent years, said Cheryl Sullenger, Operation Rescue's senior policy advisor. Her research has produced disciplinary action against various abortion doctors.
 
Foremost among the scandals was that of abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell and his Philadelphia clinic. The regulatory failures in Pennsylvania appear to have made an impression on officials in other states.
 
Gosnell received three consecutive life sentences in May for the first-degree murder of three born-alive babies. Those children were only three of hundreds at least six months into gestation who were killed outside the womb after induced delivery at a clinic criticized for its unsanitary and unsafe conditions.
 
A 2011 grand jury report criticized the Pennsylvania Department of Health and Department of State for failing to oversee the clinic properly. Gosnell's clinic had not been inspected since 1993 despite many complaints, according to the report.
 
While the actions of state legislatures and agencies appear to have contributed to clinic shutdowns, the growing activism of pro-lifers also has been an important ingredient, said the national director of 40 Days for Life.
 
"I believe the increase in closures is due to record numbers of Christians praying for an end to abortion, and getting actively involved in pro-life efforts where they live -- recognizing that change is not going to come from politicians in Washington, D.C., anytime soon," David Bereit wrote in a statement for Baptist Press.
 
Since 2007, 40 Days has conducted its semi-annual campaigns of peaceful prayer vigils outside abortion clinics in more than 500 cities nationally and internationally. More than 575,000 people have participated, and 40 Days reports 39 clinics have closed permanently after their campaigns.
 
Both Bereit and Sullenger believe even more clinic closures are in the offing.
 
"The momentum is shifting dramatically in the pro-life direction, and as even more people answer the call to 'speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves' and 'rescue those being led to the slaughter,'" Bereit said, citing verses in Proverbs 31 and 24, respectively, "I believe we will see many more abortion centers closing in the near future."
 
Sullenger said in a written statement, "We do anticipate an increase in the number of abortion clinics as new laws are enacted and inspections increase. Enforcement of laws on the books has always been the key. We simply have never found an abortion clinic that complies with the law on all points.
 
"Couple that with a downward trend in abortion numbers and increased pro-life sentiment, [and] the abortion industry is in financial trouble," she said before adding a caveat. "However, an influx of money from the government via [the 2010 health-care reform law] and private sources could artificially keep some clinics open."
 
Contact: Tom Strode, Baptist Press

September 12, 2013

Life Chain continues to pray across U.S. to end abortion

 
The urgent need to rescue preborn babies is at the heart of another Life Chain observance Oct. 6.
 
For 26 years, people have been peacefully holding signs along streets in cities and towns while praying for the end of abortion. Upwards of a million participants in the United States and Canada were mobilized until organizers stopped counting in the early 1990s to make prayer the sole focus. The event occurs on the first Sunday in October, along with similar Life Chains at different times in other countries.
 
"Abortions remain numerous" while too many churches remain apathetic, said Royce Dunn, founder and director of Life Chain (www.lifechain.net) and a Baptist layman from Yuba City, Calif. "That's why we do this. We aim to rescue a nation, too. The church must discover and discern the holocaust."
 
Life Chain launched in California with thousands of participants from Sacramento to San Diego and went national in 1991 with 373 locations and 771,000 participants across the country. In 1992 the total swelled to more than 800 U.S. venues and 975,000 participants along with 97 chains and 80,000 people in Canada, although current numbers are considerably lower.
 
"The Life Chain is a call to the church through pastoral leadership," Dunn noted. "It's church-oriented and pastor-focused. Pastors are urged to prepare their people and lead them to the chain. Participants are to just isolate themselves with God for 90 minutes. If they do that with their pastor, it will be a very, very meaningful experience."
 
Joe Goodson, a Southern Baptist minister in Texas, has seen the Life Chain work well in the state, having participated as a seminarian, youth pastor and pastor over the years. This year he will be with the Temple/Belton Life Chain.
 
The battle at the Texas statehouse in Austin in recent months over a bill to restrict abortions is a special motivation to Goodson for this year's Life Chain.
 
"It was an intense conflict between light and darkness, and the spiritual blindness and darkness upon our nation and culture was almost palpable at times," Goodson said. "The attempt to protect unborn children was slandered as evil with all sorts of obscene signs, chants and bitterness." The legislature passed a bill with various abortion restrictions and Gov. Rick Perry subsequently signed it.
 
"After witnessing this, I am exponentially more eager to spread the word about the Life Chain all across Texas and beyond ... to provide that essential voice for the voiceless unborn," Goodson said.
 
Dunn said today's worship often shuns the cries of Jeremiah, Isaiah and Jonah. Instead, the American church largely is ineffectual against "a calamity much larger than the German Holocaust. While 56 million chiefly surgical abortions have been reported in America and 3 million in Canada, the actual numbers are much higher, and hidden deaths from the abortive chemicals in birth controls may exceed the surgical deaths."
 
Commenting on the silence of many pastors on the issue, Dunn said, "As long as they refuse to discern and communicate what the children are enduring they will continue to die. ... The same thing happened in Germany. The same thing happened in America with institutional slavery before the Civil War. America has been warned before."
 
For each Life Chain that gathers for prayer, their plea to end abortion is conveyed through a set of seven signs, with one taking the lead -- "Abortion Kills Children," the only one also printed in Spanish.
 
Other signs include: "Pray to End Abortion"; "Adoption the Loving Option"; "Jesus Forgives & Heals"; "Lord, Forgive Us and Our Nation"; and "Abortion Hurts Women."
 
The signs feature colored lettering on a white background. Their cost has gone up over the years from 15 cents to 50 cents. Fundraising is discouraged. A local coordinator at the event typically will ask for a free-will offering to pay for them.
 
"It's really peanuts to try to save human life," Dunn said.
 
For locations in Illinois, please visit: http://lifechain.net/NatList1_V2.html#ILLINOIS
 
Contact: Allen Palmeri, Baptist Press

September 11, 2013

Lawmaker reviews rule change allowing Illinois minors secret STD vaccinations

 
Illinois parents concerned about their children getting secret vaccinations against sexually transmitted diseases may get the opportunity to voice their opinion about overseeing their children's medical care as soon as the fall veto session, State Senator Sue Rezin (R-Morris) said Wednesday.
 
"The rule change slipped through and nobody caught it.  We're looking at how we can correct it," she said.
 
Rezin is referring to a change made in June that allows minors to get vaccinations for sexually transmitted infections (STI) without their parents' knowledge that is raising concern among Illinois parents.
 
Since 1995, Illinois minors starting at age twelve have had the right to consent to medical treatment and counseling if they thought they had been exposed to an STI.
 
At the end of June, Illinois' Department of Public Health confirmed, another right was granted to Illinois minors – the ability to consent to vaccinations affiliated with STIs.
 
Illinois minors are not allowed to receive pain relievers or any other medical treatment without their parents' consent. They are not allowed to get their ears pierced or their skin tattooed without responsible adults being in agreement.  But now, under Illinois' communicable disease code, they can get Gardasil or Hepatitis B shots and keep them a secret from their parents under federal HIPAA laws.
 
"This new public policy in Illinois is stunning and dangerous," said Barbara Loe Fisher, president of the National Vaccination Information Center in Virginia. "Unless parents are informed that their children have been given a vaccine like Gardasil, they can't monitor their children for symptoms or side effects that could cause permanent harm. No twelve year old has the ability to object morally or ethically to a health professional telling them they need a vaccination."
 
"Gardasil is a vaccination given as a prevention against the human papillomavirus (HPV), not a treatment if a child thinks she may have been exposed," Fisher said.
 
The July 2013 U.S. federal government's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System shows 30,674 adverse reactions reported after Gardasil vaccinations, with 963 recipients being left disabled and 140 dead.
 
How did Illinois children get the right to consent to STI vaccinations such as Gardasil without legislative debate or public comment?
 
In May, the Illinois General Assembly's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules considered a proposal rewriting a section of the Communicable Disease Control and Immunizations' Control of Sexually Transmissible Infections Code.
 
"The changes were mostly to do with revising language concerning HIV, but the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists suggested the change adding vaccinations," Vicki Thomas, the executive director of J-CAR said. "They said that part of the treatment for STIs now involves vaccinations, and at their recommendation, the words 'or vaccination against' were added."
 
Thomas said no one raised any questions or comments about the change, so the new responsibility for vaccinations and any adverse effects was provided to minors twelve years of age and older when J-CAR voted to accept the section rewrite.
 
Senator Rezin serves on J-CAR and said the addition was one she disagrees with, but "Nobody caught it, and literally three words were inserted," making the change.
 
Rezin said legislative staff is looking at what can be done to correct the current policy now in effect.
 
"We're looking at it, at how this happened, and hoping to consider legislation that will cause parents of minors twelve and above to consent to vaccinations like Gardasil," Rezin said.
 
However, involving parents in the treatment of children who think they may have been exposed to a sexually transmitted infection may be a challenge in the Illinois legislature.
 
In 2011, California passed into law AB 499, which allows children to receive Gardasil or Hepatitis B vaccination without parents' consent. The legislation was controversial and drew outrage from parents that didn't sway state lawmakers.
 
"Informed consent should always be a criteria for medical treatment," NVIC's director Fisher said. "Children at age 12 are unable to process what is needed for informed consent. Illinois has enacted a very dangerous policy."
 
Source: Illinois Review