As the Obama Administration has approached its end, President Obama and his appointees have become more and more brazen in trampling on the rule of law. Where they have an ideological goal that Congress has not enacted into law, they manufacture their own laws, in the form of executive orders, and directives from various federal agencies. Where there is a law that they find ideologically distasteful, they refuse to enforce it, or they gut it by radical reinterpretation.
Two years ago, the California Department of Managed Care, issued a decree, mandating that nearly all health plans in the state must cover all abortions. Well, we said, they can’t do that, because since 2004 we have had a federal law, the Weldon Amendment, that says no state government that receives any federal Health and Human Services money – and of course may discriminate against any health care provider for refusing to participate in providing abortions. The law explicitly includes insurance coverage, and explicitly covers health plans.
Various churches and religiously affiliated schools filed complaints with the Obama Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), asking that the Administration enforce the federal law, and thereby compel California to withdraw the state mandate that was forcing these churches and schools to pay for the killing of unborn children.
For two years, the Administration did nothing – despite many urgings and proddings from members of Congress. Then, finally, on June 21, HHS took action. But it did not act to compel California to withdraw its abortion mandate. Instead the Administration sent letters to the people in California who had complained, announcing that no violation of federal law had occurred. The letters were written by a government lawyer whose previous job was vice-president of a center for pro-abortion legal activism. She announced that HHS had decided the Weldon Amendment only applied to those who file objections to abortion on “religious or moral grounds,” and said the department had decided that the insurance companies in California did not have such religion-based objections. The churches and religiously affiliated employers who filed the complaints did have religious objections, but they were not health care providers and therefore they were not covered by the law.
Now, there is no language whatsoever in the Weldon law that imposes a religious test, and the Weldon Amendment explicitly includes “health plan(s)” within its scope – so on its face, the California decree was as blatant a violation of the federal law as could be imagined. To avoid this conclusion, the Administration had to engage in blatant fabrication, in order to achieve its ideologically dictated end. And for good measure, they suggested that the Weldon law – which does no more than protect against government-compelled participation in the killing of unborn children – might be unconstitutional, a suggestion not supported by any federal court decision.
In the face of this outrage, Paul Ryan, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, has announced that next Wednesday, July 13, the House will vote on legislation that would prevent states from requiring health care providers to participate in abortion. This legislation, the Conscience Protection Act, would prohibit any level of government from mandating that health care providers participate in abortion. It would protect individual health care providers, such as doctors and nurses, and also entities such as hospitals and health plans (and their clients). It provides for people who are affected by abortion mandates to file private lawsuits in federal courts – so the cooperation of ideologically hostile activists drawing paychecks at the federal Department of Human Services would no longer be necessary.
This legislation is urgently needed. An agency of the state of New York has already adopted an abortion mandate, similar to the California mandate, requiring small group employers to cover all kinds of abortion. And, on the very the same day that the Obama Administration gutted the Weldon Amendment, a court in Washington state ruled that public hospitals must provide abortions if they offer maternity care.
I urge you to click here to visit the Legislative Action Center,
From there, it is easy to send an email to your U.S. Representative, urging that he or she support the Conscience Protection Act when the House takes it up on Wednesday, July 13.
Click here to take action NOW.
Click here for more from National Right to Life
July 11, 2016
Democrats for Life fighting party politics
Democrats supporting the sanctity of human life from conception to natural end are trying to make their voices heard — even though the Left is much louder.
The Democratic Party platform committee is now formulating this year's platform in preparation for the presidential election, making sure Hillary Clinton will feel comfortable with it. The committee is conducting four regional meetings leading up to the four-day Democratic Convention in Philadelphia, which begins July 25.
Kristen Day, the head of Democrats for Life, outlined some provisions included on the 2012 platform.
“It called for repealing [the] Hyde [Amendment], which prevents taxpayer funding of abortion in our country,” Day informed. “And then it repeals Helm, which prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion abroad. It called to repeal all reasonable regulations on abortion and sort of an after-thought, it did say ‘Well, okay, if we don't get abortion, well maybe we'll provide some support for the pregnant women.’”
This year, Day believes the platform will go all-out for abortion on demand, removing previous restrictions — including no taxpayer funding of abortions.
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
The Democratic Party platform committee is now formulating this year's platform in preparation for the presidential election, making sure Hillary Clinton will feel comfortable with it. The committee is conducting four regional meetings leading up to the four-day Democratic Convention in Philadelphia, which begins July 25.
Kristen Day, the head of Democrats for Life, outlined some provisions included on the 2012 platform.
“It called for repealing [the] Hyde [Amendment], which prevents taxpayer funding of abortion in our country,” Day informed. “And then it repeals Helm, which prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion abroad. It called to repeal all reasonable regulations on abortion and sort of an after-thought, it did say ‘Well, okay, if we don't get abortion, well maybe we'll provide some support for the pregnant women.’”
This year, Day believes the platform will go all-out for abortion on demand, removing previous restrictions — including no taxpayer funding of abortions.
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
Conscience Protection Act Needed
On July 13, the House is scheduled to vote on the Conscience Protection Act of 2016. It would amend the Public Health Service Act to "codify the prohibition against the federal government and state and local governments that receive federal financial assistance for health-related activities penalizing or discriminating against a health care provider based on the provider's refusal to be involved in, or provide coverage for, abortion."
The bill is necessitated by a series of decisions forcing health care providers to cover elective abortions, including late-term abortions. Two years ago, California ordered all health care providers, including Catholic entities, to provide for abortion coverage in their health care plans.
Complainants then appealed to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and on June 21 HHS sided with California law, refusing to intervene. Thus did it expressly violate federal law on this subject. After the California law was passed, New York State passed a similar measure forcing employers to cover abortions, providing no exemptions.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
The bill is necessitated by a series of decisions forcing health care providers to cover elective abortions, including late-term abortions. Two years ago, California ordered all health care providers, including Catholic entities, to provide for abortion coverage in their health care plans.
Complainants then appealed to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and on June 21 HHS sided with California law, refusing to intervene. Thus did it expressly violate federal law on this subject. After the California law was passed, New York State passed a similar measure forcing employers to cover abortions, providing no exemptions.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
July 8, 2016
Taste of Chicago Attendees to See Pro-Life Airplane Banner
Attendees at Taste of Chicago, Illinois' largest event of the year, will get a taste of pro-life advocacy. An airplane bearing a pro-life message will fly over the beaches of Lake Michigan and Navy Pier during the massive event today.
Chicago-area pro-life advocate Chris Iverson helped get the idea off the ground. He explained that this is a grass roots effort by a group of friends who have pooled their funds to fly a banner over the massive event. “My friends and I have this hunger to raise awareness with the communities around Chicago about the problem of abortion. Having an airplane display a message was an idea that came up in conversation. We researched it and decided to go with it. We have been very effective at reaching hundreds of thousands of people with our pro-life banners on highway overpasses, but we have this hunger to do more. We just thought, what else could we do to raise awareness that abortion takes human life?”
Click here for more from Illinois Review.
Chicago-area pro-life advocate Chris Iverson helped get the idea off the ground. He explained that this is a grass roots effort by a group of friends who have pooled their funds to fly a banner over the massive event. “My friends and I have this hunger to raise awareness with the communities around Chicago about the problem of abortion. Having an airplane display a message was an idea that came up in conversation. We researched it and decided to go with it. We have been very effective at reaching hundreds of thousands of people with our pro-life banners on highway overpasses, but we have this hunger to do more. We just thought, what else could we do to raise awareness that abortion takes human life?”
Click here for more from Illinois Review.
July 7, 2016
Building a Pro-Life Future
From the 2016 National Right to Life Convention...
Grassroots pro-lifers are constant and consistent–educating, working on legislation, working at pregnancy centers, talking to friends and neighbors, working with young people. That faithfulness is making a difference.
During World War II, as you might expect, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had some dark days, but he didn’t necessarily look at setbacks as defeat. He asked a friend, “Why do we regard history as of the past and forget we are making it?”
We, right now, are making history. We are fighting for what is right, defending the defenseless and speaking up for the voiceless. Future generations will look back on our efforts as a bright light during a very dark period in our nation’s past. We, here today, are making history– building a pro-life future in which all human life will be respected and protected.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Grassroots pro-lifers are constant and consistent–educating, working on legislation, working at pregnancy centers, talking to friends and neighbors, working with young people. That faithfulness is making a difference.
During World War II, as you might expect, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had some dark days, but he didn’t necessarily look at setbacks as defeat. He asked a friend, “Why do we regard history as of the past and forget we are making it?”
We, right now, are making history. We are fighting for what is right, defending the defenseless and speaking up for the voiceless. Future generations will look back on our efforts as a bright light during a very dark period in our nation’s past. We, here today, are making history– building a pro-life future in which all human life will be respected and protected.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Profits over people? Former abortion worker warns of continuing clinic abuses
After the Supreme Court struck down Texas’ abortion clinic regulations last week, a new report claims that these clinics are ignoring health standards and continuing to put women at risk.
“It just shows that, over and over again, the abortion industry is more concerned about putting profit ahead of the safety of women,” said Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood employee and founder of the pro-life “And Then There Were None” ministry, which helps abortion clinic workers leave the industry.
The #NotOver campaign is a “multi-phase” project launched after the Supreme Court struck down safety regulations of Texas abortion clinics on June 27. It aims to draw attention to poor health standards at abortion clinics and push Congress to pass clinic regulations.
Click here for more from CNA Daily News.
“It just shows that, over and over again, the abortion industry is more concerned about putting profit ahead of the safety of women,” said Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood employee and founder of the pro-life “And Then There Were None” ministry, which helps abortion clinic workers leave the industry.
The #NotOver campaign is a “multi-phase” project launched after the Supreme Court struck down safety regulations of Texas abortion clinics on June 27. It aims to draw attention to poor health standards at abortion clinics and push Congress to pass clinic regulations.
Click here for more from CNA Daily News.
July 6, 2016
Amazing Computer Animation Shows In Utero Development of Human Face
On its webpage The BBC offers some absolutely amazing examples of science developed with laypeople in mind. But replete with spectacular graphics, its series on “Inside the Human Body” may be the most fascinating of all.
Although it first appeared over four years ago, it wasn’t until later that most of here in the states become aware of a YouTube video of one segment—a time-lapse of the development of the human face in utero.
According to the New Scientist, the animation “is based on human embryo scans captured between 1 and 3 months after conception, the period during which a face develops.”
In the video Michael Mosley, the producer and presenter, explains, “The three main sections of the puzzle meet in the middle of your top lip, creating the groove that is your philtrum.” He adds, “This whole amazing process, the bits coming together to produce a recognizable human face, happens in the womb between two and three months.”
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Although it first appeared over four years ago, it wasn’t until later that most of here in the states become aware of a YouTube video of one segment—a time-lapse of the development of the human face in utero.
According to the New Scientist, the animation “is based on human embryo scans captured between 1 and 3 months after conception, the period during which a face develops.”
In the video Michael Mosley, the producer and presenter, explains, “The three main sections of the puzzle meet in the middle of your top lip, creating the groove that is your philtrum.” He adds, “This whole amazing process, the bits coming together to produce a recognizable human face, happens in the womb between two and three months.”
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
2016 Democratic platform even more pro-abortion
So what is the party’s position on abortion? Only a tiny portion of the section is included. Instead David Weigel of the Washington Post talks about how, for “the first time, the 2016 Democratic platform says that the party will attempt to repeal the Hyde Amendment.”
We will continue to oppose — and seek to overturn — federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment … we support the repeal of harmful restrictions that obstruct women’s access to health care information and services, including the “global gag rule” and the Helms Amendment that bars U.S. assistance to provide safe, legal abortion throughout the developing world.
Translated out of AbortionSpeak and into English, what is the party is going after?
The Hyde Amendment is a provision attached to the annual appropriations bill that covers many federal health programs (including Medicaid). More federal funding means more–lots more–dead babies.
Just a word about the remainder of the section on “Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice.” Here are the first three sentences, which is indicative:
“Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion–regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured. We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing.”
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
We will continue to oppose — and seek to overturn — federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment … we support the repeal of harmful restrictions that obstruct women’s access to health care information and services, including the “global gag rule” and the Helms Amendment that bars U.S. assistance to provide safe, legal abortion throughout the developing world.
Translated out of AbortionSpeak and into English, what is the party is going after?
The Hyde Amendment is a provision attached to the annual appropriations bill that covers many federal health programs (including Medicaid). More federal funding means more–lots more–dead babies.
Just a word about the remainder of the section on “Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice.” Here are the first three sentences, which is indicative:
“Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion–regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured. We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing.”
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
July 5, 2016
University presentation claims arguing pro-life view is ‘assault’ microaggression
The idea of microaggressions and safe spaces have affected the free speech of pro-lifers on campus. One example of this that recently came to light is an online presentation from Longwood University in Virginia, reported on by Campus Reform and Red Alert Politics, which appears to categorize challenging pro-choice thought as an “assault” microaggression.
But what really stands out in this presentation is the fact that “an anti-abortion person attacked my pro-choice beliefs” is grouped under the “assaults” category — along with events like “almost being raped.”
The language in which the presentation describes being pro-life — “an anti-abortion person” — is also particularly suspect. If the example does the courtesy of referring to the pro-choice person as “pro-choice” rather than pro-abortion, why not grant the same courtesy to those who oppose abortion and call them pro-life?
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
But what really stands out in this presentation is the fact that “an anti-abortion person attacked my pro-choice beliefs” is grouped under the “assaults” category — along with events like “almost being raped.”
The language in which the presentation describes being pro-life — “an anti-abortion person” — is also particularly suspect. If the example does the courtesy of referring to the pro-choice person as “pro-choice” rather than pro-abortion, why not grant the same courtesy to those who oppose abortion and call them pro-life?
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
July 4, 2016
Throwing out Texas law tempts others to try for the same
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court overturning the Texas abortion clinic law this week, Pennsylvania Senator Daylin Leach reportedly is testing the waters trying to gain support for repealing the bill passed after the Kermit Gosnell scandal. Gosnell was found guilty of killing three babies born alive at his filthy, substandard abortion clinic in Philadelphia and now is serving a life term.
The law that Leach would like to see overturned sets simple standards for abortuaries, such as keeping facilities clean and sterilizing instruments. Maria Gallagher of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation explains that the law only brings positives, even for the abortion-minded.
“We see where those facilities are undergoing regular inspections and those inspections are posted on the Internet for everyone to see,” she says. “It's tragic that abortion is still occurring in Pennsylvania, but it's not a situation where the abortion facilities are being hamstrung in any way by our law.”
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
The law that Leach would like to see overturned sets simple standards for abortuaries, such as keeping facilities clean and sterilizing instruments. Maria Gallagher of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation explains that the law only brings positives, even for the abortion-minded.
“We see where those facilities are undergoing regular inspections and those inspections are posted on the Internet for everyone to see,” she says. “It's tragic that abortion is still occurring in Pennsylvania, but it's not a situation where the abortion facilities are being hamstrung in any way by our law.”
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
Activists: Pro-abortion propaganda should be withdrawn
A 2005 study suggested a 20-week baby in the womb cannot feel pain. That research has been cited time and time again by abortion supporters fighting against bills that would ban abortions 20 weeks into a pregnancy and beyond. In contrast, reliable research starting in 2007 demonstrated preborn babies can feel pain at that stage, if not before.
Mary Spaulding Balch of the National Right to Life Committee draws a comparison.
"For instance, they say that the prior studies indicated that the pain center for a human being is in the cerebral cortex," she shares. "But what these newer studies are showing is that that's not the case – that the pain center is really in the thalamus. So when you look at an unborn child, the unborn child's thalamus is there before the cortex is complete."
Balch, Mary Spaulding (NRLC)On a simpler level, Balch says doctors validated the latter findings while doing surgery to correct problems on a baby in the womb without anesthesia for the child.
"The baby's stress level increased. The baby pulled away from the painful stimuli," she describes. "The baby did everything that you and I would do if we were feeling pain."
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
Mary Spaulding Balch of the National Right to Life Committee draws a comparison.
"For instance, they say that the prior studies indicated that the pain center for a human being is in the cerebral cortex," she shares. "But what these newer studies are showing is that that's not the case – that the pain center is really in the thalamus. So when you look at an unborn child, the unborn child's thalamus is there before the cortex is complete."
Balch, Mary Spaulding (NRLC)On a simpler level, Balch says doctors validated the latter findings while doing surgery to correct problems on a baby in the womb without anesthesia for the child.
"The baby's stress level increased. The baby pulled away from the painful stimuli," she describes. "The baby did everything that you and I would do if we were feeling pain."
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
Abortion Kills 185% More People in Black America than All Thirteen Other Leading Causes of Death
According to the National Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 65, No. 2 dated February 16, 2016, the total number of deaths in Black America from the thirteen leading causes of death is 232,335. Abortion dramatically increases that toll.
Let's do the math ...
232,335 Black Deaths (13 leading causes) +
429,000 Black Abortions in 2013
------------
661,335 Total Black Deaths
Abortion represents a 185% increase in deaths from all 13 other leading causes of death in Black America, according to Dennis Howard, President of the Movement for a Better America, who has written extensively on abortion demographics. Howard says, "Abortion is the number one cause of death in Black America. No other cause of death in Black America, even comes close."
Live births in Black America for 2013 amounted to 634,760, leaving a Black Life Deficit of (26,575). In Black America, more people are dying than being born. If not for abortion, the Black community would be growing by over 400,000 lives a year. If Black America is going to continue to exist, our priorities must change.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
Let's do the math ...
232,335 Black Deaths (13 leading causes) +
429,000 Black Abortions in 2013
------------
661,335 Total Black Deaths
Abortion represents a 185% increase in deaths from all 13 other leading causes of death in Black America, according to Dennis Howard, President of the Movement for a Better America, who has written extensively on abortion demographics. Howard says, "Abortion is the number one cause of death in Black America. No other cause of death in Black America, even comes close."
Live births in Black America for 2013 amounted to 634,760, leaving a Black Life Deficit of (26,575). In Black America, more people are dying than being born. If not for abortion, the Black community would be growing by over 400,000 lives a year. If Black America is going to continue to exist, our priorities must change.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
Life Legal Defense Foundation Appear in Federal Court for 'Planned Parenthood v. the Center of Medical Progress' Case
The Life Legal Defense Foundation will appear in federal court on Wednesday, July 6 on behalf of David Daleiden in the case of Planned Parenthood v. the Center of Medical Progress.
Planned Parenthood filed its lawsuit against Daleiden's Center for Medical Progress after Daleiden exposed Planned Parenthood's illegal trade in fetal body parts last year. The court will hear oral arguments on Life Legal's Motion to Dismiss the suit and our "Anti-SLAPP" Motion. The Anti-SLAPP Motion argues that the abortion giant filed the lawsuit only to intimidate and silence Daleiden.
The hearing will be at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District in San Francisco at 2:00 pm on July 6.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
Planned Parenthood filed its lawsuit against Daleiden's Center for Medical Progress after Daleiden exposed Planned Parenthood's illegal trade in fetal body parts last year. The court will hear oral arguments on Life Legal's Motion to Dismiss the suit and our "Anti-SLAPP" Motion. The Anti-SLAPP Motion argues that the abortion giant filed the lawsuit only to intimidate and silence Daleiden.
The hearing will be at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District in San Francisco at 2:00 pm on July 6.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
June 30, 2016
Pro-choice activists have hard time condemning sex selection abortions
Abortion rights groups are put in a difficult position by sex-selection abortions. They have said for years that a woman’s decision to abort is no one’s business but her own, and that no one should ever interfere with women’s choices to have abortions, but now, abortion is being used as weapon against baby girls, causing a huge gender imbalance in some countries. From an author who wrote a book on sex selection abortions in China, India and other countries:
“After decades of fighting for a woman’s right to choose the outcome of her own pregnancy, it is difficult to turn around and point out that women are abusing that right…”
From one pro-choice activist:
“We have had a challenge making sure that when we communicate we are able to preserve women’s right to abortion but at the same time say that sex selection on the basis of the gender of the future child is incorrect because it amounts to discrimination. How do you hold onto this discrimination tag and at the same time talk about safe abortion and access to it? It’s been a huge challenge for us – we are walking a tightrope.”
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
“After decades of fighting for a woman’s right to choose the outcome of her own pregnancy, it is difficult to turn around and point out that women are abusing that right…”
From one pro-choice activist:
“We have had a challenge making sure that when we communicate we are able to preserve women’s right to abortion but at the same time say that sex selection on the basis of the gender of the future child is incorrect because it amounts to discrimination. How do you hold onto this discrimination tag and at the same time talk about safe abortion and access to it? It’s been a huge challenge for us – we are walking a tightrope.”
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Supreme Court decision will not deter passage of pro-life laws across the nation
There are other pro-life laws already passed in a number of states which eventually will work their way through the legal pipeline until they reach the Supreme Court. In the AP story they were talking about a ban on dismemberment abortions (the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Act) but could also have addressed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.
The Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Act is now on the books in six states– Kansas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana The bill has also been introduced in Idaho, Missouri, and Nebraska, and is expected to be introduced in several other states.
The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is the law in 14 states– Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas [known as the Preborn Pain Act], West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
The Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Act is now on the books in six states– Kansas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana The bill has also been introduced in Idaho, Missouri, and Nebraska, and is expected to be introduced in several other states.
The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is the law in 14 states– Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas [known as the Preborn Pain Act], West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Pro-abortion Non-Governmental Organizations Request UN to Mark International Safe Abortion Day
Pro-abortion NGOs are petitioning UN officials to mark September 28 as International Safe Abortion Day. The day has been used by pro-abortion activists to protest pro-life laws and stage events promoting abortion since 1990 but now the NGOs are seeking official recognition to aid their agenda.
A letter will be sent on July 4 to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and to the heads of UN agencies stating, “We, the undersigned, are writing to support the proposal of the International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion that you declare 28 September, International Safe Abortion Day, an official international UN Day.”
The letter cites calls by select treaty monitoring bodies, notorious for distorting treaties and instructing countries to overturn pro-life laws, as a reason for officially recognizing a day for abortion
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
A letter will be sent on July 4 to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and to the heads of UN agencies stating, “We, the undersigned, are writing to support the proposal of the International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion that you declare 28 September, International Safe Abortion Day, an official international UN Day.”
The letter cites calls by select treaty monitoring bodies, notorious for distorting treaties and instructing countries to overturn pro-life laws, as a reason for officially recognizing a day for abortion
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Gallup’s latest poll on euthanasia and “doctor-assisted suicide”
As tricky–or as deliberately misleading–as polls on abortion can be, those taken on euthanasia can be almost as bewildering and every bit as confounding. Under the headline, “Euthanasia Still Acceptable to Solid Majority in U.S.” here’s the latest from Gallup’s “Values and Beliefs poll” conducted in May.
Here are the “three highlights”:
- 69% say doctors should be allowed to end a patient’s life by painless means
- 51% say they would consider ending their lives if faced with terminal illness
- About half of Americans say doctor-assisted suicide is morally acceptable
First, the question asked of 1,025 adults is, “When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and his or her their family request it?” Which, of course, misses the boat on so many grounds (what about patients who are no longer competent? diabetes is incurable) and tilts the answers (“doctors,” “painless”).
The 69% is up from 64% in 2012 but down from 75% in 2010.
Second, what about applying this to themselves? “A hypothetical question–if you personally had a disease that cannot be cured and were living in severe pain, would you consider ending your life by some painless means, or not?”
Given this immensely dreary scenario, 51% would “consider,” 42% would not. But in 2005, 59% would consider ending their life to 38% who would not.
Third, respondents were asked, “Regardless of whether or not you think it should be legal, for each one, tell me whether you personally believe that in general it is morally acceptable or morally wrong. How about doctor-assisted suicide?”
According to Gallup, 53% said this was morally acceptable, 41% said it was morally wrong. Despite over a decade of pro-assisted suicide media coverage, that is down slightly from 56%-37% the last time Gallup asked the question.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
Here are the “three highlights”:
- 69% say doctors should be allowed to end a patient’s life by painless means
- 51% say they would consider ending their lives if faced with terminal illness
- About half of Americans say doctor-assisted suicide is morally acceptable
First, the question asked of 1,025 adults is, “When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and his or her their family request it?” Which, of course, misses the boat on so many grounds (what about patients who are no longer competent? diabetes is incurable) and tilts the answers (“doctors,” “painless”).
The 69% is up from 64% in 2012 but down from 75% in 2010.
Second, what about applying this to themselves? “A hypothetical question–if you personally had a disease that cannot be cured and were living in severe pain, would you consider ending your life by some painless means, or not?”
Given this immensely dreary scenario, 51% would “consider,” 42% would not. But in 2005, 59% would consider ending their life to 38% who would not.
Third, respondents were asked, “Regardless of whether or not you think it should be legal, for each one, tell me whether you personally believe that in general it is morally acceptable or morally wrong. How about doctor-assisted suicide?”
According to Gallup, 53% said this was morally acceptable, 41% said it was morally wrong. Despite over a decade of pro-assisted suicide media coverage, that is down slightly from 56%-37% the last time Gallup asked the question.
Click here for more from National Right to Life.
June 29, 2016
Congress refers New Mexico to abortion case
Congress' Select Investigative Panel on Human Life has issued a criminal referral to New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas amounting to a legal case in which the University of New Mexico and Southwestern Women's Options abortion clinic in Albuquerque may have violated state and federal law. The case involves the harvesting of aborted baby body parts for the university.
Tara Shaver with Protest ABQ tells OneNewsNow it's not the first time Balderas has heard of the charges.
“We filed a formal complaint with him back in July really hoping that he would dig into the issue because we had compelling evidence from Southwestern Women's Options' consent form showing that the women were not even able to opt out of designating their aborted baby body parts for research,” she says. “It was just mandatory for them to sign this form to get their abortion.”
Click here for more from OneNewsNow.
Supreme Court rejects appeal for pharmacists' conscience rights
The US Supreme Court has declined to hear a challenge to a Washington state law that requires pharmacists to provide customers with potentially abortifacient drugs.
The Court's decision, announced on June 28, lets stand a state law that was enacted in 2007, obliging pharmacies to provide "emergency contraceptive" bills to women with valid prescriptions. The law had been challenged by pharmacists who had moral objections to dispensing pills that could cause the destruction of unborn children.
Justice Samuel Alito, one of three justices who argued that the Supreme Court should hear the appeal, called the denial an "ominous sign." He wrote in an angry dissent: "If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern."
Click here for more from Catholic World News.
The Court's decision, announced on June 28, lets stand a state law that was enacted in 2007, obliging pharmacies to provide "emergency contraceptive" bills to women with valid prescriptions. The law had been challenged by pharmacists who had moral objections to dispensing pills that could cause the destruction of unborn children.
Justice Samuel Alito, one of three justices who argued that the Supreme Court should hear the appeal, called the denial an "ominous sign." He wrote in an angry dissent: "If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern."
Click here for more from Catholic World News.
Hospital Refuses to Provide Care for Two-Year Old with Brain Injury
Two-year old Mirranda Lawson choked on a piece of popcorn on May 11 and was taken to Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center (VCU) in Richmond In critical condition. Since that time, the hospital has steadfastly refused to provide treatment for the toddler, saying they don't believe she can recover. However, Mirranda has already far outlived her original prognosis. Furthermore, she is moving in response to her parents' voice and requires far less medication now to remain stable than she did when she first arrived at VCU. Even though Mirranda has a serious brain injury, her condition is improving.
Mirranda's parents have made it clear to the hospital that they wish to care for their daughter at home. Home care is a common option for patients with brain injuries like MIrranda's. However, the hospital refuses to provide Mirranda with the breathing tube and feeding tube she needs to be eligible for home care. These are routine procedures that the hospital regularly performs on other patients, yet VCU will not provide them to Mirranda.
Doctors at VCU have said they will agree to allow Mirranda to go home to die, but they refuse to allow her to go home to live.
Click here for more from Christian Newswire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)