An urgent call for pro-lifers to share their views

Time is running out for public comments on a proposed rule change at HHS that could cost abortion clinics revenue.

The Trump administration has proposed a change in Title X rules for funds granted through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Their rule change is to only provide that money to entities that are not affiliated with abortion, so this is our chance to take money away from Planned Parenthood.  The change would cost Planned Parenthood approximately $60 million.

HHS posted an 60-day period for online public comment, which ends July 31

Click here to view the proposed rule change.

Write a message to Health and Human Services Secretary Azar using the KEY POINTS below.

KEY POINTS

· Existing Title X regulations have blurred the line between abortion and family planning. The proposed Protect Life rule simply makes clear that abortion is not family planning.  The rule would direct that abortion facilities could not be in the same location as where family planning services are delivered.  The rule also states that Title X grantees may not refer for elective abortion.

· The proposed rule does not cut one dime of funding for family planning. Instead it merely ensures that federal funding goes to health facilities that do not perform or promote abortion as family planning.

Title X funds would be directed to health facilities willing to comply with the restored regulations. (Of note, nationwide, of the roughly 4,000 Title X service locations, less than 443 are Planned Parenthood clinics).

· There is widespread availability of facilities that do not provide abortion onsite.

Clinics that receive Title X funds (hospitals, Federally Qualified Health Centers, state public health departments, and others) already provide care to well over half the patients served by Title X.  Since it appears that few such grantees are co-located with abortion clinics, they should have little difficulty complying with the new regulations.

· The proposed regulations will not "gag doctors" or "interfere with the doctor/patient relationship." This recycled argument is intended to divert attention from the real issue-- the routine referral for elective abortion by federally funded agents under the auspices of the Title X family planning program.

Click here to enter your comments on the proposed rule change.

National Abortion Federation drops 7 out of 11 charges against David Daleiden

The National Abortion Federation (NAF) dismissed seven out of eleven claims on Friday against pro-life journalist David Daleiden and his organization, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP). In 2015, NAF sued David and CMP after they began releasing undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s trafficking of baby body parts. Buying and selling fetal tissue is illegal under federal law.

As part of its lawsuit, NAF successfully obtained a “gag order” from the court preventing Daleiden and CMP, during the course of litigation, from releasing the undercover videos recorded at NAF abortion conferences. A court-issued “gag order” bars the parties in a lawsuit from talking about certain aspects of the case or prevents the media from publishing contentious facts or evidence. By dismissing the seven claims, NAF is trying to speed up the case so it can secure a permanent gag order against David and CMP, which would block the release of the videos regardless of the case’s outcome.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

Father, Wren Michel, blocks hospital door, preventing doctors from removing son’s life support

Jonathan Michel, a 39-year-old father of three who lived next door to his parents in Malakoff, Texas, suddenly fell to the ground on June 30 and suffered a serious head injury. He was rushed to the East Medical Center in Tyler, Texas. Doctors discovered that Jonathan had internal bleeding and extensive damage to the left side of his brain.  His right side was almost completely paralyzed.

While Jonathan’s parents were pleased that their son was receiving life-saving help from the hospital, Jonathan’s wife was trying to put an end to such help.

However his father likely saved his brain-injured son’s life when he discovered a medical team was about to remove his son's life support.  “If you’re going to unplug him, you’ll have to go through me,” Wren Michel told the doctor and nurses as he stood in front of the door."

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

Former worker: A busy abortion center has ‘no time to sterilize instruments’

At a conference called “Abortion: The Inside Story” sponsored by The Pro-Life Action League, former abortion worker Hellen Pendley spoke about her time in the abortion industry. Pendley worked for an abortion chain in Georgia, which had 12 different abortion facilities located throughout the United States. When Pendley applied for a job at the abortion facility, she was asked two questions. The first was, “Are you pro-choice?” Pendley answered in the affirmative.  The second was, “Can you handle the fact that this is a business?” The second question would set the tone for Pendley’s time at the abortion facility. She soon became aware that the facility put profit over patient safety and comfort. She learned that the facility’s single-minded focus on making money endangered the safety and even the lives of the women who came to them.

Pendley, who had a medical background, was initially shocked by the lack of life support equipment and emergency care supplies in the facility. She says the facility…

had absolutely no life support equipment, we had no crash cart. We didn’t have any of those things in the clinic, and the state of Georgia where I’m from and where I operated this particular clinic, we were regulated by the state [but] the state didn’t require that we had any life support, [they] didn’t require that we had any recovery room equipment though we did perform abortions under general anesthesia.

Click here for more from Live Action News.

FDA shock: Abortion pill caused 22 deaths and a thousand hospitalizations

At least 22 women have died after taking the abortion pill regimen, RU-486, and many others have experienced serious complications, according to updated data from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While abortion — and specifically, medication abortion — is sold to women as “safe,” there can be serious and life threatening complications from the abortion pill, as noted by the pills’ manufacturer, Danco. Although Danco is required to report any death associated with Mifeprex, women experiencing complications, various factors — such as not returning to the abortion provider or not reporting use of the drug to emergency personnel — may cause these numbers to seem lower than they actually are.

The abortion lobby is pushing for easy access to the abortion pill on college campuses and some are even calling for it to be approved for home use. No doubt, we may never know how many women suffer serious complications or succumb to death from the abortion pill if this happens. Clearly, according to its manufacturer, there are serious risks:

Click here for more from Live Action News.

Parents, beware: Teen Vogue is pushing abortion on young girls… again

In 2003, iconic fashion magazine Vogue launched an offshoot aimed at covering fashion and celebrities for teenagers. That magazine, Teen Vogue, didn’t take long to find a new mission: to encourage young girls to engage in promiscuity and to portray abortion as something normal and insignificant, something equivalent to a quick weekend trip to the mall. Even as Teen Vogue’s sales declined, the hyper-focus on abortion, politics, and sexuality — in a “fashion” magazine — continued. In 2015, Teen Vogue was suffering from sales so low, it had to completely scrap its print magazine, and transitioned to an online-only publication. But the positive promotion of killing the most vulnerable humans among us continues.

This week, Teen Vogue praised an “abortion comedy tour,” boasting that it “fights anti-abortion stigma with humor.” The tour is spearheaded by pro-abortion comedienne Lizz Winstead, and in Teen Vogue’s write-up, readers are encouraged to stop viewing abortion as something negative or traumatic:

Those who are struggling with their abortion experience benefit from resources that can help them navigate those complicated emotions. However, the danger of only amplifying this specific narrative is that it becomes the dominant one, allowing for anti-choice ideologies to exploit that emotion and present abortion as predominantly emotionally disruptive for people.

Click here for more from Live Action News.

Women call visits to abortion centers ‘humiliating’ and ‘close to rape’

The idea of getting an abortion is, understandably, scary for many women. And of course, the abortion industry and its friends want to convince women that abortion facilities are nothing but kind, professional, and compassionate. But the abortion industry, which makes money off of women’s abortions, is likely not the most reliable place to look for the truth, or for reassurance. A new “abortion AMA” posted on Bustle gave photos and descriptions of what an abortion facility looks like. The information came directly from the abortion industry, from “abortion spa” Carafem, and from abortion giant Planned Parenthood. The article naturally tried to shine a positive light on facility workers, and tried to present facilities and procedure rooms as warm and inviting. While this is the message being spread by the abortion industry, the real experiences women have had aren’t so rosy. Women have consistently spoken of the poor treatment they have received at abortion facilities, and some have compared it to a cattle line:

It was this huge clinic; it was so impersonal. It was just like we were moved through like cattle. It was just like a factory there. It was so efficient, and so sterile, and so big. It was like a mass production line…

The second one, I went right away; it was really early. It was the same kind of big Chicago clinic. I remember it being even more efficient, more factory like the second one, and that bothered me more this time.

Click here for more from Live Action News.

UN demands Mexican state ‘promptly comply’ with ruling legalizing abortion

The UN human rights office, the UN agency for women, and the UN Population Fund issued a joint press release to applaud a federal district court judgment that orders the legislature of Veracruz to guarantee access to abortion for women and girls on the basis of the non-binding recommendations of UN committees.  They call on the legislature to "promptly comply" with the order and offer their "technical assistance" in drafting the new abortion legislation.

The state legislature of Veracruz only just rejected legalizing abortion in December following a "Gender Alert" from the federal government. The gender alert mechanism is ostensibly designed to fight violence against women. It requires local and state governments to respond to and act on accusations of violence against women.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

Judge throws out disgraced New York AG’s lawsuit against pro-life activists

A federal judge in New York has delivered a victory for attorneys from the Thomas More Society and a group of peaceful pro-life advocates in an unsubstantiated harassment lawsuit brought against them by former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.

The federal lawsuit, filed in June 2017, charged the peaceful pro-life sidewalk counselors – who offer abortion-bound women information on life-affirming alternatives – with “a weekly pattern of threatening, obstructive and violent activity.” The charges were brought despite lack of evidence of any of the purported threats, harassment, or groping that the prosecution had claimed occurred outside of the Choices Medical Clinic abortion facility in Jamaica, Queens.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

With Roe v. Wade under threat, abortion activists drop the pretenses and go nuclear

The resignation of Justice Anthony Kennedy from the Supreme Court of the United States has been, in many ways, a clarifying moment. As progressives begin to realize that there is a discernible path to the overturn of Roe v. Wade, they have abruptly abandoned any semblance of nuance on the abortion question. Abortion, it is now clear, is not simply a matter of “women’s health” or even a “necessary evil.” Abortion is essential to the survival of the Sexual Revolution, and is a fundamental necessity for those who wish to live precisely as they please. Sex makes babies, but babies are inconvenient, and so the right to kill those babies must be maintained at all costs. Abortion guarantees people the ability to use their reproductive organs for recreational purposes, so long as the inevitable but unwanted children can be swiftly disposed of.

With Roe under threat, progressives are laying this out in the starkest terms. LGBT activist Viva Ruiz, who recently created a massive float for a Pride parade featuring a blasphemous backdrop reading “Thank God for Abortion, (pictured)” gave an expletive-laden interview to the appropriately named media outlet Jezebel explaining why abortion was so essential. “If people with uteruses don’t have access to abortion, we’re not having a sexual liberation,” she explained, “and we’re all f***ing, and we’re past the binary.” Queer people need abortion too, she added. After all, if they can’t access abortion, how can they get rid of the babies they make while living their liberated lives? Alleged comedienne Michelle Wolf recently summed it up in her Netflix “Salute to Abortion” sketch: “God bless abortion!”

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

We will save the unborn through the courts

The courts are absolutely essential to saving unborn babies. From Roe v. Wade onward, abortion advocates have only been able to impose their extreme agenda because of rulings of unelected judges rather than the democratic process.

In order to break the pro-abortion stranglehold and return the power back to the people, confirming judges who respect the Constitution and the protections it affords is imperative.  A court ruling this past weekend shows just how pivotal this is.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

Pro-abortion Hollywood preparing propaganda movies to save Roe v. Wade

As pro-abortion politicians, activists, journalists, and pundits express outrage over the prospect of a second Trump Supreme Court nominee helping overturn Roe v. Wade, several movies are currently in the works hoping to stoke fears about a post-Roe America.

As highlighted by Townhall’s Amy Furr, no less than three films are in the works about the Jane Collective, an underground network that helped women obtain illegal abortions in the years before the 1973 case. They include Cait Cortelyou’s Ask for Jane, Simon Curtis’ Call Jane (starring Elizabeth Moss, pictured), and Amazon Studios’ This Is Jane which takes place in Chicago, all of which ABC News reports, tackle the material through a decidedly pro-abortion lens.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

Of all places, CNN writes comprehensively about abortion polling

Grace Sparks should be given credit for acknowledging what we’ve been saying for about, say, 30 years. And that is (and this is my wording) you can fix the results not by out-and-out lying but by choosing not to make even a token effort at complexity.

Sparks starts with a very keen point.

All polling used below is from Gallup. Due to question wording and methodological differences, using one pollster to compare numbers is the best way to ensure consistency.

True, but also Gallup is to be praised for going the extra step which assists anyone genuinely interested in what abortions a majority of the public will accept. For example,

There are a few ways to frame the number of people who say abortion should be legal or illegal. Technically, in the most recent Gallup poll, conducted in late May, 79% think that abortion should be legal under any or certain circumstances. However, out of that, a plurality are saying it should only be legal in a few circumstances (50%), with three-in-10 saying it should be legal in any. Only 18% said abortion should be illegal in all circumstance

I went back to the Gallup poll and the 50% is actually 53%.

The result is that 43% of Americans say abortion should be legal in all (29%) or most (14%) circumstances, while a majority of 53% say it should be legal in only a few (35%) or no circumstances (18%). [Underlining is mine.]

But the point is there is a majority (53%) says abortion should not be legal in any circumstance (18%) or “only in a few” (35%). To the best of my knowledge “few” has never been teased out, but it likely means the “hard” cases of life of mother, rape, or incest.

Click here for more from NRL News Today.

Three Myths of the Pro-Life Movement Exposed

Anyone who has read much about abortion in the news, or commented on an abortion discussion on Facebook or Twitter, has likely encountered three myths in one form or another. Sadly, blog comments or Facebook debates rarely elevate the discussion. Instead, emotion often rules the day. On the surface, the following statements may seem to be reality; closer examination reveals that their justifications are mythical, not rational.

Myth #1. The Pro-Life movement is “pro-forced birth” - The desire of pro-life people is not that we want to force women to do what they don’t want to do, but rather that our social values change to the point that people no longer desire abortion.

Myth #2. The pro-life movement does not care about women, just babies - The cause of life compels the protection not only of the unborn, but of the mother as well. We understand that women need compassion, hope, and help when facing pregnancy decisions. Our desire to protect women is not predicated on their views on abortion; pro-life advocates have been at the forefront of calling for increased regulatory oversight to ensure the safety of women seeking abortion at abortion clinics.

Myth # 3. The pro-life movement only cares about babies in the womb, but disregards their needs when they are born - Pregnancy centers provide services for the poor, minority, and at-risk babies before and after their birth. If these centers only cared about them in the womb, why would they provide parenting classes, diapers, financial support, and other aid to these children and their mothers? Clearly, their actions indicate that this accusation is unfounded.

Click here for much more from Care-Net.

What could happen if Roe v. Wade is overturned?

Predictions are high for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that required all 50 states to allow abortion on demand. But what would actually happen across the United States if Roe fell? One answer is that it would depend on how the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe. Let’s briefly explore what could happen in a post-Roe America.

Abortion could be returned to the states - If the Supreme Court flatly overturns Roe v. Wade, declaring its former decision unconstitutional, abortion would return to the jurisdiction of each state.

Abortion could be made illegal under the 5th and 14th Amendments - Both the 5th and 14th Amendments give human beings — not just citizens — the right to equal protection under the law. When a fundamental right — the right to life being chief among them — is violated, and the government approves through law, action, or intentional inaction, the Supreme Court considers this discrimination.

Pregnant women will still need empowerment and practical support - Some of these mothers will still be in difficult or dangerous circumstances. There will be a greater need than ever for pregnancy resource centers and medical clinics that serve pregnant mothers and their children.

Click here for more from Live Action News.

Statistics Reveal many Abortions are happening later in Pregnancy

A recent state abortion data reveals that later-term abortions in some states were as high as 15 to 17 percent of all abortions reported. National abortion data reveals that over 100,000 abortions occur in the second and third trimesters each year. Polls show that the American public is uneasy with aborting a child beyond the first trimester (13 weeks and up) and believe it should be restricted after this point.

It is clear from previous reports that late-term abortions are not being committed solely for health reasons. In several states, including New Mexico, taxpayers are actually forced to fund late-term procedures (after the 20th week) done for any reason the woman desires.

In 2014, more than 100,000 abortions took place in the 2nd and 3rd trimester...

- 13-15 weeks (6.2%): 57,424
- 16-20 weeks (3.8%): approximately 35,195
- 21 weeks and greater (1.3%): approximately 12,040

Click here for more from Live Action News.

Pro-abortion groups panic, ramp up efforts to keep Brett Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court

As America awaits the confirmation hearings on whether Judge Brett Kavanaugh will join the U.S. Supreme Court, pro-abortion activists continue to work to build opposition to President Donald Trump’s latest nominee.  The GOP’s 50-49 Senate majority can withstand one defection and still confirm Kavanaugh with Vice President Mike Pence breaking the tie. Two “no” votes from the GOP would force Republicans to sway at least one of three red-state Democrats.

Planned Parenthood Action Fund, NARAL, and other pro-abortion women’s groups are joining an army of left-wing groups to organize a “Stand for Justice” rally on August 26, International Women’s Day, to demand that senators block Kavanaugh, Breitbart reports.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com

Governor Rauner appointed retiring pro-life State Rep. Patti Bellock to direct the Department of Healthcare and Family Services

Governor Rauner and his wife have donated thousands and thousands of dollars to abortion provider Planned Parenthood, he signed into law a measure forcing Illinois taxpayers to pay for abortions for any reason, and the same law he lauded protects the right to abortion if Roe vs Wade is overturned. This move upset Democrats because the Governor is now "waffling" on the abortion issue because Rep. Bellock has a solid pro-life voting record.

Rep. Bellock while in the General Assembly, consistently voted no on issues related to reproductive health, she voted 'no' on HB40 and has a consistent record on voting against bills promoting reproductive health.

Along with voting against HB40, then-Assemblywoman Bellock over the years voted against requiring healthcare workers to discuss abortion as a health option, against stem-cell research, against allowing minors to obtain an abortion with parental consent, against health-insurance plans to cover birth control and against expanding sex education curriculum.

Click here for more from Illinois Review.

Idaho's Miracle Baby 'Baby Christopher' Went Home with His Family on Friday, July 13

Baby Christopher Ruben was a 23-week pre-born child who faced incredible odds after his mother (Malinda) had a stroke and was being kept alive on life support.

Medical professionals at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center worked passionately to ensure "Baby Christopher Ruben" would be delivered safely. This would mark the first time a procedure of this kind has ever occurred in the State of Idaho. With four other hospitals having denied transfer requests, a team of doctors of St. Alphonsus courageously embraced the impossible.

Five months and nine days after Baby Christopher Ruben was born, Idaho's Miracle Baby was healthy and strong enough to be released from the hospital and went home with his family on Friday, July 13, 2018.

Click here for more from Christian Newswire.

Planned Parenthood suit against Trump prioritizing abstinence education rejected by Judge

In May, three Planned Parenthood groups and the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) sued the administration over the Department of Health & Human Services’ (HHS) February guidelines overhauling how it evaluated applications for Title X family planning grants.  The new rules gave priority to abstinence, ease of primary care access, more family participation, and cooperation with faith-based groups.

On Monday, District Court Judge for the District of Columbia Trevor McFadden, sided with the Trump administration in the lawsuit challenging its move to prioritize faith-based, abstinence-focused programs for dispensing family-planning dollars.

Click here for more from LifeSiteNews.com