Tik Tok Video Shows Girl Celebrating During Surgical Abortion

A video in which a young woman celebrates during her second abortion went viral this week. Titled  “Abortion Time! Take 2,” the video shows the young woman cradling her early pregnancy bump before smiling, laughing, and dancing in a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic where she is shown undergoing an ultrasound-guided vacuum aspiration abortion. She smiled at the camera while her legs were suspended in stirrups as she laid in a bed.

The video has been viewed millions of times and has sparked controversy about what kind of content should be allowed on a social media platform clearly aimed at younger audiences. This kind of edgy, mature content designed to upset pro-life advocates should not have a place on a platform with a large middle-school-aged userbase.



This is not the only instance of edgy pro-abortion content on the platform, either. Tik Tok has allowed a variety of videos showcasing edgy abortion humor on its platform, including a video of a girl pretending to do a gender reveal for her unborn child before announcing that she had an abortion.

Click here to read more.

UK Website Exposed for Illegally Shipping Abortion Pills Overseas Without Prescriptions

Carole Novielli, a writer at Live Action News, wrote an investigative article detailing her experience exchanging messages with a customer service representative at SafeAbortionRX, a UK website which ships abortion pills to the United States. In her conversation with a representative who went by "Casey," she learned that the website was even willing to illegally ship abortion drugs to Americans who don't have prescriptions.

“Our products are prescription drugs and we strictly DO NOT dispense them without a healthcare professional’s advice slip or prescription,” their prescription policy states. It showed room for exceptions lower down the page, however: “If you feel that the medication is an urgent necessity for you and do not have a prescription, please contact our healthcare experts on the live chat or support team.”

SafeAbortionRX was willing to sell Carole abortion kits including the abortion pill regimen Mifepristone and Misoprostol. The first of these pills starves an unborn child by reducing the transfer of nutrients from a mother's body to her child. The second induces labor to remove the deceased child from the mother's womb. The website recommends minimal clinical supervision during the abortion process, but women who access these drugs via the internet without prescriptions can easily attempt to carry out abortions on their own, possibly hurting themselves in the process.

Click here to read more.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer Accused of Threatening Pro-Life Supreme Court Justices

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Outside the Supreme Court

"I want to tell you, Gorsuch! I want to tell you, Kavanaugh! You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."

That's what Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer yelled outside the Supreme Court at a pro-choice rally on Wednesday. It's an emotionally charged statement that has been interpreted by some as a threat of violence against pro-life Supreme Court Justices if they don't interpret the law in the way that Chuck Schumer would like. Chief Justice John Roberts responded with what many are calling a "rare rebuke."

“Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous,” Roberts said. “All members of the court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.”

Did Senate Democrat leader Schumer just threaten two conservative justices? Where is the media?

“I want to tell you Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch: You have unleashed a whirlwind, and you will pay the price”pic.twitter.com/MellytNNp5

— Mark Meadows (@RepMarkMeadows) March 4, 2020

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell criticized the New York Senator openly on the Senate Floor Thursday:

"...The Democratic Leader traveled to the workplace of two judges, and in front of a crowd of activists, he told those judges “you will pay the price” and “you won’t know what hit you.” 

If any American had these words shouted at them from a sidewalk outside their office, they would hear those threats as personal. And most likely they would hear them as threatening or inciting violence."

Senator McConnell went on to reference the shooting against Congressional Republicans at a baseball field in Alexandria, Virginia back in 2017; implying that Schumer's comments could lead to more deadly violence.

Sen. Schumer responded to Sen. McConnell's criticisms by giving a half-apology. "I shouldn't have used the words I did, but in no way was I making a threat. I never, never would do such a thing and Leader McConnell knows that. And Republicans who are busy manufacturing outrage over these comments know that too."

He justified his statement by saying he was passionate about the subject matter of the Supreme Court case, which he claimed was a woman's constitutional right to choose. This is false. The Louisiana law being debated in the Supreme Court does not limit a woman's right to have an abortion. It simply requires abortionists to maintain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in case there are complications- making abortion clinics consistent with other outpatient surgical facilities in the state of Louisiana.

Regardless, Sen. Schumer said, "My point was that there would be political consequences for President Trump and Senate Republicans if the Supreme Court with the newly confirmed justices stripped away a woman's right to choose."

Pro-life groups such as Operation Rescue, a pro-life group that highlights the danger of abortion by publicizing 911 calls made after abortions, have called for Sen. Schumer's resignation, but it seems unlikely at this point.

Click here to read more.

Movieguide Apologizes after Pro-Life Film "Unplanned" was Scrubbed from Hallmark Awards Show. Show will be Reissued.

The film Unplanned tells the story of Abby Johnson, a former director at Planned Parenthood who eventually became a pro-life advocate. Unplanned was nominated for a Movieguide award in the categories of "best film for mature audiences" and the "Faith and Freedom Award." A Movieguide award show was aired on the Hallmark Channel on February 24, but all references to Unplanned were completely edited out of the show. Lead actress Ashley Bratcher took notice and targeted a flurry of social media posts at Hallmark. Now, Hallmark has directed Movieguide to re-edit the video of the award show so it can be aired once again including the pro-life film.

“We have scheduled the MOVIEGUIDE® Awards to re-air on Hallmark Drama on Monday, March 9th at 10 PM.,” Movieguide founder and publisher Ted Baehr told LifeSiteNews. “It will also be available on the TV Everywhere app. All telecasts will include mentions of the film, ‘Unplanned’ and its lead actress, Ashley Bratcher. We at Crown Media [Hallmark] extend our sincere apologies to Ashley.”

Baehr also told LifeSiteNews that he advocated for Unplanned's nomination to the award show, but in the end, it was up to Movieguide videographer Jeremy Carroll to edit the three-and-a-half-hour ceremony down to a 42-minute version for television. Before Hallmark directed Movieguide to re-edit the show, he defended Carroll's decisions. “I’m not going to go to my editor…and tell him he shouldn’t have cut it,” Baehr said. “I’m sure he cut it for good reasons, and I’m sure he’d make the right decisions and I trust my editors.”

Baehr has since called and apologized to Ashley Bratcher personally.

Click here to read more.

Supreme Court Hears Arguments Regarding Louisiana's “Unsafe Abortion Protection Act”

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court began hearing arguments in June Medical Services, LLC v. Russo. The case is a challenge to Louisiana’s “Unsafe Abortion Protection Act,” which helps women receive care during the medical complications which may occur during an abortion procedure by requiring abortionists to maintain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

The law was passed to create consistency between abortion clinics and other outpatient surgical centers, which were already required to maintain admitting privileges with hospitals. Abortionists argue that imposing consistent regulations on their business is unfair, however, because it puts an undue burden on women seeking abortions. The interesting thing about that argument is that no independent women are challenging the law; only abortionists are. This is a law designed to protect women from medical complications which can occur during a surgical procedure by ensuring they can be swiftly admitted to a hospital by an abortionist when necessary. The law does not place any burden on women who seek abortions. It only places a burden on abortionists who don't seek admitting privileges to nearby hospitals.

Justice Samuel Alito made a point of emphasizing this fact. “You think that if the plaintiff actually has interests that are directly contrary to those individuals on whose behalf the plaintiff is claiming to sue, nevertheless that plaintiff can have standing?” he said during arguments.

National Right to Life President Carol Tobias gave this statement outside the Supreme Court:

"...Hospital admitting privileges are called 'privileges' for a reason. A doctor must meet certain requirements established by the hospital before he or she is allowed to practice there. Those privileges are usually given to doctors based on credentials and performance. 

If the abortion industry is really worried about women, they should want an admitting privileges requirement, in order to reassure women that they are getting good care. If admitting privileges are not required, the door is open for all substandard doctors to start performing abortions in LA."

Click here to read more.

West Virginia Passes Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

On Monday, West Virginia Governor Jim Justice signed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act into law. The bill is similar to a federal senate bill that failed to reach the 60 votes required to be called to a vote. The law mandates that babies born alive during an attempted abortion be provided "the same degree" of medical care that would be provided “to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”

According to the Associated Press, Gov. Justice said it was, “unbelievable, to tell you the truth, that we have to do such a thing. So today we’re going to put a stake in the sand that says for us, for us at least we stand for life and we stand for the right stuff.”

Click here to read more.

CNN Refers to Abortion Survivor as "fetus that was born"

Credit: Josh Hallett / Flickr

When CNN reported on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, the news organization clearly showed its pro-abortion bias through its nonsensical word choice. CNN reported that the legislation would “require abortion providers to work to ‘preserve the life and health’ of a fetus that was born following an attempted abortion as they would for a newborn baby.”

No medical professional would refer to a baby who was born despite an attempted abortion as a fetus. This language would only ever be chosen to sterilize the idea of refusing medical care to a child. It is purposefully confusing to trick readers into rationalizing infanticide.

“The bill we’re voting on doesn’t change anyone’s access to abortion […] It is about babies that are already born,” Senator Ben Sasse said on the Senate floor after citing CNN's article. “Newsflash, CNN: if you’re a baby and you’ve been born and you’re outside a momma, nobody calls that a fetus. You just want to call it a fetus because you don’t want to cover the actual story that’s being voted on in the U.S. Senate today.”

Click here to read more.

New Indiana Bill Requires Abortion Clinics to Tell Women Considering Abortions about Humane Disposition Law

In the aftermath of the discovery of the late Ulrich Klopfer's hoard of over 2,000 aborted children at his home, the Indiana state government enacted a law requiring abortion clinics to treat the remains of aborted children with respect. In many cases, aborted children are seen by abortion clinics and hospitals as "medical waste," but the Indiana law requires abortion clinics to have the bodies of aborted children cremated or buried.

Now, a new bill has been sent to Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb which would require abortion clinics to provide women considering abortions complete information about the humane final disposition law. Indiana Right to Life President and CEO Mike Fichter gave this statement:

“Indiana’s current humane final disposition law, as upheld by the Supreme Court, contains grey areas we believe abortion clinics use to keep women in the dark, especially when it comes to drug-induced abortions. This bill addresses these areas and makes sure women get all the facts, including the reality that a drug-induced abortion will result in an aborted baby. We will continue working for a day when no child is aborted in Indiana. Until that day comes, this bill will make sure these children are never again treated like common medical waste in our state.”

The law would also require abortion clinics, crematoriums, and funeral homes to keep accurate logs of aborted bodies as they are sent from place to place and respectfully set to rest. These logs will make bodies easier to track and prevent people like Klopfer from being able to get away with taking and hiding bodies.

Click here to read more.

Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act Votes Fail in Senate

Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (D)
Credit: Charles Edward Miller / Flickr

On Tuesday, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act failed to reach the number of votes required to end debate and bring the two bills to a full vote.

The cloture vote (the vote to end debate) ended 53-44 for the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and 56-41 on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. A minimum of 60 votes was required to end the democrat-led filibuster. The votes were mostly along party lines, with notable Illinois Democrats Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth siding to block final votes.

These bills, while unlikely to pass the House of Representatives, would be crucial legislation to protect unborn life in the United States. It is disappointing that partisan politics divides politicians too much to even call these bills to a vote. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act does not even limit abortions. It simply ensures that children born alive despite an attempted abortion will receive the same level of medical care as babies born under normal circumstances.

While it is more predictable that pro-abortion advocates would block the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, that does not make it any less acceptable that they would do so. Pro-lifers need to ensure that pro-life politicians are sent to Washington in the upcoming election and hold them accountable so that they make the protection of ALL life a priority.

Click here to read more.

CA Attorney General to HHS: “California will take no ‘corrective action.’” CA will Continue to Force Churches to Cover Abortion

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra
Credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra wrote in a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that the State has no plans to stop forcing private employers, including churches and religious organizations, to fund health insurance plans with abortion coverage.

The HHS Department’s Office for Civil Rights issued a Notice of Violation to the state of California in January. The Notice declared that California's law forcing employers to cover abortion was a violation of the Weldon Amendment. The amendment allows the federal government to withhold funding from states which discriminate against “any institutional or individual healthcare entity” because they don't “provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.”

The HHS Office for Civil Rights stated that if California fails to comply with federal law, it may face “limitations on continued receipt of certain HHS funds.”

California will not back down with its violations, however. “California will take no ‘corrective action,’” said Xavier Becerra. He argued that the Obama administration found no problems with the California requirement, which began in 2014.

It could easily be argued that pro-abortion bias may have affected the Obama administration's enforcement of the Weldon Amendment.

Click here to read more.

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Title X "Protect Life Rule"

Credit: www.weisspaarz.com

On Monday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 7-4 in favor of the Trump administration's "Protect Life Rule" which prevents organizations that provide abortions or refer patients to abortions from receiving Title X funding for their family-planning services from the government.

Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote in the majority opinion that the Supreme Court approved similar regulations in 1991 with Rust v. Sullivan and that the Protect Life Rule is “less restrictive in at least one important respect.” In the majority opinion, she stated “a counselor providing nondirective pregnancy counseling ‘may discuss abortion’ so long as ‘the counselor neither refers for, nor encourages, abortion,’” wrote Ikuta.

Planned Parenthood has called upon Congress to reverse the Protect Life Rule, which it calls a "gag rule."

Click here to read more.

Daleiden and Merrit Charges Heard in San Fransisco Superior Court

David Daleiden at Pro-Life Summit 2020
Credit: American Life League / Flickr

David Daleiden and Sandra Merrit, undercover journalists who exposed Planned Parenthood for harvesting and illegally trafficking body parts from babies, are facing charges of illegal recording under California privacy law. Their defense team appealed the original guilty verdict to San Fransisco Superior Court and hope to get all charges dropped to protect the field of undercover journalism.

"David and Susan face 10 years- a decade- in San Quentin Penitentiary if those felony counts were to be upheld," said Peter Breen, senior counsel for the Thomas Moore Society representing the undercover journalists. "[This is] the first time and only time undercover journalists have ever been charged with that illegal taping law in California. And again, all of these tapes were taken in public exhibit halls and public restaurants. There was nothing done wrong by David and his team."

Breen says that his team is prepared to appeal this case all the way to the Supreme Court.

Click here to read more.

Florida Governor to Sign Parental Consent Bill

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis

In his state of the state address, pro-life Florida governor Ron DeSantis asked the Florida House of Representatives to pass a parental consent bill which would require a minor's parents to be involved in their daughter's decision to have an abortion. His request has now been answered.

On February 20, the Florida House of Representatives passed HB 265 with a majority of 75 to 43. When the bill reaches Governor DeSantis's desk, he is expected to sign it and pass it into law.

Sen. Kelli Stargel, a sponsor of the original bill that passed the Senate, said her legislation is “not a pro-choice or pro-life bill.” Stargel added, “This is about whether or not you’re going to have adults involved in difficult decisions with children.”

Polling showed 73% bipartisan support for the parental consent bill among Floridians.

Click here to read more.

California Lawmakers Receive Valentines Bags from Planned Parenthood with Message: "Don't F*** with us."

California lawmakers reportedly received "goody bags" last week with a message from Planned Parenthood. They included condoms with the words "Don't F*** with us. Don't F*** without us." The bags also included a piece of paper with a short poem:

"Roses are red 

Violets are blue 

Planned Parenthood promotes safe sex 

Now your office can too!"

The idea apparently being that legislators could distribute these condoms to workers in their legislative offices. Senate Republican leader Shannon Grove went to Facebook to express her disappointment on Valentine's day:

“We confirmed several offices received this ‘gift’ from Planned Parenthood, including mine. Really???? This is how PP communicates with members of the state legislature. Good thing I stopped a group of kids from seeing in my office…… #Crass #disgusting #Vulgar.”

Of course, Planned Parenthood's business model is not built on promoting safe sex. It is built on promoting abortion and profiting off vulnerable women who don't feel like they have any better options.

Click here to read more.

Supreme Court to Begin Hearings on Louisiana's "Unsafe Abortion Act" Next Month

Credit: Glenn Beltz / Flickr

On March 4, the United States Supreme Court will begin hearings in June Medical Services v. Phillips, a case deciding the constitutionality of a Louisiana law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges to a nearby hospital.

"The Unsafe Abortion Act" requires abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the facility. The requirement is designed to keep women safe in cases when women are injured during abortion procedures. This would also have the side-effect of ensuring only qualified physicians perform abortions since hospitals review a doctor's experience before granting admitting privileges.

The state of Louisiana originally lost its case in District Court before winning in the Fifth Court of Appeals. It will be the first abortion-related case to be heard by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

Click here to read more.

Former Editor of Harvard Journal Argues Preborn Children are Entitled to Equal Protection Under the Constitution

Pro-life organization Live Action released a new video in its series titled “Pro-Life Replies” on Wednesday. In this video, former editor in chief of Harvard Journal of Law Josh Craddock argues that the landmark case Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, and preborn children should have constitutional protection under the 14th amendment.


Click here to read more.

HHS Seeking Nominations for Board to Decide Ethics of Tax-Funded Research on Aborted Babies

Credit: Michel / Flickr

The Department of Health and Human Services announced Wednesday that it is seeking nominations for the National Institute of Health Research Ethics Advisory Board. Part of this board's duties will include deciding the ethics of using aborted babies in medical research.

“The Board will be composed of 15 individuals who are not federal employees,” the announcement says. The board will include at least one attorney, ethicist, practicing physician, and theologian. Furthermore, at least one half of the appointments must be “scientists with substantial accomplishments in biomedical or behavioral research.”

“The Ethics Board will advise, consult with, and make recommendations to, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) regarding the ethics of research involving human fetal tissue (HFT) proposed in NIH grant and cooperative agreement applications and R&D contract Proposals,” the announcement continues. “Recommendations will address whether the Secretary should withhold funds or not withhold funds from a proposed project because of ethical considerations. In providing advice and recommendations on these matters, the Ethics Board will consider, among other things, the use of alternative models, and review and verify the core ethical principles and procedures used in the process to obtain written voluntary informed consent for the donation of the tissue.”

Directions and necessary materials for nominations are included in the announcement. Nominations must be received within the next 30 days.

Click here to read more.

Judge Rules Against Title X Abortion Funding Restrictions in Maryland

On February 18, a U.S. district judge ruled in favor of the state of Maryland against the Trump administration's Title X rule restricting taxpayer funding of abortion.

The Protect Life Rule prevents taxpayer funding from going towards family planning facilities that provide abortions, share a location with an abortion provider, or refer patients to abortions. U.S. district court judge Richard Bennett sided with the state of Maryland against the Protect Life Rule, calling it, “arbitrary and capricious, being inadequately justified and objectively unreasonable.”

“The administrative record reflects that literally every major medical organization in the United States has opposed implementation of this rule,” he wrote. “There is almost no professional support for its implementation.”

Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia are also suing against the Protect Life Rule, so even more federal court decisions regarding the Trump administration's ability to restrict taxpayer funding of abortion in this way will come.

Click here to read more.

Illinois Abortions Increased by 3,000 in First Year of Taxpayer-Funding

Credit: Matt Turner / Flickr

Late in January, the Illinois Department of Public Health released abortion statistics for 2018, the first full year since Republican Governor Bruce Rauner signed a bill requiring Medicaid and state insurers to provide abortion coverage. According to these new statistics, over 3,000 more abortions occurred in 2018 than in 2017.

“We knew that abortions would continue to increase as taxpayer funding of abortions took hold, but seeing an increase of nearly 4,000 more Illinois babies aborted is shocking,” Thomas Moore Society Vice President Peter Breen told the National Review.

Pro-life advocates are afraid that these numbers will only increase as Illinois becomes an "abortion hub" for nearby states. As Illinois removes restrictions on abortion and nearby states enact new restrictions, both politicians and abortion providers have stated that they want to provide abortions to women from bordering states.

Click here to read more.

Canadian Judge Rejected Refugee Because She Kept a Child Conceived in Rape

Credit: ccpixs.com

A member of Canada's refugee board doubted a woman's rape claim and rejected her application to live in Canada because she didn't believe a woman who had been raped would ever choose not to abort.

“(I am) sensitive to the subject of rape, but the claimant’s explanation does not make sense as to why she would keep a child who would remind her of being raped, unless that is not the case,” wrote Sarwanjit Randhawa.

In the applicant's hearing, Randhawa asked her if she ever considered having an abortion, to which she responded that she opposed abortion. She knew it wasn't the child's fault that they were conceived in abortion, and she knew what it was like to live without parents.

None of these explanations were good enough for Randhawa, who has been taught by pro-abortion advocates that abortion isn't just a choice for women who have been raped. To her, it is the appropriate response in all cases.

After reports about the judge's decision spread, the decision was reversed in an appeal.

Click here to read more.