August 4, 2021

New EACH Act Aims to Codify Roe v. Wade and Expand Abortion Funding

Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)
Senate Sponsor of the EACH Act
Pro-abortion members of Congress are pushing new legislation that would codify Roe v. Wade into federal law and further expand federal funding of abortion.

The Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act, abbreviated as the EACH Act, would legalize abortion throughout all stages of pregnancy and override state laws restricting abortion. Furthermore, the EACH Act would require Medicaid or Federal Employees Health Benefit Plans to provide coverage for abortion services. According to the Washington Times, qualified health plans would be allowed to use the Health Insurance Marketplace tax credit, which was originally designed to help low-income individuals afford health insurance.

The EACH Act has been introduced in Senate Bill S.1021 and its companion bill H.R. 2234 in the House. Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth (D) is the primary sponsor in the Senate, while Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) is the primary sponsor in the House of representatives.

Several Representatives from Illinois have co-sponsored the House version, however. Those Representatives include Reps. Janice Schakowsky (D-9), Sean Casten (D-6), Danny Davis (D-7) Lauren Underwood (D-14), Mike Quigley (D-5), Marie Newman (D-3), Jesus G "Chuy" Garcia (D-4), Bill Foster (D-11), Bradley Scott Schneider (D-10), and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-8).

Pro-Life Senators Urge Biden Administration to Withdraw Proposed Abortion-Funding Rule

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), one of the 26 pro-life senators
co-authoring a letter to HHS Secretary Becerra
After the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed a new rule for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that would loosen protections preventing the program from funding abortion, 26 pro-life Senators sent a letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra demanding that he withdraw the rule.

As written, the ACA requires abortion coverage to be billed separately in ACA plans. The proposed HHS rule removes that requirement.

In their letter to Becerra, the 26 senators objected to the administration's efforts to “ignore the congressional intent and the unequivocal legal requirements regarding abortion coverage offered through the Affordable Care Act.”

“The purpose and effect of the Proposed Rule, in tandem with partisan legislative efforts to expand the ACA, will be to increase taxpayer funding for abortion on demand, to the financial benefit of Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry,” the senators wrote.

They also argued that the rule could cause many Americans who oppose abortion to unknowingly pay for them.

The letter concludes, “HHS should rigorously enforce the separate abortion payment requirements in the law, as directed by Congress and faithfully implemented by the current regulations, and promptly withdraw the provisions in the Proposed Rule to the contrary.”

August 3, 2021

House Passes Spending Bills Without Hyde Protections


Last week, the House of Representatives passed several spending bills to fund institutions including the State Department, the Capitol Police, and Veterans Affairs. Disturbingly, however, none of those bills included Hyde Amendment protections.

The Hyde amendment has been a bipartisan part of federal spending bills since it was first introduced in 1976 by Illinois Congressman Henry Hyde (R). The amendment bans federal funding of domestic abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Over the years, Hyde protections are said to have saved over two million American lives.

“Democratic leadership in the House has put Hyde on the chopping block,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “After 45 years of bipartisan support, Democrats in the House want to destroy a measure designed to save human lives.”

Additionally, the appropriations bills neglected to include Weldon Amendment and Helms Amendment language. The Weldon Amendment protects pro-life medical providers from being forced to participate in abortion, while the Helms Amendment is aimed to prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortions in other countries.

August 2, 2021

Over 200 Congressmembers File Brief Supporting Mississippi in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

200 members of Congress have joined the list of pro-lifers supporting the state of Mississippi in the upcoming Supreme Court case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

The pro-life legislators give several arguments in their brief: 
  • Current Supreme Court precedent is inconsistent regarding whether states can place limitations on pre-viability abortions. The legislators wrote, “Some federal courts have interpreted Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) as creating a bright-line rule that forbids lawmakers from restricting previability abortions in any way, regardless of the strength of the interests at stake.” The brief notes that the Court created an exception to this rule, stating, “the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Act this Court upheld in Gonzales v. Carhart without regard for the viability line.”
  • The American public supports pro-life protections. “The second-trimester regulation embodied in Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act is strongly supported by the American public,” reads the brief. This is echoed by a Marist poll conducted earlier this year. 76% of respondents to that poll wanted abortion to be either banned or limited to the first three months of pregnancy.
  • States, through their legislators and electors, can be trusted to make laws governing abortion. The Congress members' brief reads, “Mississippi's case provides the Court a chance to release its vise grip on abortion politics, as Congress and the States have shown that they are ready and able to address the issue in ways that reflect Americans’ varying viewpoints and are grounded in the science of fetal development and maternal health.”
  • The legistlators' brief reads that states, “have expressed the desire to protect life through a burgeoning number of laws enacted to further the States’ important interests in protecting women from dangerous late-term abortion, ending the destruction of human life based on sexism, racism, or ableism, upholding the integrity of the medical profession against the barbaric practice of dismembering human beings in the womb, and protecting preborn infants from the horrific pain of such abortions.”
  • Finally, the brief argues, “It is long overdue for this Court to return lawmaking to legislators.” It then quotes a dissent by Justice Scalia in a 1988 Supreme Court Case: “The most reliable objective signs [of societal views] consist of the legislation that the society has enacted. It will rarely if ever be the case that the Members of this Court will have a better sense of the evolution in views of the American people than do their elected representatives.”

July 30, 2021

Pelosi's Archbishop Says Devout Catholics Can't Condone Abortion

Salvatore J. Cordileone, Archbishop of San Francisco
Last Thursday, the Archbishop of San Fransisco responded to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi after she cited her Catholic faith while arguing for federal funding of elective abortions. Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco, Pelosi's home diocese, disagreed with her stance on the Hyde Amendment and abortion as a whole.

“Let me repeat: no one can claim to be a devout Catholic and condone the killing of innocent human life, let alone have the government pay for it,” he told CNA. “The right to life is a fundamental -- the most fundamental -- human right, and Catholics do not oppose fundamental human rights.”

At a press conference on July 22, Pelosi said that she supported taxpayer funding of abortion because it is “an issue of health, of many women in America, especially those in lower-income situations and in different states.” She mentioned her faith during the conference as well, saying,

“as a devout Catholic and mother of five in six years, I feel that God blessed my husband and me with our beautiful family, five children in six years almost to the day, but... it’s not up to me to dictate that that’s what other people should do, and it [funding of abortion in Medicaid] is an issue of fairness and justice for poorer women in our country.”

Cordileone responded on Thursday,

“To use the smokescreen of abortion as an issue of health and fairness to poor women is the epitome of hypocrisy: what about the health of the baby being killed? What about giving poor women real choice, so they are supported in choosing life?

This would give them fairness and equality to women of means, who can afford to bring a child into the world. It is people of faith who run pro-life crisis pregnancy clinics; they are the only ones who provide poor women life-giving alternatives to having their babies killed in their wombs.”

Click here to read more.

Pro-Abortion House Members Block "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act"

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
After the Biden administration proposed a budget without Hyde Amendment language, pro-life legislators introduced a bill that would prevent federal tax dollars from funding abortion. This week, pro-abortion legislators in the House of Representatives voted to block the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.

On Tuesday, House Republican leadership and the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus co-chairs filed a motion attempting to force a vote before the full House of Representatives. The next day, however, pro-abortion legislators voted to block that motion. Every Democrat present voted together to block the bill.

Pro-life legislators say that they will continue to put forth motions to call the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act to a vote.

July 29, 2021

National Right to Life asks Supreme Court to Value State Interests in Mississippi Abortion Case

National Right to Life and Louisiana Right to Life together filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to reverse Roe v. Wade and allow states to enact more abortion regulations. The brief argues that normal legal rules have not been applied to abortion decisions and that applying those rules would allow states to protect their interests with abortion regulations.

The Supreme Court will soon consider Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which involves the abortion lobby's challenge to Mississippi's near-total ban on abortions after 15 weeks. The lower courts have ruled that state abortion bans before viability are unconstitutional. The Supreme Court will decide whether all bans on pre-viability elective abortions are unconstitutional.

National Right to Life and Louisiana Right to Life are asking the Court to make clear what the law actually is since rulings in the past have created confusion among lower courts.

Jomes Bopp, Jr., NRLC's General Counsel for the brief, said:

“Since Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court has twisted the normal rules of law to protect an absolute abortion right and not given full effect to powerful state interests such as protecting preborn life and maternal health. Today, we ask the Court to reverse that tangential path, which will allow greater regulation of abortion, lead to stability in the law, and put Roe itself at issue.”

Click here to read more.

July 28, 2021

Arkansas AG Files Supreme Court Brief Defending Ban on Down Syndrome Discriminatory Abortions

Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge
Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge filed a brief to the Supreme Court earlier this month in defense of Arkansas Act 619, the Down Syndrome Discrimination by Abortion Prohibition Act.

Arkansas legislators passed Act 619 into law in 2019. Since then, the law was challenged by pro-abortion activists. The law was overturned by a district court, and that court's decision was affirmed by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in January of 2021.

That decision came not long after the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Tennessee could enforce its ban on discriminatory abortions. The Tennessee law bans abortions when the abortionist knows that the mother is seeking the abortion purely because of the child's sex, race, or diagnosis of Down syndrome. The 8th Circuit acknowledged that this created a circuit split, which opens the way for the Supreme Court to step in.

In her brief, Rutledge asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the 8th Circuit's decision.

“In my personal experiences, I know individuals with Down syndrome have an extra chromosome, but they also have extra love to give and I will fight for these innocent individuals who are a gift from God,” said Attorney General Rutledge. “The Constitution does not sanction killing an unborn child just because that child may have Down syndrome and I will not stand by and allow this practice to happen.”

WHO Updates Guidelines to Promote DIY Chemical Abortions

The World Health Organization (WHO) released updated guidelines this month encouraging self-administered chemical abortions without the supervision of a doctor.

The new WHO guidelines promote the self-administration of injectable contraception, emergency contraception, and abortion pills—including "in countries where abortion is illegal or restricted."

The WHO has long promoted abortion across the globe and interfered with the beliefs of pro-life countries. International aid from the WHO often includes tools and drugs used during abortions.

Writing for the pro-abortion organization Women First Digital, Lilian Muchoki said that the WHO guidelines are “based on a dream that abortion will be de-medicalized, the same way that contraception and other options are de-medicalized.”

Self-managed abortions can be dangerous not only to unborn children but also to their mothers. If the mother has an undiagnosed pregnancy condition, incorrectly dates her pregnancy, or doesn't correctly follow the process of the abortion-pill regimen (which is especially possible when a doctor is not involved), she is at increased risk of life-threatening complications such as hemorrhage.

Click here to read more.

July 27, 2021

Mississippi AG Files Brief Asking Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v. Wade

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch
Last Thursday, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch filed a brief with the Supreme Court as part of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. In it, she asks the Supreme Court to overturn its two infamous rulings on abortion: Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization is the abortion lobby's challenge to a Missippi law banning most elective abortions after 15 weeks. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case this fall, and many pundits believe that this case could cause the Supreme Court to reconsider the standing precedent on abortion.

Fitch argued in her brief that the Roe and Casey decisions created “a special-rules regime for abortion jurisprudence that has left these cases out of step with other Court decisions and neutral principles of law applied by the Court.”

“As a result, state legislatures, and the people they represent, have lacked clarity in passing laws to protect legitimate public interests, and artificial guideposts have stunted important public debate on how we, as a society, care for the dignity of women and their children,” Fitch said.

“It is time for the Court to set this right and return this political debate to the political branches of government,” she wrote.

Click here to read more.

New Bipartisan Bill Introduced to End Military Policy Encouraging Abortion

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) introduced new legislation this week that would ban military academies from forcing pregnant women to either abort their children or drop out of school.

The Candidates Afforded Dignity, Equality and Training Act of 2021, or CADET Act, is written to amend policies that encourage pregnant women to abort their children. The current policy at military academies is that students can't have dependents. This leaves women who become pregnant with two options: either dropping out of school or aborting their children. If a woman drops out of school rather than choosing abortion, she will be forced to repay the government for the education she received, since she will not be able to serve in the military.

The CADET Act would allow women who get pregnant to take a year off from school to give birth and recover. They will then be allowed to return and graduate a year later than planned. While the woman finishes school, another person would be named as a temporary guardian for the child.

“Under our current system, cadets who become pregnant must either sign away the rights to their child, get an abortion, pay devastating financial responsibilities, or leave the academy altogether,” Cruz said in a press release, adding,

“I am proud to introduce this crucial legislation ensuring cadets in military academies can retain legal guardianship of their children without unnecessary burdens, and most importantly, keep young military families together. The CADET Act is a commonsense step to ensure the brave young women of our Armed Forces have the right level of support to continue their academy training and go on to fulfill their future service as commissioned officers while raising their family.”

Click here to read more. 

July 26, 2021

District Judge Issues Injunction Against Arkansas Abortion Ban

U.S. District Judge Kristine G. Baker
Arkansas's Unborn Child Protection Act, which was passed and signed into law earlier this year, was blocked last Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Kristine G. Baker. Her preliminary injunction prevents the state of Arkansas from enforcing the law, which was set to go into effect on July 28.

The Unborn Child Protection Act bans almost all abortions in the state, with an exception to save the life of the mother. When the law was passed, Senate sponsor Jason Rapert said that part of the law's intent was to directly challenge the Supreme Court precedent of Roe v. Wade.

In a statement to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Rapert said, “Where is the conscience of the court? Judge Kristine Baker never fails to strike down pro-life laws in Arkansas. …She’s basing her decision on the same type of claptrap we always hear which ends up in the killing of unborn babies in our state and in the nation.”

The pro-abortion challengers to the law predictably include Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Click here to read more.

July 23, 2021

Texas Gov. Greg Abbot Signs Bill to Ban Abortion if Roe v. Wade is Overturned

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the Human Life Protection Act on Tuesday, which will ban abortion in the state if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.

The Human Life Protection Act would take effect 30 days after Roe v. Wade is overturned or if a new court ruling allowed states to individually prohibit abortions. The law includes exceptions for cases when the mother's life is at risk or she is at risk of a “substantial impairment of major bodily function."

According to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, Texas is the 12th state to pass a "trigger law" banning abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned. The other states are Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah.

Click here to read more.

IL Congresswoman Mary Miller Introduces Protecting Life on College Campus Act

On Tuesday, Rep. Mary Miller (IL-15), Rep. Chip Roy (TX-21), and Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) introduced a new bill that would prohibit federal funds from going to colleges or universities that provide abortions or abortion drugs on-campus.

“Chemical abortions are the future the abortion issue is lobbying for, and I know that as a mother of five daughters, my girls and their peers are the most vulnerable to the chemical abortion industry. The abortion industry does not advocate for women, as they constantly claim to do. They exploit young women but leave them to deal with the consequences and severe potential side effects all on their own,” said Miller. “American taxpayers should not be forced by Democrats to fund the abortion providers in this country directly or indirectly. The Protecting Life on College Campus Act stands up for the many Americans who share a deeply held moral opposition to ending life in the womb.”

The bill was created in response to a new California law mandating that public universities make abortion pills available on their campuses. The law takes effect in 2023, and it will affect all 34 public universities in California.

The pro-life law introduced on Tuesday would require colleges to submit annual reports to the U.S. Secretary of Education and the Secretary of Health and Human Services showing that they do not provide abortion drugs.

Click here to read more.

July 22, 2021

FRC Creates New Website Tracking Taxpayer Funding of Abortion

The Family Research Council launched a new website this month to show taxpayer funding and abortion data of Planned Parenthood since 1994.

Titled, "America's Direct Deposit to Planned Parenthood," the analysis uses information from the Government Accountability Office and Planned Parenthood's annual reports to show how many taxpayer dollars have been funneled into Planned Parenthood organizations. Between 1994 and 2019, Planned Parenthood has reported performing 7,059,206 abortions and receiving $9.7 billion in total taxpayer funding. Over that period of time, the annual taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood has quadrupled from $163.1 million in 1994 to $618.1 million in 2019.

Over the period between 1994 and 2018, Planned Parenthood's share of the total abortions in the US has increased from 10.5% to 55.8%.

As the US House of Representatives considers a budget bill that doesn't include the protections of the Hyde Amendment, Planned Parenthood stands to gain even more funding from taxpayers.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said:

"Planned Parenthood has become America's abortion giant, and it has been taxpayer dollars that has bankrolled the baby-killing industry. Planned Parenthood now performs more abortions annually than every other abortion supplier in America. Far from escaping its racist, eugenicist roots, it increasingly targets minority babies by locating the vast majority of its abortion facilities near black or Hispanic neighborhoods. Planned Parenthood does not deserve billions in government funding. Even pro-choice Americans have long agreed that taxpayers should not be forced to fund abortions. The time has come to put an end to the forced partnership between taxpayers and Planned Parenthood," concluded Perkins."

Click here to read more

20 States File Brief Defending South Carolina Heartbeat Law

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall
Led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, 20 states filed an amicus brief in support of South Carolina's heartbeat law.

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster signed the Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act into law in February, and pro-abortion groups filed a lawsuit against it the following day. District Judge Mary Geiger Lewis placed an injunction blocking the law's enforcement soon afterward.

The law requires abortionists to provide ultrasounds for mothers before committing an abortion, and it bans abortionists from aborting a child whose heartbeat is detected during that ultrasound. Abortionists who violate the law could face felony charges, fines, and jail time. The law includes exceptions for medical emergencies, rape, incest, and fetal diagnoses.

South Carolina appealed the district court's injunction last week, arguing that the pro-abortion organizations lacked the legal standing to bring a lawsuit. South Carolina also argued that only the heartbeat provision (not the ultrasound requirements) should be blocked by the injunction, since that is the provision being challenged in court.

“South Carolina’s fetal heartbeat law was struck down in an error-filled district court opinion,” Marshall said in a press release. “Although Planned Parenthood and the other plaintiffs challenged only the law’s regulation of abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected, the district court enjoined the law in its entirety — including portions of the law that dozens of other states already have and regularly enforce.”

Click here to read more.

July 21, 2021

Bioethicists Propose Time-Delayed Suicide Implants for Dementia Patients

Prominent bioethicists are proposing that dementia patients could be implanted with time-release suicide devices that could kill patients at a future time of their choosing.

In a recent article for Hastings Center Report, the world's most prominent bioethics journal, bioethicists proposed that dementia patients could be implanted with "advance directive implants" or ADIs.

The article, titled "Ending One's Life in Advance," reads:

"The ADI would require extensive engineering and may not be feasible with current technologies. Still, we suspect it could become feasible in the near future. We imagine the ADI as something like a computerized subdermal implant containing a lethal dose of a medication or combination of medications. Release of these medications would occur rapidly after a predetermined interval or after some specific event had occurred. The ADI would likely require a long-lasting battery, computerized control, and a pump or microfluidic mechanism."

Assisted suicide, including suicide with ADIs, involves the intentional killing of one human being by another. Allowing the idea of assisted suicide to become a normal part of our culture dehumanizes those with conditions like dementia, and that should not be allowed to happen. Regardless of their circumstances, human lives are valuable, and they should be cared for.

Click here to read more.

Washington Church Files Brief with 9th Circuit Over Abortion Coverage Mandate

Cedar Park Assembly of God in Washington state is taking another step in its ongoing fight against a law requiring religious institutions to include abortion coverage in all employee healthcare plans with maternity benefits.

On July 9, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a brief before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asking them to overturn a lower courts ruling, which threw out the church's lawsuit. ADF attorneys argued that Washington state is violating the church's constitutional rights to practice their religious beliefs about the sanctity of human life. The attorneys also argued the law specifically targets churches, since it provides exceptions for healthcare providers but not religious organizations.

“We’re standing for the rights of people of faith to not be forced into being complicit with something inconsistent with our faith,” said senior pastor Rev. Jay Smith, according to SeattlePi. “Abortion is the antithesis of who we are as an organization, what our beliefs are, and how we live our faith.”

According to the Washington Times, attorneys for the state argued that the church was not injured or burdened by the law because they can buy insurance from providers who are exempt from the abortion coverage requirement. The court filing rebuked the state's argument, stating, “No evidence supports the court’s assumption that Cedar Park could obtain an abortion-excluding group health plan from a different insurance provider. That such a plan might be available to a few ministries elsewhere has no impact on Cedar Park’s injury or standing to challenge [the law].”

July 20, 2021

Pro-Abortion Groups File Unusual Class-Action Lawsuit Over Texas Heartbeat Law

Last Tuesday, a coalition of pro-abortion groups and individuals filed a class-action lawsuit over a new Texas law that will ban the abortion of unborn children whose heartbeats can be detected (generally at six weeks). This case will be very different from other legal battles over pro-life legislation because of the Texas law's unique enforcement mechanism.

The Texas heartbeat law, which goes into effect on Sept. 1, allows individuals to file lawsuits against abortionists or anybody who aids them in aborting an unborn child after the child's heartbeat would be detectable. This is different from normal pro-life laws, which are enforced directly by states.

The pro-abortion coalition didn't just file a lawsuit against the state to challenge the constitutionality of the heartbeat law. The Texan reported that the "unusual lawsuit" was filed “against the Texas Medical Board, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, the entire Texas court system, and one individual man: Mark Lee Dickson, founder of the ‘Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative.'”

Dickson is a pastor and the director of Right to Life East Texas. He helps cities throughout Texas and the rest of the country become sanctuary cities for the unborn. These cities enact ordinances banning abortion within city limits. He was included as a defendant for posting on Facebook that he is willing to file lawsuits against abortionists if they violate the heartbeat law.

In a statement to Live Action News, Dickson said,

“Does the sound of our heartbeat mean more outside the womb than it did when we were inside our mother’s womb? Are we really any more human than the babies we see on the ultrasound monitors? Texans cannot ignore the facts. We all came from our mother’s womb. Many of us, in bringing our own children into this world, have heard the heartbeat and have seen the 2D, 3D, and 4D ultrasounds. How could we ignore those unmistakable evidences of life? This is, most certainly, a fight worth fighting.”

Click here to read more.

Chicago Public Schools to Give Condoms to Children in Grades 5-12

A new policy passed by the Chicago Public School (CPS) Board of Education last December will require Chicago public schools to provide condoms to children as young as ten years old when in-person classes begin next month.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the policy requires schools that teach grades 5-12 to "maintain a condom availability program." The Sun-Times reported that the policy will require over 600 public schools to distribute condoms to children.

“Essentially what we want to do is make condoms available to students for if and when they think they need them,” said Dr. Kenneth Fox, CPS’ chief health officer.  “…When you don’t have those protections and don’t make those resources available then bad stuff happens to young people. You have elevated risks of sexually transmitted infections, of unintended pregnancies, and that’s very preventable stuff.”

When asked why fifth-graders were included, Fox said the policy was “informed by a developmental understanding of children.”

Citing a column by former Planned Parenthood manager Ramona Treviño, Live Action argued that abortion businesses stand to profit from introducing children to sex at a young age. Treviño wrote:
"Working for a non-abortion center made it clear to me that contraception and abortion are two sides of the same coin. One does not exist without the other… Contraception creates a market for abortion by promoting promiscuity and providing men and women a false sense of security against an unintended pregnancy. The more promiscuous people are (especially young people), the more likely they’ll become pregnant.

The more people use birth control and adopt a contraceptive mentality, the higher the odds that they’ll seek an abortion. Because, let’s face it, if they’re using birth control, a child is not part of the ‘plan.’ Abortion is the backup, so to speak, for contraceptive failure, misuse, or lack of self-control."

Click here to read more.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)