Google Quashes Abortion Pill Reversal Ads

Rebekah Hagan with her son Zechariah, whose
life was saved from the abortion pill by
Abortion pill reversal.
Photo from the 2020 March for Life/Lisa Bourne

After receiving pressure from pro-abortion activists, Google has canceled advertisements for Abortion Pill Reversal.

Pro-abortion activists from the London-based Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) called on Google and Facebook to remove advertisements for Abortion Pill Reversal. The group relied on a discredited and incomplete study designed to debunk APR. 12 women had taken the first abortion pill in that study, and 3 of them experience hemorrhaging. Of those three, only one of them had taken progesterone, the drug used in abortion pill reversal. The study was rightly canceled due to the injuries women were facing. The study fails to prove that those injuries were caused by progesterone. While only one of the three injured women had taken progesterone, all three had taken the abortion pill.

“In a dramatic and unprecedented move, Google has sided squarely with extremist pro-abortion political ideology, banning the pro-life counterpoint and life-saving information from being promoted on their platform,” Live Action founder Lila Rose told CNA in a statement.

Rose said that on Sept. 13, Google took down all of Live Action's advertisements for abortion pill reversal. Google accused the advertisements of containing false information. Before Google took action on Sept. 13, the tech giant had run them for over four months.

Heartbeat International, which manages the Abortion Pill Rescue Network and its 24/7 helpline, was also targeted by Google's censorship.

“Women deserve to know the truth about all their options,” said Heartbeat International Vice President Betty McDowell. “That is why it is disappointing to see Big Tech kowtow to Big Abortion in the latest attack against pregnancy help.”

“By removing Abortion Pill Reversal ads from Google and Facebook—two of the largest tech companies in the world—these companies silence the only viable option for women who seek to reverse the effects of the abortion pill,” McDowell said.

Click here to read more.

Texas Abortionist Sued After He Admits to Breaking Texas Heartbeat Act

After a Texas abortionist openly admitted to breaking the Texas Heartbeat Act, two non-Texas residents filed lawsuits against him. While this may be the first instance of the Texas Heartbeat Act being used to take legal action against an abortionist, the two men filing these lawsuits seem to be using the situation as an opportunity to challenge the law rather than protect life.

San Antonio abortionist Dr. Alan Baird wrote on the opinion page of The Washington Post Sunday that he had violated the Texas Heartbeat Act on Sept. 6 by aborting an unborn baby who had a heartbeat. He wrote that he did this because he had “a duty of care to this patient...and because she has a fundamental right to receive this care.”

The Texas Heartbeat Act prohibits abortionists from ending the lives of babies whose heartbeats can be detected, which usually happens around six weeks gestation. The law is enforced by individuals, who have the ability to file lawsuits against abortionists and those who assist in facilitating abortions. These can be people who pay for abortions or those who provide transportation. The mothers of these children can't be sued under the law.

The two men filing lawsuits against Dr. Baird include Oscar Stilley, an Arkansas man currently serving a 15-year house arrest sentence for tax evasion, and Felipe Gomez, a pro-abortion Illinoisan. Stilley told the New York Times that he is "not pro-life" and he hopes to collect the money he could be awarded by winning his suit. Gomez said that he would donate any winnings to pro-abortion activist groups.

“Neither of these lawsuits are valid attempts to save innocent human lives,” John Seago, legislative director for Texas Right to Life, told the New York Times.

Click here to read more.

Pope Francis to Reporters: "Abortion is murder."

Pope Francis

Pope Francis addressed the press while traveling on the papal plane last week. While taking a question about abortion, he emphatically told them that abortion is not simply a political issue, it is murder.

"Abortion is more than an issue. Abortion is murder. Abortion, without hinting: whoever performs an abortion kills. You take any embryology textbook of those students that study in medical school. At the third week of conception, at the third, many times before the mother notices, all the organs are already there. All of them. Even the DNA. […]"

"It’s a human life, period. This human life must be respected. This principle is so clear. And to those who can’t understand it I would ask two questions: Is it right, is it fair, to kill a human life to solve a problem? Scientifically it is a human life. Second question: Is it right to hire a hitman to solve a problem? I said this publicly […] when I did, I said it to [Radio] COPE, I have wanted to repeat it. And period. Don’t continue with strange discussions: Scientifically it’s a human life. The textbooks teach us that. But is it right to take it out to solve a problem? This is why the Church is so strict on this issue because accepting this is kind of like accepting daily murder."

Click here to read a full transcript of the Pope's remarks.

Federal Judge Denies Biden DOJ Request to Block Texas Heartbeat Act

Federal District Judge Robert Pitman on Sept. 16 denied a request by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to block enforcement of the Texas Heartbeat Act.

The DOJ lawsuit has a hearing date scheduled for Oct. 1, but it petitioned Judge Pitman to grant a temporary restraining order against the Texas Heartbeat Act's enforcement until the case is decided. In a victory for pro-life advocates, Judge Pitman (an Obama appointee) denied the DOJ's request. This means that the Texas Heartbeat Act will see enforcement for the time being.

Judge Pitman refused a request by the DOJ to hold the hearing sooner, saying that Texas "wished to be heard." The state has until Sept. 29 to argue its case. After that, the DOJ will have until Oct. 1 to respond.

Renae Eze, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's press secretary, gave a response to Judge Pitman's Oct. 1 hearing date. “The most precious freedom is life itself. Texas passed a law that ensures that the life of every child with a heartbeat will be spared from the ravages of abortion,” Eze said in statement to The Hill. “Unfortunately, President Biden and his Administration are more interested in changing the national narrative from their disastrous Afghanistan evacuation and reckless open border policies instead of protecting the innocent unborn.”

Click here to read more.

20 States File Brief Against South Carolina Heartbeat Law

IL Attorney General Kwame Raoul (D)

On Sept. 15, the attorneys general from 20 states and Washington D.C. filed a joint amicus brief in support of a pro-abortion lawsuit challenging a South Dakota heartbeat law.

The South Carolina Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act requires that women first receive ultrasounds before having an abortion. If the ultrasound detects the unborn baby's heartbeat, aborting that baby would be illegal. A fetal heartbeat becomes detectable around the six-week mark.

Planned Parenthood predictably filed a lawsuit challenging the law after it was signed in February. It has been blocked from enforcement pending the decision of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which is slated to be heard by the Supreme Court this fall.

The brief was co-signed by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul. Additionally, it was signed by the Attorneys General from Virginia, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

“South Carolina’s law prevents women from accessing essential medical care, potentially resulting in permanent long-term health impacts or even fatalities,” Raoul said in a press release. “The restrictive laws being enacted by states like South Carolina do not stop abortions. They jeopardize women’s lives by making it more difficult to receive safe abortions. Women have the right to make their own decisions about abortion care in consultation with their health care providers, and I will continue to oppose measures that deprive them of that right.”

Abortion restrictions do not make women less safe. Abortion providers who neglect abortion laws make women less safe. Women who attempt dangerous self-administered abortion procedures are risking the safety of themselves and their children. Abortion restrictions simply acknowledge the humanity of unborn children and seek to provide them the protection they deserve.

Click here to read more.

South Dakota Appeals Decision Blocking Counseling Requirement for Women Seeking Abortion

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R)

In 2011, South Dakota lawmakers passed HB 1217. This pro-life law, among other things, required pregnant women to consult with a pregnancy help center before scheduling an abortion. In August, Judge Karen Schreier refused to dissolve the injunction she issued against the consultation part of the law over a decade ago.

In response, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem announced on Sept. 15 that the South Dakota legal team retained American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) attorney Jay Sekulow to join the South Dakota legal team in the Planned Parenthood v. Noem case. She had already promised that the state would appeal Judge Schreier's decision to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“All life is precious. Mothers should have the opportunity to hear all relevant information before they are faced with the ‘choice’ of whether to end their unborn child’s life,” Gov. Noem said at the time of Judge Schreier’s decision. “I look forward to the day when all life – born and unborn – is protected by law.”

Gov. Noem continued that Schreier's refusal to dissolve her injunction means “the law passed by the people’s representatives is suspended until a final court decision is rendered. In doing so, the Court rejected the will of the people when it comes to protecting unborn life.”

Click here to read more.

7th Circuit Rules in Favor of Texas Pro-Life Activist Sued for Defamation

On Sept. 3, the 7th District Court of Appeals in Texas unanimously ruled to dismiss a defamation lawsuit against pro-life activist Mark Lee Dickson. The lawsuit was filed by the pro-abortion Lilith Fund, a group that helps women pay for abortions.

The lawsuit accused Dickson of defamation and conspiracy. Dickson, who is the Director of Right to Life of East Texas and the founder of the Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative, criticized a Lillith Fund billboard that read, "Abortion is Freedom." Dickson said that the billboard advocated “for the murder of… innocent lives,” and he pointed out that Texas statutes prior to Roe v. Wade criminalized abortion.

The 7th Circuit ruled that Dickson's criticisms were protected by the constitution, saying that the lower court had "erred" in allowing the case to get as far as it had. The court ruled that the Lilith Fund must pay Dickson's court costs and attorney fees.

Click here to read more.

Appeals Court Lifts Injunction Against Indiana Abortion Laws

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided on Wednesday to lift an injunction placed against multiple Indiana abortion laws last month. This means that Indiana can enforce five previously blocked abortion laws while the appeals process continues.

The laws require that

• all second-trimester surgical abortions occur in licensed surgical centers or hospitals
• women receive abortion pills only during in-person visits with physicians
• patients receive in-person physical examinations before having abortions
• abortion pills never be distributed through the mail via telemedicine

Federal Judge Sarah Evans Barker had struck down these laws in August, but Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita appealed her ruling. “We would expect our commonsense laws to be upheld as the appeal continues,” Rokita said in a statement. “Protecting the culture of life is the top priority of my office, and we will continue fighting for every life alongside our legislative partners.”

The Seventh Circuit ruling notes that the state has a good chance at winning its legal battle supporting the pro-life laws.

Click here to read more.

DOJ Pushes Federal Judge to Block Texas Heartbeat Act

This Tuesday, as part of the lawsuit the Biden Department of Justice filed against Texas last week, DOJ attorneys asked a federal judge to issue a preliminary injunction against Texas's new law prohibiting abortions of unborn children whose heartbeats are detectable.

DOJ attorneys argued that an injunction "is necessary to protect the constitutional rights of women in Texas and the sovereign interest of the United States in ensuring that its States respect the terms of the national compact."

Earlier this month, the Supreme court ruled on technical grounds that abortion providers had not made a sufficient case against the Texas Heartbeat Act. They made a 5-4 decision declining to block the law's enforcement, but that decision did not rule on the constitutionality of the Heartbeat Act's enforcement. Legal challenges could still make their way to the Supreme Court and potentially get a different result.

Texas's heartbeat act is resistant to normal means of legal challenges because it is enforced via civil lawsuits rather than direct action by Texas officials. Individuals in Texas can file lawsuits against abortionists or those who assist in the abortions of children with detectable heartbeats.

Click here to read more.

6th Circuit Blocks Enforcement of Tennessee Pro-Life Law

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling on Friday, Sept. 10 blocking the enforcement of pro-life Tennessee law.

The law takes several steps to reduce the number of abortions in Tennessee. Except in cases where abortion is deemed necessary to save the mother's life, the law bans

• discriminatory abortions due to race, sex, or Down Syndrome diagnosis
• abortions after the unborn baby's heartbeat is detectable
• abortions for juveniles currently in the custody of the Department of Children's services. Additionally, the option to receive a waiver from a judge was removed for this circumstance

The law also requires abortion clinics to provide information to women informing them about abortion pill reversal.

The law further includes tiered bans on abortion. If the courts conclude that the six-week ban (the heartbeat portion of the law) is unconstitutional, "cascading bans" can go into effect. The law automatically enacts abortions at eight, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 weeks of gestation in the case that courts strike down bans at younger gestational ages. While courts have enjoined the law pending decisions on its constitutionality, none of these bans are enforceable.

Click here to read more.

Police Evacuate Texas Right to Life Employees After Bomb Threat

Police evacuated Texas Right to Life employees from their headquarters on Friday, Sept. 10 after the pro-life organization received a bomb threat.

Texas Right to Life had received a bomb threat in an email. After that, a postal worker delivered a package that staff members deemed suspicious. They called the police, who immediately evacuated the building and called in the Houston Police Department's bomb squad. While x-ray review found that the package was not harmful, the police say that they will begin an investigation into the threat.

Bellaire Police Department Chief Onesimo Lopez told Fox News, “We take these kind of threats very seriously. Our Criminal Investigations Division is conducting an investigation into the threats and will follow up on any leads that develop. No other information is available at this time.”

Texas Right to Life received an influx of criticism from pro-abortion advocates shortly before the new Texas Heartbeat Act went into effect on Sept. 1. Texas Right to Life had volunteered to assist Texans in filing lawsuits against those who break the Texas Heartbeat Act. The Texas Heartbeat act empowers individuals in Texas to file lawsuits against those who abort babies with detectable heartbeats or those who aid in that process, such as paying for abortions or providing transportation (the mothers can't be sued under the law).

“We understand that some people will use violence to achieve their ends,” said Texas Right to Life Vice President Elizabeth Graham. “Sadly, the violence of abortion has been used for over 45 years so people can live as they wish; Texas Right to Life mourns violence both inside and outside of abortion facilities.”

“These recent crimes and conspiratorial acts against our work and our dedicated staff will not stop Texas Right to Life from ensuring that the Texas Heartbeat Act is enforced,” Graham continued “We are resolved more than ever to strengthen programs and outreach to abortion-vulnerable women to empower them to choose life.”

Click here to read more.

Saint Xavier University in Chicago Covers Abortion in Student Health Plan

Saint Xavier University in Chicago—a Catholic school—is offering a student health care plan that includes abortion coverage for the second year in a row.

The College Fix reported on the plan last month. Its coverage noted that the Archdiocese of Chicago declined to comment on Saint Xavier University's policy.

“Benefits include abortion care services,” the student health insurance plan says. The plan also covers contraception and sterilization procedures.

Sarah Michalak, a Catholic SXU graduate who grew up in the Archdiocese of Chicago, now works as the Students for Life of America Upper Midwest Regional Coordinator. In an interview with The College Fix, she voiced her disappointment with her alma mater.

“As an alumna of Saint Xavier University, I am disappointed to see they are not upholding their Catholic ideals,” Michalak said. “Catholic universities should be beacons of life, love and truth. It’s the responsibility of Catholic universities to authentically care for their students, and abortion is not authentic support for pregnant and parenting students,”

“We know that abortion is not authentic support and we will fight for pregnant and parenting students and preborn babies,” Michalak said. “If the university is unaware of this inconsistency, we are hoping that they will correct their error immediately.”

Click here to read more.

Montana AG Asks Court to Dismiss Challenges to Pro-Life Laws

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen

Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit last month against the state of Montana over four pro-life laws passed in the state's most recent legislative session. Last Tuesday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen called on Yellowstone District Court to reject Planned Parenthood's attempt to have the laws blocked before they can be enforced.

The Montana laws include a ban on abortion after unborn children reach 20 weeks gestation, a requirement that women be given the option to view an ultrasound before having an abortion, informed consent requirements for abortion pills, a ban on the distribution of abortion pills through the mail, and a ban on federal exchange health plans in Montana from paying for abortions.

“Because the regulations at issue protect women from the very people who are suing against these laws, Planned Parenthood has no basis for asking the court to halt what the legislature had every prerogative to pass,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Denise Harle in a statement.

Without court intervention, the pro-life laws are set to take effect on October 1.

Click here to read more.

Pro-Abortion Groups File Lawsuits Against Oklahoma Pro-Life Laws

Oklahoma State Capitol

Several pro-abortion groups filed a lawsuit against the state of Oklahoma in an attempt to block several pro-life laws from taking effect next month.

The pro-life laws in question take significant strides to reduce the number of abortions in Oklahoma. The potential abortion regulations that could restrict abortions in Oklahoma starting on Nov. 1 include the following:

• medical professionals who abort children for reasons other than to save the mother's life or to “prevent substantial or irreversible physical impairment” would have their medical licenses suspended for at least one year
• abortions after an unborn child's heartbeat can be detected would be prohibited
• only doctors who are board-certified in obstetrics and gynecology would be allowed to commit abortions
• the use of abortion pills would face multiple new regulations

The Oklahoman reports that the abortion organizations suing the state of Oklahoma over the pro-life laws include The Center for Reproductive Rights, multiple Planned Parenthood affiliates, the Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice, Tulsa Women’s Reproductive Clinic, and others.

Click here to read more.

Biden Administration Sues Texas over Heartbeat Law

Attorney General Merrick Garland

On Thursday, the Biden administration announced its lawsuit against the state of Texas over its new law banning most abortions on unborn children with detectable heartbeats.

The Justice Department's complaint filed in a Texas federal district court argues that Texas acted “in open defiance of the Constitution” in restricting “most pre-viability abortions.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland further argued in favor of the filing. “The Act is clearly unconstitutional under longstanding Supreme Court precedent,” Garland said. “The United States has the authority and responsibility to ensure that no state can deprive individuals of their constitutional rights through a legislative scheme specifically designed to prevent the vindication of those rights.”

The Justice Department's lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction against state officials and “private parties who would bring suit under the law, from implementing or enforcing” the law.

This is the latest pro-abortion effort to block the democratically passed law. So far, the Texas Heartbeat Act has survived court challenges. The Supreme Court gave a 5-4 decision last week not to grant a temporary injunction against the Heartbeat Act's enforcement while the case goes through the lower courts. The Justice Department's case may provide another avenue for pro-abortion advocates to block the law's enforcement.

Click here to read more.

Website Hosting Service GoDaddy Deplatforms Texas Right to Life Whistleblower Site

Last week, website hosting service GoDaddy brought down Texas Right to Life's website designed to help Texans report violations of the new Texas Heartbeat Act. GoDaddy had originally hosted the website, but complaints from pro-abortion groups caused the company to refuse its service to Texas Right to Life.

Texas Right to Life responded in a press release,

"Pro-abortion advocates tried for over a week to overwhelm the website with traffic and fake tips. When they failed, keyboard warriors harassed GoDaddy to take down our site."

Texas Right to Life Director of Media and Communication Kimberlyn Schwartz wrote,

“We will not be silenced. If anti-Lifers want to take our website down, we’ll put it back up. No one can keep us from telling the truth. No one can stop us from saving lives. We are not afraid of the mob. Anti-Life activists hate us because we’re winning. Hundreds of babies are being saved from abortion right now because of Texas Right to Life, and these attacks don’t change that.”

At the time of writing, the website has not yet been reactivated with another hosting service. Texas Right to Life Vice President Elizabeth Graham told Fox Business that the group was in contact with several hosting services friendly to the pro-life cause, however. She anticipates that other pro-life groups will soon be switching hosts for their own websites, as well. “We’re just glad that they canceled,” Graham said, “because we were able to out them as siding with the abortion crowd, and what’s even better is that we don’t want the abortion affiliated platform hosting a pro-life website.”

Click here to read more.

South Dakota Gov. Signs Executive Order Banning Telemedicine Abortions

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R)

On Sept. 7, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem signed an executive order preventing doctors from using telemedicine to prescribe abortion pills. Instead, doctors in South Dakota will need to see women in person to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol.

Before April 2021, the FDA required that women throughout the United States see doctors in person before being receiving prescriptions for the abortion pill regimen. The FDA "temporarily" lifted those requirements due to the pandemic, but pro-life advocates seem to be correct in doubting the Biden administration's intentions. The FDA has already announced plans to consider making permanent changes to how abortion drugs are prescribed. Those changes are expected to go into effect on November 1, 2021.

The FDA restrictions protected women by allowing doctors to confirm the gestational age of pregnancies and properly diagnose conditions such as ectopic pregnancy. If the unborn child's gestational age is older than the mother's guess, or if she has an ectopic pregnancy, going through with the abortion pill regimen can pose significant and deadly risks to the mother as well as her child.

The executive order demands that the South Dakota Department of Health adopt emergency rules including:

• a requirement that physicians examine a pregnant mother in person before prescribing abortion pills
• banning the distribution of abortion-inducing drugs via courier, delivery, telemedicine, or mail service
• banning the distribution of abortion-inducing drugs in schools
• requiring "pill only" clinics to obtain licenses in accordance with South Dakota's surgical abortion clinic licensing requirements
• a requirement that the South Dakota Department of Health collects data on the frequency, complication rate, location, and sex trafficking context of the abortion pill

Click here to read more.

More States Announce Plans to Pass Texas-Style Heartbeat Laws

After seeing that Texas's new Heartbeat Act successfully passed and is now being enforced, other states have announced plans to enact similar legislation and save more unborn lives.

While the Texas Heartbeat Act has not yet made its way through all possible legal channels and may find itself in front of the Supreme Court once again, several states have taken note of the law's success so far. As a result, they have announced plans to draft similar bills to prevent unborn babies in other states from facing abortion.

According to PregnancyHelpNews.com, a subsidiary of Heartbeat International, pro-life lawmakers in Florida, Arkansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, and South Dakota had all announced intentions to pass laws similar to the Texas Heartbeat Act.

• Arkansas State Sen. Jason Rapert ordered a bill be filed in his state "to mirror the Texas SB8 bill."
• Florida Senate President Wilton Simpson said that the Florida legislature is “already working” on a heartbeat act like the Texas one.
• Mississippi State Sen. Chris McDaniel said that he would "absolutely" consider filing legislation to match Texas SB8.
• North Dakota Sen. Janne Myrdal confirmed that legislators in her state are discussing using the Texas Heartbeat Act a template for new legislation in their own state.
• South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, whom some speculate might run for president in the 2024 election cycle, said that she directed her Unborn Child Advocate “to immediately review the new TX law and current South Dakota laws” and make sure South Dakota has the “strongest pro-life laws on the books.”

Click here to read more.

Biden Flops on Belief that Life Begins at Conception

photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr

Contradicting his own past statements, President Biden went on record last week stating that he does not believe life begins at conception.

During a press conference, a reporter asked him how he planned to respond to the new Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans abortion after an unborn child's heartbeat is detectable. As part of his response, Biden told reporters that he did not believe life begins at conception.

“I respect people who don’t support Roe v. Wade, I respect their views,” Biden said. “I respect those who believe life begins at the moment of conception and all — I respect that, don’t agree, but I respect that. I’m not gonna impose that on people.”

It's a scientific fact that a unique human being with DNA that is different from both parents is formed during conception. The idea that life begins at conception is also a part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Biden statement disputed these and his own past statements on whether life begins at conception.

In a 2008 interview with the National Catholic Register, Biden said he was “prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception.”

He also involved this belief in his vice presidential debate against Rep. Paul Ryan. “Life begins at conception, that‘s the Church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life,” Biden said. “But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman.”

Biden reiterated this belief as recently as 2015 during an interview with America Magazine. In that interview, he said, “I’m prepared to accept that at the moment of conception there’s human life and being, but I’m not prepared to say that to other God-fearing, non-God-fearing people that have a different view.”

Click here to read more.

Chicago Woman Rescues Abandoned Newborn Found in Trash

Screenshot from WGN News Video

Last month, a Chicago woman found a newborn baby amongst trash while she was looking for recyclable materials. When she opened the drawers of a dresser, she found the newborn baby boy with his umbilical cord still attached. Waste removal services would have taken the baby away with the trash that same day had the anonymous woman not searched the drawers.

The woman held the child until paramedics arrived.

Matthew Lang, one of the firefighters who responded to the emergency, told CBS 2, “I look out the window, and I just see this woman, hysterical, waving her arms.” He had expected the worst, but what he saw was reassuring. “We don’t know who put the baby there, but whoever did left a rosary. My mind went to ease as soon as I saw that baby moving and crying. It was almost surreal.”

Emergency responders took the baby to Lurie Children's Hospital for treatment. Lang went to Facebook to urge parents who feel like they can't take care of their babies to surrender babies to safe havens rather than leave them in the trash.

In Illinois, parents can safely and anonymously surrender newborns 30 days old or younger to any hospital, police station, fire station, or hospital. There will be no legal repercussions to the parents, and the child's life will not be endangered.

Click here to read more.