Abortion clinics close in 2 states

     

Abortion clinics in two states have closed, according to media reports.

Planned Parenthood of Southern New Jersey has shut down its Cherry Hill family planning clinic in a dispute over state funding, while a Maryland abortion clinic is closing after its operator's medical license was suspended.

In New Jersey, Democrats in the state Senate failed to override Gov. Chris Christie's veto of a bill that would have restored $7.5 million to family planning clinics, according to the Associated Press.

Christie, a Republican who was elected last year, faced a projected deficit of nearly $11 billion when he took office. In his first budget, he proposed the elimination of all funds for the state's family planning program. As a result, state money through the program will not go to Planned Parenthood, which operates family planning clinics. The Cherry Hill clinic closed Sept. 21.

In Maryland, staff members at Gynecare Center in Severna Park acknowledged Sept. 23 that the facility was shutting down, according to LifeSiteNews.com. Pro-life advocates said they are uncertain if the clinic is permanently closed or if it will reopen if its embattled operator, Romeo Ferrer, 69, finds another doctor to perform abortions.

The Maryland Board of Physicians suspended Ferrer's medical license Sept. 8 as a result of his failure to care properly for a 21-year-old woman who died after he performed an abortion on her in 2006. She was 16 weeks pregnant. The board found that Ferrer gave her too much anesthesia and failed to monitor her condition according to his own policy.

In related news, abortion doctor George Shepard Jr., 88, has lost his medical license in a second state.

The Delaware Board of Medical Licensure and Discipline suspended the license of George Shepard Jr., on Oct. 1, according to The Wilmington (Del.) News Journal. The Maryland Board of Physicians had suspended Shepard's license in its state, it was reported Sept. 3.

The Maryland board charged Shepard with unprofessional conduct and with aiding abortion clinic operator Steve Brigham in defying credentialing mandates. Shepard serves as part-time medical director of Brigham's Maryland clinics. Delaware officials began investigating Shepard after Maryland took action, The News Journal reported.

The president of Delaware's Board of Medical Licensure and Discipline, Raymond Moore Sr., stated, "It is important that Delaware take action in conjunction with Maryland to ensure Dr. Shepard does not subject Delawareans to unsafe practices."

-- Abortion clinics in Texas must be licensed to dispense the abortion drug RU 486 and may not use prerecorded telephone messages to fulfill the state's informed consent law, Attorney General Greg Abbott has ruled.

Responding to a request from State Rep. Frank Corte, R.-San Antonio, Abbott issued two written opinions Sept. 24 that pro-life advocates hailed as victories in protecting the safety of pregnant women.

Regarding the use of an abortion drug, such as RU 486, the attorney general said Texas law requires licensure of abortion facilities and the prescription or provision of a drug to terminate a pregnancy "may be an abortion" under state law.

Abbott acknowledged the text of the informed consent law is unclear but said "it is more likely than not that a court would construe the phrase 'orally by telephone or in person' to mean that an abortion facility may not use either a prerecorded telephone message or a one way conference call" to provide the necessary information 24 hours before an abortion. The information includes the medical risks of abortion.

Joe Pojman, Texas Alliance for Life's executive director, said his organization is "pleased with these two opinions because they are major victories in the struggle to require Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers to protect the health of women. Attorney General Abbott has confirmed what common sense already tells us."

Contact:  Tom Strode

Source: Baptist Press
Date Published: October 7, 2010

--  Thank you.  Illinois Federation for Right to Life 2600 State Street, Suite. E Alton, IL  62002  Phone: 618.466.4122 Fax: 618.466.4134 Web: www.ifrl.org E-mail: mail@ifrl.org

Microbiologist Exposes National Cancer Institute's Cover-Up of Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

2003 Workshop, "Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer" Was Fraudulent

 

     

 

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer notes that microbiologist Gerard Nadal, PhD is exposing on his blog the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) cover-up of the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link at its 2003 workshop entitled, "Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer." Dr. Nadal, who has taught at St. John's University and Manhattan College, accused the organizer of the workshop, NCI branch chief Dr. Louise Brinton, of having "done violence to the truth." He compared her statements about the ABC link to a Wimbledon match and charged that she and her colleagues are "sincerely unethical and corrupt."

Dr. Leslie Bernstein, a leader/moderator at the workshop, gave her reasons for covering up the ABC link in an interview with CancerPage.com a few days after the workshop had concluded. She said:

"There are so many other messages we can give women about lifestyle modification and the impact of lifestyle and risk that I would never be a proponent of going around and telling them that having babies is the way to reduce your risk....I don't want the issue relating to induced abortion to breast cancer risk to be part of the mix of the discussion of induced abortion its legality, its continued availability. I think it should not be part of the argument." [1]

The NCI's misconduct was previously revealed in a detailed letter to President Obama and Congressional leaders on January 25, 2010 which called for a Congressional investigation of the NCI and its failure to issue timely warnings about the breast cancer risks of abortion and oral contraceptives. [2] Those signing the letter include the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, two scientists - Dr. Nadal and Professor Joel Brind - three medical groups, 15 physicians and 19 pro-family organizations. So far, Obama and Congressional leaders have not exhibited the slightest interest in protecting women's lives.

Dr. Nadal has promised to review one study on the ABC link every day until he has exhausted all of the research in January or February of 2011.

References available online at:

www.abortionbreastcancer.com/press_releases/101007/index.htm

 

Contact: Karen Malec

Source: Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
Date Published: October 7, 2010

'No on 62' Campaign Accused of Fraud Against Colorado Voters; Libel Against Amendment 62

          

Personhood Amendment 62 sponsors have requested that the 'No on 62' campaign cease and desist their false proclamations that Amendment 62 would ban or "halt" in vitro fertilization and stem cell research.

The 'No on 62' campaign recently released a press statement claiming that "Amendment 62 would halt in-vitro and medical options" and that "the use of stem cell research to seek cures...would certainly be halted", although both statements are absolutely false.

Amendment 62 simply recognizes the rights of all people. Amendment 62 has no bearing upon the creation of those human beings, whether they are created through natural reproduction or through in-vitro fertilization.

Adult stem cell research has produced scores of effective treatments and remains most promising. Therefore the 'No on 62' claim that all stem cell research will be halted is an enormous and blatant deception. Amendment 62 would ban the fatal dissecting and harvesting of the bodies of the tiniest children in embryonic research.

"From our perspective, it's encouraging to see that our opponents feel that they must resort to lies," commented Leslie Hanks, co-sponsor of Amendment 62. "Of course in-vitro fertilization will still be legal once Amendment 62 passes; in fact, the passage of Amendment 62 will make in-vitro fertilization safer. Amendment 62 is about recognizing, respecting, and protecting the value and dignity of every person, no matter their size or location. These falsehoods from our opposition only highlight their desperation."

As any person can read and understand for themselves, Amendment 62 only affects human beings who are already in existence. It would be impossible for Amendment 62 to prohibit procreation in any way, or to prohibit the use of the most promising stem cell research.

"Amendment 62 has committed to honesty during our campaign, but it's no surprise that our opposition, which is backed by abortion industry giant Planned Parenthood, has resorted to outright lies. They are protecting their billion dollar income," explained Gualberto GarciaJones, co-sponsor of Amendment 62. "Fertility treatments, contraception, and stem cell research cannot be halted by Amendment 62, which protects the constitutional rights of all human beings. We may not have the deep pockets of our opponents, but we have science and truth on our side. We are only asking that our opponents refrain from outright lies. Colorado voters deserve the truth, and I am sure that most people will see through these deceptions about Amendment 62."

Contact: Jennifer Mason

Source: Personhood Amendment
Date Published: October 7, 2010

California Stem Cell Agency Rewards Blasphemy While Admitting the Humanity of Embryos Slated for Destruction

     

The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (California's $6 Billon clone and destroy agency), has awarded a top prize to a patently blasphemous poem in its October 6 "Stem Cell Awareness Day" poetry contest. As if squandering taxpayer money on propaganda to promote "Stem Cell Awareness Day" were not enough, CIRM is bent on mocking the most sacred of Christian texts.

The poem by Tyron Anderson, one of two prize-winning pieces in the October 6 contest, begins "This is my body which is given for you" and ends, "Take this in remembrance of me," unambiguous references to Christ's words at the Last Supper and the words with which Holy Communion is celebrated to this day. The choice of this poem for a prize represents the deliberate pilfering of the holiest of voluntary, sacrificial acts in the history of humanity for a shoddy pep piece in CIRM's campaign to promote the wholesale destruction of human life.

 Beyond the blasphemy, however, is the poem's inadvertent acknowledgment of the personhood of these embryos whom the CIRM otherwise sees merely as a source from which to harvest pluripotent stem cells. "The poem's premise is that the embryo is a person wishing to give its life. But why we should assume that the embryo is saying, 'Let me help,' rather than 'Let me live'?" asks LLDF President Dana Cody. "Are these scientists attempting to assuage their guilt over their exploitation of and experimentation on unconsenting human subjects by telling themselves that the victims really want to give up their lives?"

 Another prizewinning poem relates the life a young woman -- from her beginnings as a one-cell fertilized egg. Later in life, stem cells offer hope of a cure for her unspecified disease. Given the acknowledgment that she herself began life as a single cell, one would hope that the stem cells used to cure her were not derived by the destruction of other humans just as unique as her.

Click here to read the poems. By rewarding these poems, CIRM has cavalierly declared the humanity of these embryos, and yet it continues to attempt to justify their wholesale destruction in a headlong quest for "cures" and "hope," while largely ignoring the ethical alternatives that exist through full funding for ethical and successful adult stem cell therapies.

Contact: Dana Cody

Source: Life Legal Defense Foundation
Date Published: October 8, 2010

Pro-abortion lobby routed at Council of Europe in debate on conscientious objection

An attack on the right of conscientious objection to abortion was defeated this evening in the Council of Europe.

 

     


The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) voted on a report, the original text of which recommended a crack-down on medical personnel who refuse to be complicit in the provision of abortion and other unethical procedures.

Ronan Mullen, the Irish senator, and Luca Volonte of Italy, led the assembly in passing amendments which totally reversed the report, from a pro-abortion attack on conscientious objection to a defence of conscientious objection. Christine McCafferty, the report's British author and her fellow pro-abortion assembly-members were therefore forced to vote against their own report.

Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager, told the media earlier this evening:

"This evening witnessed an incredible victory for the right of staff in medical institutions to refuse to be complicit in the killing of unborn children and other unethical practices.

"SPUC is immensely grateful to the large number of our supporters who lobbied the assembly in recent months, as well as to Senator Mullen, Mr Volonte and the assembly-members who supported them."
In the debate Senator Mullen pointed out that:

•the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises the rights of unborn children;
•there is no human right to abortion, whereas conscientious objection is a basic principle of human rights;
•the report's original text was in reality a furtherance of pro-abortion agenda.

Contact: John Smeaton

Source: SPUC
Date Published: October 7, 2010

British Columbia Sues Contraceptive Patch Manufacturer

     

The British Columbia government has filed a lawsuit against pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson Inc., claiming the maker of the "Ortho Evra" contraception patch “aggressively marketed the contraceptive without disclosing the safety hazards associated with Evra.”

The lawsuit claims that women using the patch “did not receive any warnings about the increased risk of developing blood clots, pulmonary emboli, strokes, heart attacks or deep vein thrombosis associated with Evra.”

The BC government is seeking to recover past and future health care costs associated with caring for women who develop serious and sometimes fatal illness as a result of using the dangerous hormonal contraceptive.

The patch delivers the hormones estrogen and progestin directly into the bloodstream through the skin, whereas oral contraceptives, which contain a similar amount of the drugs, must pass through the digestive system before being absorbed.

Health Canada approved the contraceptive in 2002, following approval by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2001.

The lawsuit claims that, although doctors reviewing the clinical trials of Evra before its approval recognized the potential for serious health problems from the use of the patch, Johnson & Johnson was negligent in providing adequate label warnings, failed to conduct long-term use risk studies, and failed to provide Health Canada with complete and accurate risk information.

Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical have faced a string of lawsuits since introducing the Ortho Evra patch.

In 2006, 43 US women sued the company, which was facing approximately 400 similar lawsuits, after suffering long-term debilitating effects from the patch.

At least 23 women have died from the use of this form of contraception, including an 18-year-old New York fashion student who collapsed in a city subway station. An autopsy on Zakiya Kennedy's body found a blood clot had moved into her lungs, and the medical examiner ruled that the clot was a side effect of the Evra birth control patch she was using.

Vancouver pharmacist and writer Cristina Alarcon told LifeSiteNews she is "ecstatic" to see the BC government take this action on behalf of women who are injured by the use of this product.
"I am ecstatic to see that perhaps our government is beginning to take women’s real healthcare needs more seriously," she said. "The history of artificial contraception was fraught with problems from its inception. Today, we continue to be used as guinea pigs for every new brand of synthetic contraceptive that hits the market."

Noting that in 2005 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the UN’s World Health Organization, classified hormonal contraceptives as Group 1 carcinogens for breast, cervical, and liver cancers, Alarcon observed that "the carcinogenic effects of the Pill are always downplayed for political and ideological reasons. The Pill is a huge money maker for Big Pharma."

"The Evra patch has problems, but then so does the current birth control pill," Alarcon concluded.

Contact:  Thaddeus M. Baklinski

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: October 7, 2010

Belgium Euthanasia: Only Half of Patient Terminations Reported as Required by Law

     

Euthanasia guidelines don’t work as advertised. We’ve seen that truth evidenced again–in the Netherlands–and again–in Switzerland–and again–in Belgium–and again–in Oregon. A new study published in the British Medical Journal shows that in Flanders, Belgium, only half of the euthanasia deaths are reported as required by the law. From the study:

 The reporting rate for euthanasia in Flanders in 2007 is estimated to be 52.8%. This means that only one out of two cases of actual euthanasia is reported to and reviewed by the Federal Control and Evaluation Committee, and one in two is not. The most important reason given by physicians for not reporting a case to the review committee was that the physician did not perceive the act to be euthanasia (76.7%).Alarge majority of the unreported cases (92.2%) were in fact acts of euthanasia as defined in our study but were not perceived or labelled as “euthanasia” by the physician involved. Unreported cases of euthanasia were generally dealt with less carefully than reported cases: a written request for euthanasia was absent more often; other physicians and care givers specialised in palliative care were consulted less often; the life ending act was more often performed with opioids, sedatives, or both; and the life ending drugs were more often administered by a nurse instead of a physician.

 Not only is it against the law for nurses to kill patients, as we discussed here before, a study by the Canadian Medical Association found that nearly half of nurse administered euthanasia deaths in Belgium are without request or consent.

 I also don’t buy that doctors don’t know when they are taking direct action to terminate a patient. But be that as it may, this study demonstrates–again–that euthanasia cannot be controlled by doctor administered death regulations. Once you let the vampire out of the coffin, it goes where it will. Guidelines are primarily there to give a comforting illusion of control.
 

Contact:  Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: October 7, 2010

British Columbia Sues Contraceptive Patch Manufacturer

 

     

The British Columbia government has filed a lawsuit against pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson Inc., claiming the maker of the "Ortho Evra" contraception patch “aggressively marketed the contraceptive without disclosing the safety hazards associated with Evra.”

The lawsuit claims that women using the patch “did not receive any warnings about the increased risk of developing blood clots, pulmonary emboli, strokes, heart attacks or deep vein thrombosis associated with Evra.”

The BC government is seeking to recover past and future health care costs associated with caring for women who develop serious and sometimes fatal illness as a result of using the dangerous hormonal contraceptive.

The patch delivers the hormones estrogen and progestin directly into the bloodstream through the skin, whereas oral contraceptives, which contain a similar amount of the drugs, must pass through the digestive system before being absorbed.

Health Canada approved the contraceptive in 2002, following approval by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2001.

The lawsuit claims that, although doctors reviewing the clinical trials of Evra before its approval recognized the potential for serious health problems from the use of the patch, Johnson & Johnson was negligent in providing adequate label warnings, failed to conduct long-term use risk studies, and failed to provide Health Canada with complete and accurate risk information.

Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical have faced a string of lawsuits since introducing the Ortho Evra patch.

In 2006, 43 US women sued the company, which was facing approximately 400 similar lawsuits, after suffering long-term debilitating effects from the patch.

At least 23 women have died from the use of this form of contraception, including an 18-year-old New York fashion student who collapsed in a city subway station. An autopsy on Zakiya Kennedy's body found a blood clot had moved into her lungs, and the medical examiner ruled that the clot was a side effect of the Evra birth control patch she was using.

Vancouver pharmacist and writer Cristina Alarcon told LifeSiteNews she is "ecstatic" to see the BC government take this action on behalf of women who are injured by the use of this product.
"I am ecstatic to see that perhaps our government is beginning to take women’s real healthcare needs more seriously," she said. "The history of artificial contraception was fraught with problems from its inception. Today, we continue to be used as guinea pigs for every new brand of synthetic contraceptive that hits the market."

Noting that in 2005 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the UN’s World Health Organization, classified hormonal contraceptives as Group 1 carcinogens for breast, cervical, and liver cancers, Alarcon observed that "the carcinogenic effects of the Pill are always downplayed for political and ideological reasons. The Pill is a huge money maker for Big Pharma."

"The Evra patch has problems, but then so does the current birth control pill," Alarcon concluded.

Contact:  Thaddeus M. Baklinski

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: October 7, 2010

HHS Uses Adoption Tax Credits to Sway Voters on Obamacare

     

In an effort to improve the public's perception of President Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services hosted a live webcast today, featuring two families who have benefitted from the Adoption Tax Credit.

The Small Business and Jobs Act of 1996 was the first to introduce the tax credit.  In 2001, the tax credit was raised to $10,000. By 2009, the credit was at $12,150, but was set to end in December.

The new health care law extended the tax credit and increased the full value of the adoption tax credit to $13,170.

The credit is fully refundable, regardless of income. That means all families can access the full value of the credit if they have "necessary qualifying expenses," even if they owe no tax for that year.

Ashley Horne, federal analyst for CitizenLink, said that the adoption tax credit is a small glimmer of good in an otherwise very bad health care law. "We applaud Congress for increasing and extending the tax credit for adoptive couples through 2011 and genuinely hope the credit will encourage more married moms and dads to take the step of giving a loving home to a child in need."

Carrie Gordon Earll, senior bioethics analyst for CitizenLink, also applauds the extension of tax credits for adopting families, but notes, "the vehicle used contains elements that funds abortion and penalizes marriage."

Source: CitizenLink
Date Published: October 5, 2010

New RU-486 data points to telemed abortion complication cover-up

     

New data released in the U.S. and Australia concerning complications to the abortion pill, RU 486, also known as Mifepristone or Mifeprex appears to point to a cover-up of the true complication rate to telemed abortions done by Planned Parenthood of the Heartland (PPH).

On September 30, 2010, the Centers for Disease Control revealed in the New England Journal of Medicine that there have been 2 more deaths from the abortion pill, 1 in 2008 and one just last year, bringing the U.S. death toll to 10 since the FDA approved the drug in 2000.

In addition, The Australian reported on October 2, 2010, that complications to usage of the RU486 abortion pill in that country is causing concern.

"It should raise serious questions about the ethicacy and appropriateness of this method of termination," said Australian Senator Guy Barnett of Tasmania.

Australia's reported complications are disturbing. Between December of last year, when restrictions on the abortion pill was relaxed, and July of 2010, there have been a reported 3,000 medical abortions reported in three provinces, a number that can be generally compared to PP of the Heartland's figure of 1,900 medical abortions done through their remote-controlled push-button abortion pill distribution scheme, known as telemed abortions.

In Australia, the drugs completely failed in 14 cases, and in another 110 cases reported such "adverse effects" as retention of the placenta, retention of aborted baby remains, conditions that require emergency surgery.

This represents a 4.1% complication rate requiring surgical abortion or emergency surgery - and this is with the benefit of the oversight of licensed physicians, a figure that is concerning to Australians, but is reflective of the reported complication rates elsewhere in the world.

Meanwhile, PPH has incredibly reported no complications in their nearly 2,000 remote controlled telemed abortions where a licensed physician only speaks with the patient for a few minutes over an Internet video connection, then never sees the patient again. The pills are distributed when the abortionist pushes a button in his or her office, opening a drawer containing the pills at the office where the patient is located.

"The numbers simply do not add up. Either Planned Parenthood of the Heartland is engaging in an intentional cover-up of telemed abortion complications or it is an indication that they provide essentially no follow-up for patients once they load them on abortion pills and send them out the door. Either scenario would be gross misconduct on PPH's part that further endangers the lives of women," said Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullenger.

In fact, a confidential informant with first-hand knowledge of the inner working of PPH has come forward to tell Operation Rescue that the telemed abortion scheme shows a "revolting lack of concern" for the lives and health of women. The informant insists that the scheme was developed with a high profit margin in mind, not the best interests of women. According to the informant, who has spoken to OR on the condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisals, PPH has traditionally attempted to distance the organization from any abortion complications, having a "Hear-no-evil, See-no-evil" attitude.

"Planned Parenthood doesn't deal with complications," said the informant. "They send the women to the ER."

"From the new data, we can see that the abortion pill is more dangerous than thought, with an additional two deaths having been reported in the past two years. We can also see that a zero percent complication rate is statistically impossible. Why would Planned Parenthood of the Heartland engage in a cover-up about the true dangers of their push-button abortions? Perhaps it is to conceal their negligent lack of follow-up care and protect their profit potential," said Sullenger.

"This is an unethical and outrageous exploitation of women. Their dishonesty on this matter presents an immediate danger to the public."

The Iowa Board of Medicine is currently investigating complaints filed by Operation Rescue and others against abortionists involved in the push-button pill scheme. Pro-life groups assert that the telemed abortion process is illegal since Iowa law mandates that abortions can only be done by licensed physicians, which are never present at any time during the remote abortion pill process.

Even an editorial published by the Des Moines Register on September 5, 2010, essentially admitted that telemed abortions are illegal in Iowa and called for a change in the laws to allow them.

"Instead of changing the law, how about enforcing it," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "It is shocking that the Des Moines Register would advocate for endangering women by decriminalizing the unlicensed practice of medicine. It shows that for these people, abortion politics and profit come before the health and safety of women."

The IBM has made it clear, however, that they lack the oversight to stop the procedure and can only discipline licensed physicians if the standard of care has been violated.

However, the IBM can produce public policy guidelines concerning the use - or misuse - of telemedicine in Iowa. An Ad Hoc committee has been appointed to look into the use of telemedicine, including PPH's push-button abortions. A public hearing to discuss public policy guidelines has been scheduled for October 22, 2010.

Operation Rescue and other pro-life groups plan to be in attendance.

"We must hold the Board accountable to the law and demand an end to this illegal and dangerous practice of distributing abortion pills over the Internet without the presence or oversight of a licensed physician," said Sullenger. "Planned Parenthood has already admitted that they want to expand their telemed abortion system into every state, and that would represent an unprecedented danger to women and their babies. For the sake of vulnerable women, we must stop this dangerous remote controlled abortion scam here and now."

Operation Rescue is seeking women who have suffered complications to telemed abortions in Iowa. Click here to learn more or to tell your story.

Source: FRC Blog / Operation Rescue
Date Published: October 6, 2010

A Nobel Prize for Manufacturing Human Life?

     

Human Life International's Interim President, Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro-Carambula, today blasted the Nobel Committee for awarding Dr. Robert Edwards the 2010 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his work in developing in vitro fertilization (IVF), the process by which human beings are created in Petri dishes for any reason.

"One wonders what else the Nobel Committee could do to further harm its own reputation," said Msgr. Barriero. "To avoid the ethical difficulties of Dr. Edwards' work is to duck the primary responsibility the Nobel Foundation has as the world's champions of scientific achievement."

"This scientist is regarded as a hero, but what he has really done is to create a market for manufactured humanity," said Msgr. Barreiro. "This is not a gift to humanity, it is a death sentence to millions of tiny human beings who are created only to be destroyed."

"This is what happens, as Pope Paul VI warned in the prophetic encyclical Humanae Vitae, when society separates the unitive and procreative aspects of the gift of sexuality," said Msgr. Barreiro. "Sexuality and even life itself become emptied of meaning, and become commodities to be manipulated, bought and sold at the whim of the powerful."

"Further, Dr. Edwards' supposedly great accomplishment has also created a means for the ultra-rich to tamper with every genetic aspect of the person, creating designer human beings," said Msgr. Barreiro. "Sadly, we are reminded that the very real good of science can be destroyed when fundamental and universal ethical principles are kept out of the scientific process -- in this case, the great value and dignity of the human person."

Contact: Stephen Phelan

Source: Human Life International
Date Published: October 6, 2010

New York Times Clueless About Embryonic Stem Cell State of Play

     

I see a lot of bad reportage in this work.  Some of it is due to ignorance. Some of it is bias.  Some of it is laziness.  Some of it is bad reporting.  And some of it is caused by a sector that is shrinking with fewer bodies to cover an, if anything, expanding story bank.

I don't know what the cause is, but a NYT story seeking to motivate people to demand that the Feds pass a law allowing the NIH to fund ESCR in the wake of the Lamberth decision ruling that doing so violates current federal law, gets a lot of things wrong.  Let's start with what the writer doesn't report.  First, he lays out the supposedly dire stakes for stem cell researchers. From the story:

    Perhaps more than any other field of science, the study of embryonic stem cells has been subject to ethical objections and shaped by political opinion. But only a year after the Obama administration lifted some of the limits imposed by President George W. Bush, a lawsuit challenging the use of public money for the research and a conservative shift in Congress could leave the field more sharply restricted than it has been since its inception a decade ago. At stake are about 1,300 jobs, as well as grants from the National Institutes of Health that this year total more than $200 million and support more than 200 projects.

I don't doubt this is true, but it isn't nearly the whole story.  ESCR has been bountifully funded in this country. Even if you took away all federal support, in the Bush years alone state and private funding for the sector amounted to nearly $2 billion by 2007.  Indeed, in California, the CIRM is permitted–if it wishes–to fund $300 million a year in ESCR experiments.  Surely that is relevant to a story on how the sector would be impacted if the Lamberth decision is ultimately upheld.

If one didn't know the facts about the field, one would think that only embryos can provide pluripotent stem cells:

    The stem cells, which are thought to have curative potential for many diseases because they can be turned into any kind of tissue in the human body, can be obtained only by destroying a human embryo, which many Americans believe is the equivalent of a life…Embryonic stem cell researchers who stand to lose their federal grants as a result argue that other types of stem cells do not have the same properties, and that all need to be studied regardless to determine which work best. They bristle at the intrusion of judges and politicians into decisions usually addressed by the peer review process, in which experts in a field comment on the merit of an idea and the best get financed.

As readers of SHS know, IPSCs are advancing exponentially, to the point they are used in drug testing specific diseases.  One would think that worth at least a mention.  And, the story gets this supposed fact flat out wrong:

    Yet even some who believe there is a compelling scientific rationale for their research agree that the legal basis for federal financing may be weak. "I was astonished that Congress hadn't dealt with this," said Stephen Duncan, a stem cell researcher at the Medical College of Wisconsin, who stands to lose several million dollars in federal grants depending on the dispensation of the case. "It's like being a little pregnant. You're either breaking the law or you're not."

    Mr. Bush, who in 2001 limited federally financed researchers to working on roughly two dozen stem cell lines already in existence, twice vetoed legislation that would have explicitly expressed support for financing the contested research. No such legislation has been introduced under President Obama, but the administration expanded the number of stem cell lines researchers could study.

Excuse me, but the DeGette/Castle/ bill–filed in 2009–would do precisely that, as well as fund human cloning research.  Arlen Specter recently filed a companion bill to try and rush the law through before the new Congress takes over. If reporters covering the stem cell issue–and assisted suicide, and animal rights, and bioethics, and other issues we bat around the court–would just read SHS, they would do a much better job of reporting.  Agree with me or not, I cover the beats!

Contact: Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: October 6, 2010

Colorado Students Go Barefoot for Babies; Erect Thousands of Crosses on University Campus

Today, barefoot Greeley students will erect 3,300 white crosses on the UNC Greeley Campus

     

With one of the largest pro-life campus groups in the nation, BEARfoot for Babies is celebrating Life Week barefoot, hosting some of the nation's most prominent pro-life speakers and putting up 3,300 small white crosses on campus grounds in memorial of the 3,300 babies killed by abortion every day in the United States.

The crosses will cover the lawn at the University Center on Wednesday.

"BEARfoot for babies has been an incredible opportunity for UNC Greeley students to stand in solidarity for babies," explained Sonny Longenbaugh, Development Director of Bear Catholic at UNC. "It is amazing how many conversations are started when students are barefoot on campus. Our second year is going better than we anticipated, and we are thrilled to share the message of life and hope with the students at UNC Greeley."

While hundreds of students participate in Life Week by going 'BEARfoot', nationally recognized pro-life speakers are featured at the University Center free of charge to anyone who would like to attend, and include Lila Rose, Carol Everett, former Planned Parenthood abortion provider, Rebecca Kiessling, conceived in rape pro-life speaker, and Brian Gail, New York Times best-selling author of "Fatherless".

Special events include a screening of the new documentary "Blood Money", Outdoor Rosary, and a Healing Mass, in honor of over 54 million human lives lost to abortion in the United States. All week, organizations and resources are available to those who are seeking counseling, alternative options to abortion or volunteer opportunities at the Life Expo.

"It is truly amazing to see so many college students that are passionate for the dignity of life," continued Longenbaugh. "Hundreds of pro-life students are serving as a witness for those lives lost to abortion, simply by going barefoot. This is a wonderful chance to highlight the tragedy of abortion, while at the same time standing together with a message of hope. It is a great feeling to be able to offer these amazing speakers and pro-life resources free of charge to all UNC Greeley students and surrounding communities."

This is the second annual BEARfoot for Babies, which has grown tremendously as the number of active students has increased. Anyone is welcome to attend BEARfoot for Babies events free of charge, as the crosses stand as a silent memorial to the lives lost to abortion.


Click here for the video.

Contact: Sunny Longenbaugh

Source: Barefoot for Babies
Date Published: October 6, 2010

Original China Whistleblower Condemns 'Celebration' of One-Child Policy

     

Steven W. Mosher, the internationally recognized China expert who originally alerted the West to that country's one-child policy, denounced the Chinese government's recent statements praising the policy on its 30th anniversary. Mosher further condemned statements by an upper-level Chinese official that the policy will be continued for "decades to come," as terrible news for the Chinese people and for China's future economic growth.

Mosher, who was present in China in 1980 when the policy was originally handed down, calls China's draconian measures an "unmitigated social disaster" that have made China the "ugly poster child of forced abortion and coerced sterilization." As for the Chinese government's glib defense of its population control measures, Mosher says that the policy has existed in part to "help maintain the muscular rigor of the one-party dictatorship that rules China."

"China is a police state, after all," Mosher continues, adding that "such a state, to remain strong, must have something to police. Economic controls have been loosened over the past 30 years, so control over other aspects of life must be tightened. The brutal one-child policy is one consequence of such a system's relentless drive for control over people's lives."

"The Chinese government," Mosher concludes, "supported by foreign population control zealots, believe that its program should be held up as a population control role model for the rest of the world. In reality, it should be roundly condemned for its widespread and systematic violations of human rights, especially the rights of women."

Steven Mosher currently serves as the president of the Population Research Institute and is available for interview on the topic of China's one-child policy.

Contact: Colin Mason

Source: Population Research Institute
Date Published: October 5, 2010

New Reports of Deaths Related to RU-486 Raising Concerns

     

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced last week that two more women died after taking RU-486 in 2008 and 2009. The drug is now linked to eight deaths.

 The announcement occurred the same week as the 10th anniversary of the drug's approval by the Food and Drug Administration.

 According to a 2006 government report, more than 1 in 600 women taking RU-486 had an adverse reaction. And one quarter of those were hospitalized; most frequently for blood transfusions.

 To date, the FDA has reported 1,300 RU-486-related adverse events, including 172 blood transfusions.

 Jeanne Monahan, director of Family Research Council's Center for Human Dignity, was not surprised with the delayed reporting by the FDA. It waited six years after the drug's approval before releasing the first reported deaths.
 "That was only because Congress requested adverse event reports from the FDA," Monahan said. "They weren't forthcoming until they had to by law."

 And while women's health remains an issue with RU-486, it's estimated that nearly one million preborn children have been killed by the drug since its approval.

 Former U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, now the Susan B. Anthony List spokeswoman, said many advocates of life and women's health expressed great concern about the FDA's handling of the approval process for RU-486.

 "Some things were disregarded," she said, "and a lot of data from the French (manufacturer) was used to say that this is safe."

 Musgrave is equally concerned about another French drug, called Ella, which is being promoted as an emergency contraception and is chemically similar to RU-486.

Source: CitizenLink
Date Published: October 4, 2010

'Abstinence' money goes to Planned Parenthood?

     

A pro-family organization is concerned about the millions of dollars Planned Parenthood has recently received for teen pregnancy prevention.

Fifteen Planned Parenthood affiliates were awarded grants -- or a part of a wining grant as a subcontractor -- totaling nearly $19 million. The grants are part of President Obama's "Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative" that focuses less on abstinence and more on contraceptive use. (See related article)
 
"I was troubled just to see in these grants that we're supposed to be very open to abstinence education and abstinence-centered programs -- [and yet] Planned Parenthood got a pretty hefty chunk of money," notes Jeanne Monahan, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council. "Washington State alone got $4 million."
 
Monahan, who used to work in the Office of the Secretary in the Department of Health and Human Services, tells OneNewsNow that Planned Parenthood is pushing for children as young as ten years old to have comprehensive sex education -- which she says her group would describes as "anti-abstinence and anti-family."
 
"It's promoting, in their words, all sorts of different kinds of sex with a variety of different partners," she laments, "and not at all...preserving the idea that marriage is the only appropriate and healthy place for a sexual relationship."
 
Monahan says Planned Parenthood benefits from many funding streams in the government. In fact, according to the group's latest financial records in 2007, it received $350 million in local, state, and federal funding, and performed more than 300,000 abortions.

Contact: Bill Bumpas

Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: October 5, 2010

Open Advocacy for Killing Children with Disabilities

     

A public row in the UK has raised the fearful meme that we should be allowed to kill children with disabilities who are suffering. From the story:

 Television pundit Virginia Ironside prompted outrage yesterday after saying she would suffocate a child to end its suffering. Shocked BBC viewers complained after the agony aunt said she would hold a pillow over the face of a child in pain. Minutes earlier the controversial writer said 'a loving mother' would abort an unwanted or disabled baby, and praised abortion as 'a moral and unselfish act'…She added: 'If I were the mother of a suffering child – I mean a deeply suffering child – I would be the first to want to put a pillow over its face… If it was a child I really loved, who was in agony, I think any good mother would.'

 Commentators accused the controversial writer of advocating eugenics, and disability rights campaigners branded her views 'despicable'.

 I have warned that our neurotic obsession with eliminating–as opposed to mitigating or alleviating–suffering leads directly to support for eliminating the sufferer. Yes, some were outraged by the statement. But the UK has already taken a hard turn onto Euthanasia Road, accepting killing as an acceptable answer to human suffering to the point that the public prosecutor has stated he won't punish some assisted suicides. That leads directly, if farther down the road, to infanticide, as it has in the Netherlands and Belgium. In other words, with controversies like this the ground is being paved.

 Indeed, we see increased support for the killing of the littlest sufferers–and not just from Peter Singer. For example–and I wish I were surprised–in the wake of the Ironside brouhaha, the left wing Guardian published an opinion article by Zoe Williams, "Abortion and Euthanasia: Was Virginia Ironside Right?", who answers her own question, why yes she was. From the column's conclusion:

 There is a furious lobby that attaches a eugenicist tag to anybody who is pro-choice or euthanasia, but it silences its opponents in an underhand way by accusing them of hostility towards the disabled. Of course Ironside is not waging a war against the disabled: she simply said "life isn't a gift per se". There are plenty of circumstances that make it more burdensome than joyful. The fact that Ironside ruffled any feathers at all illustrates how important it is not to take this as tacit, but to say it out loud. Of course it is hostility when killing is advocated as the answer to a life that is "more burdensome than joyful!" Good grief.

 Many eugenicists of old advocated killing disabled babies and other unfit as if they were "weeds." This is no different. The neo-eugenicists have simply learned not to express direct hostility for those they would prefer eliminated. Rather, the killing agenda it is couched in gooey euphemisms and words of oozing compassion. But the key point to remember is that the act advocated is the same. The underlying evil is no less loathsome merely because it is wearing prettier clothes.

Contact: Wesley J. Smith

Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: October 4, 2010

Police Detain Young California Activists for Pro-Life Witness on Public Sidewalk

     

Members of the Survivors' Campus Life Team were detained for holding graphic images and advocating the pro-life message on public sidewalks in front of Nipomo High School on Monday, September 27, 2010.

The activists were offering literature to students as they left the school when they were approached by campus administrators and guards shortly after school dismissal and instructed to leave the area or face arrest.

According to the Survivers, Principal Johnson and San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Deputy Holzier claimed, first, that the Survivors were on school property, then that they were in violation of the school's safety zone, and then that the team had caused a campus disturbance because the school administration had received many calls from angry parents.

The Survivors say that Deputy Holzier prevented team members Kristina Garza and Daniel Rivera from participating in outreach for at least twenty minutes. "It was obvious that both the school and the sheriff department did not want us to share our message with the students," said Ms. Garza, director of the Campus Life Team. Deputy Holzier held the team members for questioning until all of the Nipomo students had left the area.
On Wednesday morning the Survivors learned that Nipomo High School officials posted a message on their website chastising the group for displaying graphic images to their students and assured parents that the school was taking steps to ensure this never happened again. Attorneys from the Life Legal Defense Foundation say they contacted the watch commander at the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Department, who agreed that the Survivors had a right to stand on the public sidewalk and hold their signs.
 
The Campus Life Team returned to Nipomo High School on Wednesday afternoon where they were met once again by school administrators and sheriff deputies ordering them to move across the street away from the students.

LLDF staff attorney, Allison Aranda, spoke with the sergeant in charge explaining to him why the group had a constitutional right to stand on the public street and engage in free speech activity.
Meanwhile, the Survivors continued to share their pro-life message with students undeterred by law enforcement.

"I'm proud that these young people took a stand for the truth and didn't let the administrator's abuse of authority intimidate them from lawfully exercising their First Amendment rights," said Ms. Aranda.

Source: LifeSiteNews.com

Date Published: October 4, 2010

Pro-life group objects to Nobel honors for IVF co-inventor

     

  A British pro-life group has objected to the awarding of the Nobel Prize for Medicine to a co-inventor of in vitro fertilization on the grounds that the technique is an abuse of scientific knowledge and has caused the abuse and deaths of embryonic human beings.

 The Nobel Committee granted the $1.5 million honor to Robert Edwards, 85, a professor emeritus at the University of Cambridge. He developed the IVF technique with British gynecologist Patrick Steptoe.

 "IVF had moved from vision to reality and a new era in medicine had begun," commented the Nobel Committee, according to AOL News. It said Edwards' vision had brought "joy to infertile people all over the world."

 The IVF technique involves mixing human eggs and sperm to conceive an embryo and then placing the embryo in a woman's womb. The technique drew ethical criticism both from those who worried children conceived in IVF would have abnormalities and from those who recognized the technique puts human embryos at risk of death and separates human reproduction from marital love.

 Louise Brown, the first baby to be born after IVF conception, was born on July 25, 1978 and is now a mother herself. She called the prize "fantastic news."

 "We hold Bob in great affection and are delighted to send our personal congratulations," she told the Associated Press.

 Nobel Committee member Christer Hoog said it is "amazing" Edwards was able to respond to criticism and has remained "persistent and unperturbed in fulfilling his scientific vision."

 The U.K.-based Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) was critical of the award to Edwards.

 "IVF is possible because of one simple fact: human life begins at fertilization/conception. But IVF is an abuse of this knowledge. IVF puts human embryos at a vast disadvantage - they are subject to testing and discrimination, freezing and storage, disability and death. Countless human embryos have perished in the development and practice of IVF," SPUC communications manager Anthony Ozimic commented on Monday.

 "Since the birth of the first IVF child over thirty years ago, well over two million embryos have been discarded, or frozen, or selectively aborted, or miscarried or used in destructive experiments."

 Though it opposes the IVF procedure, he said SPUC insists that IVF embryos and babies must be accorded the rights that "any human person deserves."

 Ozimic added that IVF does not treat fertility problems but rather bypasses them.

"IVF has made it possible to search out and destroy disabled embryonic children. Our society should not be applauding legal and scientific advancements in the targeting and killing of disabled human beings," he continued. "Giving Professor Edwards a prize for promoting the abuse of human embryos by IVF is an affront to mankind, and especially to disabled people."

 He contended that the Billings Ovulation Method and Natural Procreative Technology (NaPro Technology) are ethical alternatives to IVF and do not put embryonic human beings at risk of harm or death.

 About four million babies have been born after an IVF conception, AOL News reports. IVF leads to a birth for 20 to 30 percent of embryos conceived.

Source: CNA
Date Published: October 5, 2010

Pro-Abortion Obama Sinks to New Low in Public Opinion Survey

     

With November's general election just a month away, a new survey shows public satisfaction with pro-abortion U.S. President Barack Obama at a new low. Many voters are upset with the direction his policies have taken the country, especially the new health care reform law and its backdoor abortion provisions.

Rasmussen reports that for the month of September, 44 percent of voters said they "strongly disapprove" of Obama's performance – a record high for this president – while 54 percent said they disapprove overall. The overall low represents a one percent increase in public dissatisfaction in Obama from August.

Those who approved overall of the president were less passionate: only 27 percent said they "strongly approved." For Rasmussen, this places Obama's approval index at -17 ("strongly approve" minus "strongly disapprove"), where it has been hovering for the past 4 months.

The strength of public disapproval of Obama is stronger than during the health care debate between December 2009 and March 2010, when Rasmussen recorded Obama's approval index between -14 and -15. Only in April, did Obama see a brief rise in his approval index, when it registered at -11.

However those numbers have fallen as the following month exposed unknown aspects of the health care law, the president's seeming indecisiveness over the BP oil spill, and a perceived lack of leadership in the debate over the Ground Zero mosque, "Park51." The mosque is opposed by a majority of Americans because the site is just a few blocks away from where over 2,000 New Yorkers lost their lives in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

One health care surprise involved public funding of abortion, a policy that over 70 percent of U.S. citizens oppose. In July the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) exposed a serious weakness in Obama's executive order obtained by pro-life Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan to prevent abortion funding in the health care law. NRLC discovered that Obama's Department of Health and Human Services had approved applications for federal subsidies of high-risk pools from at least three states (New Mexico, Maryland, Pennsylvania) that included elective abortion as a covered benefit. The Obama order did not technically cover Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plans (PCIPs), a $5 billion HHS stopgap program to help those with pre-existing medical conditions unable to afford health insurance, until the health care reform law takes full effect in 2014.

After the matter blew up in the press, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that it would make Hyde amendment restrictions apply to these programs in the spirit of President Obama's executive order.

Another of the major surprises for the public in the 2,409-page "Affordable Care Act" was a small section requiring freelance individuals, small businesses, and corporations to fill out 1099 tax forms to every company or individual for purchases exceeding $600 worth of goods and services within the tax year beginning on January 1, 2012.

The measure has been criticized as a costly, if not crippling, accounting nightmare for small businesses, and one that is likely to strain the accounting resources of big businesses as well. The 1099 expansion of the Internal Revenue Service was built into the health care law to offset the costs of the program – the IRS estimates the federal government misses $300 billion in potential tax revenue from unreported income – but could adversely impact working families in a U.S. economy still stuck in recession.

The sinking ratings of Obama pose bad news for congressional Democrats, who despite having made gains in the generic ballot, still trail behind Republicans.

A new ABC News-Washington Post poll shows Republicans leading Democrats 49 percent to 43 percent in the poll of likely voters. A Rasmussen survey shows a much tighter difference, but with Republicans still leading Democrats, 45 percent to 42 percent.

The ratings are definitely having an impact in races where pro-life Democrats and Republicans are running against each other. In West Virginia, a traditionally Democrat state with strong social conservative values, pro-life GOP candidate John Raese is just leading popular, pro-life Democrat Gov. Joe Manchin III in a special election for U.S. Senate. The reason for Manchin's disadvantage is largely attributed to state voters' dissatisfaction with Obama's policies and the health care law. (Click here to read the story).

Contact: Peter J. Smith

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: October 5, 2010