Pro-Life Action League Announces First-of-its-Kind Program to Help Women Who Change their Minds
The Pro-Life Action League is excited to announce a new alliance with Resurrection Medical Center and The Women's Center in establishing a protocol for assisting women who change their minds after initiating a second trimester abortion procedure. This groundbreaking partnership is the first-of-its-kind in Chicago and can be a model for Catholic hospitals around the country.
"Recently, our sidewalk counselors have seen several women who have changed their minds about abortion, and who wish to continue their pregnancies even once the late-term abortion procedure has started," said Ann Scheidler, vice president and director of sidewalk counselor training for the Pro-Life Action League. "This new process enables us to provide the most comprehensive medical care and emotional support for the pregnant woman who is facing this stressful situation."
The protocol was developed by representatives from the League, Resurrection and The Women's Center, a crisis pregnancy center on the northwest side of Chicago.
In preparation for setting new guidelines, the Pro-Life Action League arranged for Dr. Anthony Levatino, a former abortionist and practicing gynecologist from Las Cruces, N.M., to advise the hospital's physicians and staff on the procedures involved in a later-term abortion and the reversal of the process.
The newly established protocol involves the following:
When a pregnant woman encounters a sidewalk counselor and indicates she has had a change of heart, she will be directed to The Women's Center.
The trained counselor at The Women's Center has a designated phone number to alert the emergency room at Resurrection that the women will be arriving shortly.
The emergency room at Resurrection will handle the initial evaluation and paper work.
The woman is transferred to the obstetrics department where the necessary procedures will be done.
If needed, the hospital will refer the women for prenatal care.
The Women's Center will continue to follow up with the pregnant woman throughout her pregnancy and the delivery of her baby, meeting any emotional and material needs as they arise.
Sister Donna Marie, chief executive officer of Resurrection Medical Center, said of the Pro-Life Action League, "I am so pleased the Resurrection Medical Center is able to be a small part of the beautiful work that you are all doing for the unborn. God bless you and your wonderful team, how pleased God must be with your commitment to His holy children."
"Never before have we had such a streamlined process to save the life of a child after the abortion procedure has been initiated," said Scheidler. "This alliance with Resurrection Medical Center is an example of the way Christ's Church is meant to work together for the good of His most vulnerable."
Contact: Stephanie Lewis
Source: Pro-Life Action League
Publish Date: November 30, 2010
Dolly the sheep has been cloned. There are now four "Dollies." From the story:
Named after country and western singer Dolly Parton, Dolly was created from a cell taken from a mammary gland. The rest of the sample of tissue has lain in a freezer since, until it was defrosted to make the Dollies. This means the quads are genetically identical to each other, as well as to Dolly, and to the ewe that donated the udder tissue. Professor Keith Campbell, who keeps the Dollies as pets on land at Nottingham University, said: 'Dolly is alive and well. Genetically these are Dolly.'
No. Dolly is dead. The four new Dolly-sheep are not "Dolly," just as she wasn't the original ewe whose mammary cell nucleus was used in her manufacture. They aren't even 100% alike since Dolly came from a different egg than her clones–meaning the donor and clones have different mitochondrial DNA.
But that's not the point of this post. I don't care much about animal cloning except as it relates to animal welfare issues. However, people cloning–that is important. And this is the point I want to make: Although this doesn't matter a whit in sheep–clones are different individuals, just as identical twins are unique individuals. (This is true even at a physical level. Even though identical twins came from the same original embryo, they have different fingerprints.)
Hence, if Hitler were cloned as in the old horror movies–his clone wouldn't be Hitler. He would probably look a lot like the original–it would be wise not to grow the Charlie Chaplain mustache–but he wouldn't be him. For example, while he might have artistic talent, the anti-Semitism would be absent. Ditto the megalomania. He might not even be a good speaker. Our personality characteristics and talents almost surely are a combination of environment and heritage, not just naked genetics.
In other words, we are not just our genes–even from the womb. So, while this story is about sheep, if we ever clone people–which should be outlawed–it will be important to remember that should cloned children ever be born, each would be fully human beings of equal moral worth and individuals in their own right–regardless of the fame or infamy of the source of their nuclear DNA.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: December 1, 2010
Some 911 Calls in Manhattan will bring out two ambulances, one hurrying to the scene in an attempt to save the patient's life, and the other arriving to save the patient's organs in case the person dies, the New York Times reported on Wednesday.
"After months of grappling with the ethical and legal implications, New York City medical officials are beginning to test a system that they hope will one day greatly increase the number of organs collected for transplant," the newspaper reported.
According to the newspaper, "a specially trained team" will monitor 911 calls for people "who may be in danger of dying," such as those having a heart attack. It's the first system of its kind in the U.S.
Click here for the New York Times article.
Contact: Susan Jones
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: December 1, 2010
Activists plan an aggressive challenge
Operation Rescue has confirmed that late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart is not in fact opening a new clinic in Maryland as he announced, but is instead joining up with an existing abortion business in Germantown in order to evade a new Nebraska law that prohibits abortions past 20 weeks.
"This is not an expansion of abortion, but a relocation of Carhart's failing late-term abortion business in a desperate attempt to avoid financial ruin," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
Running from the law that halted his late-term abortion business, Carhart has made an opportunistic move to capture a portion of the abortion market vacated by the notorious abortionist Steven Chase Brigham, whose Maryland abortion clinics recently closed after it was discovered that he was operating a secret illegal late-term abortion racket in Maryland.
Like Brigham, Carhart has no hospital privileges in any state, including Maryland where he intends to commit the risky late second and third trimester abortions at Germantown Reproductive Health Services, located at 13233 Executive Park Terrace.
GRHS is an affiliate of the National Abortion Federation, a group of abortion mills that has an abysmal record of filthy clinics and dangerous abortionists. Convicted rapist Brian Finkel, who is currently serving 34 years in an Arizona prison for raping dozens of his abortion patients, was a proud NAF member. (View photos of a filthy NAF abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas, which was bought and closed by Operation Rescue.)
"Being an NAF affiliate only increases our belief that conditions at the Germantown clinic are such that the lives and health of women seeking Carhart's late-term abortion services would be placed at even greater risk than is usual for late-term abortions which are typically prone to complication," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
Carhart plans to begin late-term abortions at GRHS on December 6, 2010. Operation Rescue is working with Maryland and Washington, D.C. pro-life groups to employ peaceful, legal means to halt Carhart's plans to do late-term abortions in Germantown.
Contact: Troy Newman
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: November 30, 2010
As a late-term abortionist has shared his plans to expand his business to other states, a move is under way to thwart his efforts in Indiana.
Carhart has announced plans to extend his expertise from Omaha to Iowa, Maryland and Indianapolis. According to Mike Fichter of Indiana Right to Life, Carhart has only been performing first-term abortions in Indianapolis, "but, of course, his announced plan for expansion has caused great alarm because there is concern at this point that that expansion will include trying to turn Indianapolis into a late-term abortion Mecca," he explains.
Late-term abortions are legal in Indiana, so Fichter believes that would pave the way for Carhart's plans. As a result, Indiana Right to Life is encouraging lawmakers to close those loopholes and adopt Nebraska's Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which bans abortions after 20 weeks. (See earlier story)
"We think that will correct some of the serious flaws that are currently in place in Indiana's law regarding second and third trimester abortions," the pro-lifer suggests. "So we want the legislators in Indiana to send a very clear message that Indiana does not want to be known as a destination for late-term abortions, and we think we can get that accomplished here in the upcoming session."
Of the 20 freshmen legislators in the House, 18 were endorsed by his organization. Pro-lifers have also made gains in the Senate, and Fichter has received calls from lawmakers who want to move forward with the legislation.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: December 1, 2010
Virginia Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II
Courtesy of the November 2 elections, there is now a newly-strengthened Republican minority in the Senate and majority status in the House. Many Republicans campaigned on a theme of repealing and replacing ObamaCare.
Let's start with public opinion, which in spite of the spinning from the White House, is dead-set against ObamaCare. Yesterday Rasmussen reported on a separate but related issue: whether the public thinks repeal is at least somewhat likely.
The headline was "Health Care Law: 47% Say Health Care Repeal Is Likely, 39% Disagree." This 47% is the highest figure ever, and is a stark contrast to what Rasmussen found in April just after the law was passed when only 38% said repeal was at least somewhat likely, compared to 51% who disagreed.
Meanwhile there are challenges galore to ObamaCare in the federal courts. Much of the attention has focused on Judge Henry E. Hudson of Federal District Court in Richmond, who was openly skeptical of the law's provision that requires most Americans to obtain insurance.
Moreover "another judge, Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, Fla., has joined Judge Hudson in writing preliminary opinions that seemingly accept key arguments made by state officials challenging the law," according to an in-depth New York Times'' piece, written by Kevin Sack and Robert Pear. To put the importance of these cases in perspective, they quoted from an article that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine written by University of North Carolina political scientist Jonathan Oberlander.
"Any ruling against the act creates another P.R. problem for the Democrats, who need to resell the law to insured Americans," he warned. Such a ruling, Oberlander wrote, "could add to health care reform's legitimacy problem."
Although there are many parts of the 2,700-page long bill that have drawn criticism, the "novel question before the courts," Sack and Pear write, "is whether the government can require citizens to buy a commercial product like health insurance."
The office of Virginia''s attorney general, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, argued the case before Judge Hudson on October 18. Cuccinelli made a number of fascinating observations in a recent update he sent out.
For example, the Commonwealth of Virginia has passed the Healthcare Freedom Act (VHFA), which says (he writes) "that no Virginian can be ordered to purchase health insurance against his will." This conflicts directly "with the federal healthcare law's mandate that all qualifying Americans must purchase government-approved health insurance."
Cuccinelli then went on to summarize some of what took place at the 2 and one-half hour long hearing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"One way of thinking about what the feds are trying to do is that in an effort to regulate interstate commerce, they are compelling us all into commerce, i.e., ordering us to buy their mandated health insurance. Virginia's position is that those who decide not to buy health insurance aren't taking any action at all that is related to commerce. All the case law related to the commerce clause addresses people voluntarily engaging in economic activity.
"Well, if you're not doing anything (i.e., not buying insurance), there's no activity to regulate. Put differently, you are inactive.
"The feds' addressed this argument saying 'the appearance of inactivity is a mere illusion.'"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judge Hudson has promised a decision by the end of the year.
Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: November 30, 2010
Henry Hyde U.S. Representative (R-Ill.), 1975-2007
An acquaintance sent along a link to a notice from the pro-abortion Center for American Progress. The title of an event which it is sponsoring and will take place next week is "Separate and Unequal: The Hyde Amendment as a Civil Rights Issue."
As you know the Hyde Amendment is one of the Movement's signal triumphs. Against seemingly impossible odds, in 1976 the late pro-life champion Henry Hyde was able to pass this measure which prohibits funding of abortion with money from the annual Health and Human Services appropriations bill.
Why does this so stick in the pro-abortionist's craw? For many reasons, I suspect. For one, at a minimum at least one million people --and perhaps considerably more--are alive today because of the Hyde Amendment. This runs counter to the core of the anti-life philosophy: there can NEVER be enough abortions.
For another, it is the model for shutting off the governmental spigot--for example, for preventing federal funds from subsidizing abortion, or insurance plans that cover abortion, in any of the new programs created by the new health care law. Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Congressman Dan Lipinski (D-Il.) have introduced a new bill that would permanently bar subsidies for abortion in all federal programs--the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" (H.R. 5939). If the Smith-Lipinski bill were enacted, it would no longer be necessary to win annual renewal of the Hyde Amendment or other such temporary bans.
But pro-abortionists, or at least some of them, really have persuaded themselves that the Hyde Amendment "discriminates" against poor and indigent women because it prohibits Medicaid from paying for abortions in all but a few instances.
The same online notice of next week's event concludes in hyperbole overdrive--"Anyone who cares about fighting racism and poverty must realize that attacks on abortion, and especially on abortion funding, are first and foremost attacks on poor and low-income women of color."
No, they are first and foremost (a) an expression of the American people's resistance to paying to kill unborn children, and (b) an attempt to save as many lives as possible.
Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: November 30, 2010
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that a pro-life employee has no legal recourse if forced by an employer to assist in an abortion.
Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo, a former nurse at Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York, said she was forced to participate in an abortion against her will and threatened with disciplinary action if she did not assist in the so-called emergency late-term abortion.
The Alliance Defense Fund, representing DeCarlo, later learned that the abortion was not an emergency and that the patient was not in crisis at the time of the procedure.
When she attempted to sue the hospital, alleging it had violated the federal "Church Amendment," a lower court ruled that the law does not provide recourse for individuals who experience discrimination.
The amendment was intended to protect health care workers of federally funded businesses from being discriminated against participating in abortions on religious grounds.
Americans United for Life, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of more than 19,000 pro-life health care professionals, argued that right of conscience is a fundamental right affirmed by the Founding Fathers and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Matt Bowman, legal counsel for ADF, said pro-life nurses should not be forced to assist in abortions against their beliefs.
"It is illegal, unethical, and a violation of (DeCarlo's) right of conscience as a devout Catholic to require her to participate in terminating the life of a 22-week pre-born child," Bowman said. "It was not only wrong, it was needless."
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: November 29, 2010
The lengthy legal battle over parental notification for minors who seek abortions continues in Illinois.
Last year's demonstration
The Parental Notice of Abortion Act was passed and enacted by a pro-abortion governor in 1995, but it has not gone into effect because of ongoing legal challenges from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The law requires an abortionist to notify a parent or legal guardian before carrying out the procedure, unless the minor provides a written statement that she is a victim of abuse or secures a confidential "judicial bypass."
But in response to the ACLU's challenges, the Thomas More Society recently took another step toward getting the 15-year-old law enforced.
"We have just submitted an amicus brief on behalf of a group of Illinois state's attorneys in support of the Parental Notice of Abortion Act in the state of Illinois," reports Peter Breen, executive director and legal counsel for the Thomas More Society. "As you may remember, Illinois is the only state in the entire Midwest that doesn't require either parental notice or consent prior to a child being taken for an abortion."
That amicus brief argues that the state constitution does not confer abortion rights and that numerous federal and state courts have upheld the constitutionality of parental notice. Breen is hopeful the support of many county prosecutors will add weight in the law's favor. But as the parental notice act has remained in limbo, the legal counsel laments that Illinois has become a dumping ground for children from other states who are seeking abortions.
"Since this law was passed but enjoined, 50,000 young people have been subjected to abortions in the state of Illinois, without any requirement that their parents be notified or that their parents consent prior to the procedure," he reports.
Breen understands the court may hear the case on an expedited basis, and that it may even provide a quick decision after a decade-and-a-half of litigation.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 30, 2010
In medicine, technology has surpassed ethics. In religion, relativism for the most part, has replaced doctrine. In advertising, there are no holds barred any longer. In airports, anything goes. While this opening may sound flip, what was once unthinkable, is now the norm. So too with the euthanasia movement.
In 1930 it was known as the Euthanasia Society of America. It's goal was to secure legalization of passive euthanasia (death encouraged by omission, through neglect of necessary treatment & care) leading to a patient's death. The goal of which, was to change public opinion on the issue, so that active euthanasia (death caused or hastened by the act of commission, using a lethal agent ) could be accomplished and legalized. I would say, they've accomplished their goals.
When wondering, if euthanasia is taking place, one has to look at what is the intent of the treatment, or lack thereof. Remember, euthanasia can be carried out by omission (passive) or commission (active). There is no moral difference.
We've come a long way since the 1930's. Today's debate is more sophisticated, but equally lethal.
We now have bio-ethical think tanks. These think tanks are shaping public opinion and religious beliefs, as well as legislative policy. They are embedded in government regulations, state and federal laws and ethical guidelines around the world.
Pope Benedict XVI discussed a fundamental problem with bio-ethics, in his address to the Pontifical Academy for Life. He said, "Some ethicists warn that modern bio-ethics is in fact a new normative system of ethics, that, based on principles of utilitarianism can never be compatible with Natural Law's principles. Under traditional medical ethics, the guiding principle is,"do no harm". But contemporary bio-ethics abandons this ... in an effort to find the utilitarian goal of the "greatest good for the greatest number". Under these principles, preserving the life of the human patient is not considered paramount."
Source: Lake County Right to Life
Publish Date: November 29, 2010
The "morning-after" pill
The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) has filed a lawsuit to force the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to make the "morning-after" pill available over-the-counter to girls of all ages.
After getting sued by the CRR in 2005, the FDA decided that any female under the age of 18 could have Plan B, but only with a prescription. But with the current demand, Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America (CWA), tells OneNewsNow the pro-abortion legal group is apparently not looking at the facts.
"The morning-after pill has been an utter failure in reducing pregnancies and in reducing abortions, and there's indication that making Plan B easy to get only increases cases of sexually transmitted diseases," she reports.
But Wright thinks the CRR is trying to use the courts to make a political statement instead of a decision based on sound medical judgment. She also contends it is an attempt to bypass parental consent, "and that's not in girl's best interest; that's only in the interest of the drug company, which will make more money, and abortion activists, who will profit from these girls relying on a very ineffective drug, then ending up pregnant or with a sexually transmitted disease," the CWA president warns.
Moreover, Wright points out that there is still no research to suggest Plan B is safe for young girls, especially those who use it regularly.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 30, 2010
Late Term (Partial birth) Abortion
The Huffingtonpost.com reprinted a piece that first ran in Women's Media Center titled, "Late-Term Abortion: Filmmakers Seek To Boost Understanding."
We learn that there are two filmmakers who are producing a honorific documentary about the two most infamous "late-term" abortionists in the world: LeRoy Carhart--who reportedly has moved his late-term abortion business from Nebraska when the state said he couldn't kill unborn babies capable of feeling pain which lawmakers have recognized as beginning at 20 weeks--and Warren Hern--most famous for (in referring to his own abortion technique) the remarkable statement that "there is no possibility of denial of an act of destruction by the operator. It is before one's eyes. The sensation of dismemberment flow through the forceps like an electric current."
This is the same Hern who once got into a heated exchange of letters over the proposed ban on partial-birth abortions. In the course of the back and forth Hern said that he did personally use this method. To which NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson responded, "He neglects to mention that this is because he prefers methods that involve the progressive dismemberment of the well-developed unborn child" (dilation and extraction).
They are so outlandish you really can't caricature what these people say or do-- in this case filmmakers Martha Shane and Lana Wilson. (The working title of their documentary is "Trust Women.")
They told Women's Media Center that they need all the money they can get, since they are only a third of the way through shooting. One way to finance their hosanna to "late-term" abortions is to sell buttons with the insignia "Trust Women."
But they also have other, more creative fundraising ideas. "We're also sending condom bouquets," Shane explained, pointing to an arrangement in a vase across the table--several condoms wrapped together with pipe cleaner stems. Wilson nodded. "Maybe we can sell them as limited edition artworks."
And, no, I am not making this up.
Nor am I making up the two-fold strategy for demonstrating the sheer goodness of what Carhart and Hern do for a living (so to speak).
There is the usual disinformation--that "late-term" abortions are practically only done for the most heart-rending of reasons. This canard was disproved during the long, LONG debate over partial-birth abortion.
The other approach is to tell us how genuinely wholesome both men are--Carhart is an Air Force veteran who is "Christian and religious," while Hern was a Peace Corp volunteer. Would such men really be likely to do something….unacceptable?
If you have any doubts, we're told the Carhart is so scrupulous in ensuring that women really do want to abort that he claims he "turns away more women than the protesters do."
So why are Wilson and Shane making the documentary? Carhart and Hern are 68 and 72, respectively, and could represent "the end of an era." So their goals are to use the film to proselytize in medical schools and to "influence a broad audience, including legislators, and hope the film will help to prevent other states from following Nebraska's post-20 weeks ban."
Indeed "our modest goal," Shane "said, is to "really affect the conversation about abortion in the United States."
They are on to a basic truth about human nature. If you "tell stories" (as they like to describe what they are about) that are warm enough, compelling enough, and avoid what's being done to whom enough, an audience can be duped.
But that's why you and I are here. To make sure the truth wiggles its way out from beneath a blanket of omissions and distortions. And because you have, you already have "really affected the conversation about abortion in the United States."
Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: November 29, 2010
We already knew that Planned Parenthood was a $1 billion dollar corporation performing hundreds of thousands of abortions at its clinics all across the U.S. Now, with the release of the groups corporate tax form we have a better idea of where some of the money coming into this "non-profit" ends up.
According to the group's Form 990, the return used for an "Organization Exempt from Income Tax," the group has 356 employees and 61 persons acting as volunteers. This apparently refers only to the national office, since according to the group's 2008 annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) staffed nearly 880 "heath centers" among its 97 affiliates and had "more than four million activists, supporters, and donors."
The return indicates that income at the national office was up over the previous year, with revenues increasing from $85,758,316 to 106,357,796 in 2008 (most from increased contributions and grants). Exactly how is unclear, but the non-profit group had a net income of $474,656 from sales of its inventory.
Planned Parenthood's top officers were well paid. For Cecile Richards, the group's politically well-connected president, total compensation from PPFA for 2008 was $346,285. She also received an additional compensation in salary, bonuses, and other reportable compensation of $38,476, from "related organizations" she did work for. In addition to being PPFA president, Richards is also heads the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which promotes candidates supportive of the group's agenda. (See below.)
The return also shows the money being given to various Planned Parenthood affiliates. Though it doesn't explain whether the support is due to the affiliate's size or activities (such as building some new regional mega-clinic or launching a web-cam abortion operation), the top 15 recipients funding from the national office include:
1. Planned Parenthood of Houston and SE TX ... $1,187,495
2. Planned Parenthood of Illinois . .. $1,148,453
3. PP of the Rocky Mountains . .. $1,096,593
4. PP Southeastern Pennsylvania . .. $1,017,775
5. Planned Parenthood of Arizona . ..$994,422
6. PP of Southwest and Central Florida . .. $947,740
7. Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid Missouri . .. $843,658
8. Planned Parenthood of MN, SD, and ND . .. $820,224
9. PP of the St. Louis Region .. . $809,952
10. PP Health Systems, Inc (w/clinics in SC, NC, VA, WV) . .. $759,395
11. PP of the Texas Capital Region .. . $535,480
12. PP of Wisconsin . .. $547,297
13. Planned Parenthood of Indiana . .. $547,188
14. Planned Parenthood of Middle and East Tennessee .. . $539,835
15. Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina .. . $504,030
It is worth noting that these several of these larger grants went to affiliates where there have been mergers in recent years (PP Arizona, and PP Health Systems, PP Illinois) or have recently opened or announced plans for huge megaclinics (PP Illinois, PP SW & Central Florida, PP of the Rocky Mountains, PP of MN, SD, and ND, PP Houston & SE TX).
Other interesting recipients of PP's cash grants include the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health ($30,000) and Advocates for Youth ($15,284) a group promoting teen sex education--two of the group's prime target constituencies.
For those still under the illusion that Planned Parenthood is an apolitical women's health group, in 2008 a large grant went to The Planned Parenthood Action Fund. This is the corporation's "nonpartisan advocacy and political arm" that endorsed and mobilized for pro-abortion candidates up and down the ballot in that election year.
The Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Inc. is one of several "related tax exempt organizations" listed on the Form 990. There is also the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Inc. PAC, and Planned Parenthood Votes, which the Form indicates do "political act[ivity]," the Planned Parenthood Foundation and PPFA 21st Century, Inc. which do "supporting" activity.
Planned Parenthood spent $3,153,843 on overseas activities, the bulk of it devoted to the Sub-Saharan African region, where the group lists three offices and 14 employees or agents. All of its international grants were for "Repro Health."
Planned Parenthood typically refers to itself as "the nation's leading sexual and reproductive health care provider and advocate serving women, men, teens and families" but in the Form 990, the group gives perhaps its most detailed description of its mission. Here it is, repeated in full:
The purpose of the federation is:
(A) To provide leadership:
– in making effective means of voluntary fertility regulation, including contraception, abortion, sterilization, and infertility services, available and fully accessible to all as a central element to reproductive healthcare:
– in achieving, through informed individual choice, a U.S. population of stable size in an optimum environment; - in stimulating and sponsoring relevant biomedical, socio-economic, and demographic research;
– in developing appropriate information, education, and training programs.
(B) To support and assist efforts to achieve similar goals in the United States and throughout the world.
The prominent place of "abortion" in this list and the federation's stated intent to make it "available and fully accessible to all" shows just how central the group believes it is to their goal of "reproductive healthcare." Remember that the next time groups like Planned Parenthood try to get "rights" to "reproductive healthcare" inserted into United Nations documents.
The statement also shows that, though the group does not speak publicly of it much anymore, population control is still very much part of the group's mentality, seen in the goal of "a U.S. population of stable size in an optimum environment..."
It isn't listed on the 2008 tax return, but Planned Parenthood performed 324,008 abortions at its affiliated clinics that year. For all the details about salaries, revenue, and expenses, if you want to understand what Planned Parenthood is all about, that is the real bottom line.
Contact: Randall K. O'Bannon, Ph.D.
Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: November 23, 2010
When George W. Bush praised scientists as having the talent and ability to discover and harness the healing potential of regenerative medicine ethically, that is, without needing to destroy embryos–his enemies scoffed. What a dope. His religion got in the way of the understanding that ESCR was the only hope.
That was then. Now, scientists are working with a number of techniques that are already providing hope in human trials–adult stem and umbilical cord stem cells–as they develop astonishing techniques that can reprogram normal cells into pluritpotent stem cells–IPSC, now being used in drug testing and to study disease–or now, even skip the stem cell stage altogether with direct reprogramming or "direct conversion." More advances have been made on the latter front. From the story:
Suppose you could repair tissue damaged by a heart attack by magically turning other cells into heart muscle, so the organ could pump effectively again. Scientists aren't quite ready to do that. But they are reporting early success at transforming one kind of specialized cell directly into another kind, a feat of biological alchemy that doctors may one day perform inside a patient's body. "I think everyone believes this is really the future of so-called stem-cell biology," says John Gearhart of the University of Pennsylvania, one of many researchers pursuing this approach.
The concept is two steps beyond the familiar story of embryonic stem cells, versatile entities that can be coaxed to become cells of all types, like brain and blood. Scientists are learning to guide those transformations, which someday may provide transplant tissue for treating diseases like Parkinson's or diabetes. It's still experimental. But at its root, it's really just harnessing and speeding up what happens in nature: a versatile but immature cell matures into a more specialized one.
That isn't to say that that studying ES cells wouldn't have any scientific interest, as the story notes, and there is still a long way to go. But the CURES! angle would become obsolete–and with it, the politics of hype–as the scientific focus, and the research dollars shifted–and just perhaps, the resulting ethical regenerative medicine would stall the drive toward Brave New World
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: November 29, 2010
A Maryland abortionist who stood accused of negligence in the death of a patient has surrendered his license and is out of business for good.
Romeo Ferrer of Severna Park, Maryland, permanently surrendered his license to state medical officials on October 27 and committed not to apply for a new one in any other state.
"Romeo Ferrer killed a woman during an abortion in February of 2006. That abortion death was kept secret from the public until 2010 when the Maryland Medical Board filed a petition against him to begin the process of revoking his license," reports Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullinger.
Ferrer hired fellow abortionist Gheovant Wartanian during his suspension period in an attempt to keep his Severna Park abortion clinic open, but he quit when Sullinger's group revealed his controversial past. When Wartanian resigned, the clinic was closed and Ferrer turned in his license for good. But had there not been public pressure, the Operation Rescue spokesperson thinks the outcome might have been different.
"There were several pro-life groups that worked together to apply pressure to the medical board and to a state attorney," she regards. "We're still asking for criminal charges in the death of this poor girl. We reached out to our supporters, and we generated phone calls and e-mails to the authorities. That helped speed this process along."
She decides this outcome was accomplished because pro-life groups worked as a team and utilized available legal channels.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 29, 2010
European Court of Human Rights
We live in a strange era in which Jefferson's "right to life" supposedly has a concomitant "right to death." At least, that will be the case if the European Court of Human Rights rules that Germany violated the right of a woman with disabilities to obtain a lethal dose of drugs for use in suicide. From the story:
The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg began hearing the case of Ulrich Koch vs. Germany on Tuesday. A court brief said the case concerned the German authorities' refusal to grant his late wife authorization to acquire a lethal dose of medication enabling her to commit voluntary, assisted suicide. After falling in front of her house in 2002, Koch's wife was paralyzed from the neck down and required artificial ventilation and constant care from nursing staff. Koch said his wife thereafter "suffered from terrible spasms" and even had trouble "sitting in a wheelchair." Because she was paralyzed, she appealed for active help to end her life. In November, 2004, she made a request to Germany's Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices to grant her authorization to obtain the medication necessary to commit suicide, but the institute refused, arguing that her wish contravened the German Narcotics Act…
The European Court of Human Rights must now decide whether the German law banning "active" assisted suicide infringes on a person's right to privacy and a dignified death, as stipulated by Article 8 of the German constitution. If the court rules in the plaintiff's favor, it could have far-reaching consequences for the growing tide of support across Europe for assisted suicides.
Koch died at a Swiss suicide clinic. Those death purveyors never say no.
Note: Koch wasn't terminally ill, which of course, isn't want the issue is about at all–except in the USA for political expediency. But also note: If Koch had a fundamental privacy right to lethal drugs for use in suicide that was violated by German law, so does everyone–and for any reason. Because if suicide is a fundamental human right, how can it be limited to the dying, the sick, or people with disabilities? Indeed, if we have a "right to die," who is to gainsay why we decide to exercise that right?
So, be very clear what a ruling in favor of a right to be made dead would mean. And think about the abandoning message it would send to those who have a very difficult time hanging on, and the destructive forces it would unleash against the most weak and vulnerable among us.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: November 26, 2010
Advertsing for EMC Frontline Pregnancy Center
New York City is taking expected steps to restrict speech of pro-life pregnancy centers, but pro-lifers are fighting the suggested measures.
Chris Slattery runs many of the Expectant Mother Care FrontLine Pregnancy Centers (EMC) in New York and tells OneNewsNow the city council did not get away with its attempted slam dunk in favor of the measure. "Over 50 pro-lifers came out in strength from all over the country to defend our work," he reports.
The proposed bill is designed to shut down pro-life centers by crippling them with requirements to post disclaimers that will be monitored by the Department of Consumer Affairs. In bold letters, both in English and in Spanish, crisis-pregnancy centers must make it known "that we don't do abortions or refer for them, we don't do contraceptives or refer for them," and they must display the days the doctors are not physically at the clinics.
But Slattery adds that "they also have onerous confidentiality restrictions that don't even allow us to report rape to the police or uncovering child abuse to child abuse hotlines." Fines for violating the ordinance range from $200 to $2,500 apiece.
Council Member Jessica Lappin, the bill's primary sponsor, says the legislation is imperative to protect women who go to crisis-pregnancy centers without realizing the mission is to counsel against abortion. Yet at the same time, abortion clinics are not regulated. So the New York pro-lifer believes the rules are unconstitutional, which is why he plans to fight against approval.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 26, 2010
Council Bluffs, Iowa
An Iowa town has taken a step to block a late-term abortionist's plans to set up shop there.
Omaha abortionist LeRoy Carhart recently announced plans to expand his business to Maryland, Indiana, and Council Bluffs, Iowa. But Steven Brody, executive director of Dubuque County Right to Life, tells OneNewsNow approximately 300 pro-life citizens showed up for a city council meeting and asked that Carhart not be given a pass to proceed.
"One of the decisions that they made was they voted unanimously to place a deed restriction on a certain parcel of land to prevent that land from being used as an abortion clinic," Brody reports.
So Avenue G and North 15th Street, the lot Carhart was reportedly considering, will not be utilized as an abortion facility. However, that does not block him from choosing a different location. But according to Brody, the pro-life citizens and city council sent a loud message to the abortionist. So he believes people in the two other states where Carhart hopes to open shop should feel emboldened to take action.
"Certainly, pro-lifers in Indianapolis and in Maryland, where Carhart is hoping and wishing to open up those late-term facilities there... there should be no reason why good folks in those areas can't muster their forces together and produce similar results," the pro-life spokesman contends.
He thinks the primary reason why the Omaha abortionist may want to take his business to new locations is because the legislature passed a bill last session that basically prohibits abortions beyond 20 weeks.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 26, 2010
Pope Benedict, in his homily at Saturday night's vigil for all nascent human life, said:
"Dear brothers and sisters, our coming together this evening to begin the Advent journey is enriched by another important reason: with the entire Church, we want to solemnly celebrate a prayer vigil for unborn life. I wish to express my thanks to all who have taken up this invitation and those who are specifically dedicated to welcoming and safeguarding human life in different situations of fragility, especially in its early days and in its early stages."
"[T]here is no reason not to consider [the human embryo] a person from conception."
"I urge the protagonists of politics, economic and social communications to do everything in their power to promote a culture which respects human life, to provide favorable conditions and support networks for the reception and development of life."
Pope Benedict echoed his vigil homily this morning in his address to the bishops of the Philippines on their ad limina visit. In a clear reference to the Reproductive Health bill which the bishops are fighting, Pope Benedict said [my emphases in bold]:
"Thanks to the Gospel's clear presentation of the truth about God and man, generations of zealous Filipino clergymen, religious and laity have promoted an ever more just social order. At times, this task of proclamation touches upon issues relevant to the political sphere. This is not surprising, since the political community and the Church, while rightly distinct, are nevertheless both at the service of the integral development of every human being and of society as a whole".
"At the same time, the Church's prophetic office demands that she be free 'to preach the faith, to teach her social doctrine ... and also to pass moral judgments in those matters which regard public order whenever the fundamental human rights of a person or the salvation of souls requires it'. In the light of this prophetic task, I commend the Church in the Philippines for seeking to play its part in support of human life from conception until natural death, and in defence of the integrity of marriage and the family. In these areas you are promoting truths about the human person and about society which arise not only from divine revelation but also from natural law, an order which is accessible to human reason and thus provides a basis for dialogue and deeper discernment on the part of all people of good will."
Warren Buffett
Warren Buffett, one of the world's wealthiest men, is in the news for saying that he wants the rich to pay more in taxes. But according to the continuing research of the Population Research Institute (PRI), Buffet prefers to spend his money ensuring that the poor have as few children as possible.
Over the years, the Buffett Foundation has funded some of the most hard-edged, even fanatical, population control programs around:
- Back in 1994 Buffet provided $2 million to fund the clinical trials of RU-486. This human pesticide has resulted in the deaths of countless unborn children and several dozen women.
- Buffet also provided $2 million to the Family Health International (FHI) for quinicrine hydrochloride, a drug which is used to perform chemical sterilizations on women. Inserted into the uterus, the powerful acid burns away the lining of the upper uterus and fallopian tubes, rendering a woman sterile. The Vietnamese and Indian governments have sterilized tens of thousands of poor women using this method, many without their foreknowledge or consent.
- Another favorite Buffet charity is an obscure entity called International Projects Assistance Services (IPAS), which is the principal manufacturer and distributor of the manual vacuum aspirators, or MVAs. These are used by the UN Population Fund, and other groups, to abort unborn babies up to 20 weeks gestation by hand. According to a Business Week report, the foundation's "1999 contribution of $2.5 million is part of a five-year, $20 million commitment, which will enable IPAS to double its capacity"
A list of Buffet's charitable contributions reads like a veritable rogue's gallery of abortion promoters and providers. Such groups as the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, Pathfinder International, and Catholics for Choice figure prominently. And in a particularly nasty twist, his funding to Planned Parenthood is specifically earmarked to enable particular clinics around the country to perform abortions.
"People wonder why Buffet is spending his money this way," says PRI president Steven Mosher. "Behind Buffet's folksy persona and obvious business acumen, lies an obsession with ridding the globe of "excess" baby humans. His biographer, Roger Lowenstein, wrote that he has "a Malthusian dread that overpopulation (will) aggravate problems in all other areas -- such as food, housing, even human survival."
"I have met with Buffet in Ohama," recalls Mosher. "I see Buffet lounging in his office in Omaha, sipping cherry Cokes and plotting billion-dollar investment strategies, while tens of thousands of poor women around the world are being scarred for life with quinicrine, or have their babies sucked out of their wombs by manual vacuum aspirators that he has helped provide."
Says Mosher, "It is sad that this Midas-like character, so blessed with material goods, should take so misanthropic a view of the people with whom he shares the planet, and from whose existence he profits. Even if he doesn't recognize the Indian as a fellow creature of God, surely he knows that they are tremendous consumers of Coke."
Contact: Colin Mason
Source: Population Research Institute
Publish Date: November 23, 2010
