The November 2 Elections and the Passage of State Pro-Life Legislation

    

The headline happened to be for a story in Sunday's Washington Post, but the thoughts expressed could be found in story after story following the pasting pro-abortion Democrats took November 2.

"GOP's gains ready to propel social issues back into spotlight" blared the headline accompanying Sandhya Somashekhar's November 21 story. I will talk about the substance of the story in a moment, but the story's preface is equally, if not more, important.

Nobody disagrees that the mid-term elections were "economy-centric," so long as you don't come up with the part of the sentence that preceded that phrase: that "Social issues barely rated." That is flatly wrong.

NRL PAC was extensively involved in 122 federal races nationwide--and won 84 of them with nine still undecided as of the day following the election. The abortion issue and abortion funding in ObamaCare were crucially important in tight races (of which there were many). What do we base that on?

Our polling found that 30% said abortion affected their vote. Of that figure, 22% said they voted for candidates who opposed abortion as contrasted with only 8% who said they voted for candidates who favored abortion. This yields a 14% advantage for pro-life candidates over pro-abortion candidates.

Then there was the response to the question, "Did the issue of funding for abortion in the Obama health care law affect the way you voted in today's election?" 31% of voters responded in the affirmative .

How did that 31% break out? 27% said they voted "for candidates who opposed the health care law," and 4% who said they voted "for candidates who favored the health care law." Put another way, 87% of the voters who said the issue mattered, voted in accord with the NRLC position.

And this was made possible because people HEARD NRL PAC. Our involvement and national reach was reflected in the post-election poll conducted by The Polling Company which found that 24% of voters recalled hearing or seeing advertising from, or receiving information from, National Right to Life. One-quarter of the population heard the truth--very impressive, wouldn't you say?

Okay, a lot of preliminaries, but crucial to understanding stories like the one written by the Post's Somashekhar. Pro-life votes were essential to the victories of pro-life Republicans at the federal level AND at the state level.

And contrary to the impression left in stories such as these, these candidates are perfectly capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time: fighting to right floundering state economies and passing protective abortion legislation that could not have been enacted November 1.

We know for a fact that state legislatures dominated by Democrats (who are overwhelmingly pro-abortion) make passage of pro-life legislature close to impossible. But the numbers have radically shifted, virtually reversing what was the case prior to the elections. As Somashekhar observes,

"Before the midterm elections, Democrats controlled 27 state legislatures outright. Republicans were in charge in 14 states, and eight states were split. (Nebraska, which has a single legislative chamber, is officially nonpartisan). Today, Republicans control 26 state legislatures, Democrats 17, and five have split control. In New York, officials are still determining who is in charge in the state Senate. Republicans control more legislatures than they have since 1952."

Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: National Right to LIfe
Publish Date: November 23, 2010

Illegal abortions go unpunished ... for now

A state attorney in North Dakota won't prosecute an unlicensed abortionist for a Class B felony.

    
     Lori Lynn Thorndike

Lori Lynn Thorndike of Colorado has been performing abortions at the Red River Women's Clinic in Fargo with an expired license. (See earlier story) But Operation Rescue's Cheryl Sullinger, who has communicated with officials in North Dakota, says the state has no plans to file criminal charges against the physician.

 "The state's attorney admits that she did do several illegal abortions in September when she was there under a lapsed license, but he felt like because she was licensed in other states that...it was okay," Sullinger explains.

But she points out that a physician must be licensed in each state they practice. Otherwise, they are practicing medicine without a license, which is a Class B felony.

 "We think that that is only going to encourage abortionists who already believe that they're above the law to commit other illegal acts," she notes.

 But State Attorney Birch Burdick's decision to not take action will not be the final word as Sullinger reports that her group is "working with other pro-life groups in North Dakota to try to get this case up to the attorney general's office."

 Meanwhile, some lawmakers who helped pass the laws to protect women are unhappy about the situation.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 23, 2010

Online Debate Examines Colorado Personhood Amendment Tactic

    
     Personhood USA

For many years Operation Rescue has worked to restore legal protections to the pre-born. In early 2006, when South Dakota was attempting to pass the first state-wide ban on abortion, Operation Rescue was there supporting those efforts. Later, when that law was challenged through the referendum process, Operation Rescue was there.

We sent one of our missionaries at that time, Keith Mason, who now heads Personhood U.S.A., to South Dakota, Mississippi, and elsewhere to learn all he could about the abortion bans that were sweeping the nation in 2006, so we could know best how to support those efforts.

In our office, we often discussed the topic of personhood and how the "Blackman Hole" was the loophole in Roe v. Wade that could eventually lead our country back to restoring legal protections for all, no matter the age or stage of development. One could say that the Personhood Movement was birthed in our office.

Keith Mason learned well from us, and after leaving Operation Rescue, he founded Personhood U.S.A. and began promoting Personhood amendments throughout the country, especially in Colorado.

Recently, a lively discussion on Facebook concerning Colorado's twice defeated Amendment 62 prompted Troy Newman to extend an invitation to the Personhood camp and to those who question the wisdom of tactics used by Personhood U.S.A. in Colorado to a friendly debate to be hosted at www.operationrescue.org. We asked both sides to submit 400 word statements in support of their views.

Keith Ashley, of Personhood Kansas submitted a statement on behalf of the Personhood organization. Steve Ertelt, Editor of LifeNews.com, has submitted a statement in opposition. We encourage all to read the two statements and engage in the debate through the comment feature at the end of the articles. We ask, as we have with our debaters, that those who comment abstain from ad hominem attacks and profanity.

"It is our prayer that this debate will air ideas that will ultimately be beneficial for the Pro-life Movement as a whole and help guide us toward the most efficient and practical way to stop abortion in America as soon as humanly possible," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "That is a goal to which we can all agree."

We plan to allow Mr. Ashley and Mr. Ertelt to post rebuttals to each other's statements in the near future.

Contact: Troy Newman
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: November 22, 2010

Incoming Iowa Governor, House Speaker Promise Pro-Life Legislation

    
     Iowa Governor-elect Terry Branstad

Iowa's incoming Republican leadership in the House vows to pass pro-life legislation in 2011. Governor-elect Terry Branstad has said he would sign such a bill into law.

 Speaker-elect Kraig Paulsen said it is necessary, since Nebraska's LeRoy Carhart recently announced he was opening an abortion clinic in Council Bluffs, Iowa.

 Chuck Hurley, president of the Iowa Family Policy Center Action, is encouraged by the attention to this very real danger.

 "We have a crisis now that has got the attention of House-speaker elect Kraig Paulsen," Hurley said. "When Carhart announced that he was going to metastasize his evil deeds – he was going to take his late-term abortion practice into other states – the natural place to go was across the river into Council Bluffs, Iowa."

 Hurley said the obstacle will be the Senate, which is controlled by pro-abortion Democrats.

 He also noted the questionable location of the late-term abortion clinic – the Democrat Senate Majority Leader's district.

 Hurley said Planned Parenthood runs an online "telemed" chemical abortion pilot program in Iowa, which they hope to export to the other 49 states. It involves an abortionist consulting with a patient via webcam, then dispensing the abortion pill by remote control.

 "There's going to be legislation to try to limit – or eliminate – these 'telemed' abortions," he said. "I have talked to several of the new legislators. They will be also pushing for a clear statement on the personhood of every human being from the moment of conception."

Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: November 22, 2010

Abortion Group Sues FDA to Allow Unrestricted Access to Morning-After Pill

     
     Morning-After Pill

The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) filed a lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday, as part of its five-year quest to make the morning-after pill available to girls of all ages – and without parental consent.

The pro-abortion group first sued the agency in 2005. One year later, the FDA approved making Plan B available to women 18 and over, and only by prescription.

On March 23, 2009, U.S. District Judge Edward R. Korman ordered the FDA to make Plan B accessible to women 17 years and older. He also advised the agency to permit unrestricted availability.

Korman wrote that the Bush-era FDA acted in "bad faith and in response to political pressure" by delaying a decision on the drug. However, the Obama administration has been equally elusive.

Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, the FDA's acting commissioner at the time the decision came down, said the age restriction was added because the manufacturer, Barr Laboratories, failed to provide adequate data on how the drug could affect minors.

Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, said Plan B has been an utter failure in reducing pregnancies and abortion – and may even increase sexually transmitted infections.

"Rather than admit they were wrong, CRR is diverting attention by running to the court to impose a political judgment," Wright said. "This radical abortion group is attempting to bypass doctors and parents so that minor girls will be vulnerable to adults who would manipulate them.

"This won't benefit girls, who would rely on this ineffective drug and end up pregnant or with a disease. It will only benefit drug companies and abortion groups."

Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: November 19, 2010

That’s Not a Baby … It’s Just Your Opinion

     
     Pre-born Human Baby

The fact that a preborn baby is a human being is lost on far too many people in our country. The incessant lies of organizations such as Planned Parenthood and others like it constantly inundate our society – confusing those who may not have been exposed to, or who may not understand, the truth.

These organizations constantly push harder for ways to keep people from seeing and understanding that a baby is a person – and has a life he deserves to live. They want us to think we're powerless to stop them, but we are not. Our voices can be heard, even if the babies' voices cannot.

Proponents and practitioners of abortion are becoming more and more strident in their denials regarding not only the rights of mothers to know all the facts but the reality of who is killed during an abortion.

Imagine sitting in an audience where a debate on the humanity of the preborn child is taking place, and hearing from Planned Parenthood, "We are not going to try to use science or evidence – the fact of the matter is, this is, this is opinion. We all have our own opinions as far as when human life begins."

As if this were not proof enough of the crippled consciences among those who favor aborting the innocent, think about the situation in Rockford, Illinois, where abortionist Dennis Christensen's facility is located, an abortion clinic that has not been inspected in 14 years.

Pro-Life Corner's editor has exposed this calamitous situation, writing,

How is it that an abortion "clinic" has a free ride for safety and hygiene? Are women so substandard that they don't deserve proper care? Where are the women who rant and rave to keep abortion legal? Why aren't they doing something about the deplorable conditions of the abortion mill in Rockford? Why hasn't the mayor, the city attorney, or anyone else in authority done something about these conditions? Is there no one in the city of Rockford or the state of Illinois who cares about the sub-standard conditions we see at this place? Safe, legal abortions are not taking place in Rockford. They may meet the criteria of legal, but safe? I think not. 

In the very same city, pro-life activists are treated as non-persons and with disrespect by the police, while the man who is operating a filthy, inhumane, unsafe so-called medical establishment gets away with murder.

Another drama is playing out in New York City. The City Council is clearly in cahoots with NARAL, publisher of a recent scathing report entitled, "The Lies, Manipulations and Privacy Violations of Crisis Pregnancy Centers in New York City."

The City Council is holding hearings on a proposed law aimed at these life-affirming agencies even though the NARAL report is full of erroneous, hysterical claims.

Theresa Bonopartis, a post-abortive woman and founder of Lumina, examined the proposed law and the NARAL publication, and told the City Council,

Over the years I have heard accounts of the manipulation and deception of countless abortion clinics: women seeking help to have their babies who are encouraged to abort for "mental health" reasons, women who did not know or were not told the development of their unborn baby, or the details and dangers of the abortion procedure they were about to undergo. I myself am one of those women. Women deserve to know the entire truth about abortion whether they are in a CPC [crisis pregnancy center] or an abortion clinic. Why is there no legislation being passed to ensure this? You continue to deny women the whole truth of the dangers of abortion yet you appease the powerful political abortion lobby.

Clearly, whether one is a resident of Colorado, Illinois, New York City or practically anywhere in this nation, murder and mayhem are being legitimized while scientific facts, the rights of women and the heroic actions of pro-life Americans are being ignored, thwarted or otherwise marginalized. Whatever happened to freedom of speech, equal rights for all, both born and preborn, and truth?

Apparently the power and financial muscle of the abortion cartel are enough to make mice out of the men elected to public office to serve all the people.

Please don't sit back and say there is nothing you can do. There is so much that you can do. Get involved today.

Contact: Judie Brown
Source: CNSNews.com
Publish Date: November 22, 2010

Couple uses internet poll to decide whether to abort or not

     
     17 Week Ultrasound Image of the baby in the poll.

A young couple from a Minneapolis suburb is leaving it up to internet users as to whether they will abort their baby or not. Pete and Alisha Arnold, whose baby is in its 17th week, are using an internet poll to ask readers, "Should we give birth or have an abortion?" The couple says that they will use the results of the poll to help make their decision about whether to keep the child.

While the site also features a blog where Pete and Alisha post comments, the main purpose is the poll concerning the baby's life. In the upper right hand corner, the site says, "You can vote and choose whether we abort or keep our unborn child. For the first time, your vote on the topic of abortion can make a difference."

The poll currently stands as 80.51% in favor of giving birth, while only 19.49% want the couple to abort the baby. The Arnolds say they will close the poll December 7th, two days before the last day they could get an abortion.

The couple has said that they are leaving the fate of the child to voters because "Voting is such an integral part of the American identity."

According to the site, the Arnolds have had three past miscarriages. The two most recent miscarriages were in January and April. The couple, in their thirties, has described both of these earlier pregnancies as "planned," leaving many to wonder why they would consider killing this most recent child.

In their first posts to the website, Pete and Alisha's reactions to becoming parents were widely different. Pete described himself as "excited at the prospects of being a father" and said he was crossing his "fingers and toes that this one goes off without a hitch."

However, Alisha expressed more reservations about the pregnancy. She said that she fears the expectation of being a "perfect wife and mother while maintaining a full-time job." She also said that she was "afraid that I will eventually regret starting a family and 'settling down'."

As the pregnancy has gone on, more and more signs point to a healthy baby. Many posts detail the baby's development by describing doctor's appointments and using information from different pregnancy resources. All the most recent doctor's appointments have shown the baby to be developing normally and that Alisha is "right on target for her due date of 4/28/11."

Alisha commented that being in her 17th week, this is now the longest pregnancy she has had to date. According to Alisha, the baby that miscarried in January was only 13.5 weeks in development.

Recently, a controversy erupted on the site over users of a message board call "4chan." In a blog post dated yesterday, Pete explained that members of 4chan had been posting links to Birthornot.com alongside pictures of pornography in order to encourage people to visit the blog and vote to have the baby aborted.

Before visitors of 4chan started encouraging users to vote for the abortion, only 21% of people had voted in favor of killing the child. After the links were posted, that percentage jumped to 55%, although that number has since reversed strongly in favor of allowing the child to live.

According to Pete, he and Alisha will still consider the abortion based on the votes from those at 4chan. In the aforementioned post, Pete said, "I see 4chan as encouraging people to vote in the poll.  How they do it is beyond my control and should not influence decisions about what we are doing here."

"We don't see a difference between this and what politicians or supporters do in regards to campaigning"

Contact: Matthew Anderson
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 19, 2010

IVF: Octomom’s Doctor Followed Ordinary Procedure

     
     Nadya Suleman

I have always believed that Octomom's (Nadya Suleman) doctor didn't do anything that other IVF doctors don't sometimes do, that is implant six embryos.  His biggest crime, for which his medical license is now at risk, was to embarrass the sector because Suleman chose to carry all of her 8 babies (two twinned)  to term rather than abort some of them, a routine procedure in IVF practice euphemistically known as "selective reduction."  In other words–and boy, is this ironic–abortion is a normal part of IVF infertility treatments.

That appears to be the case.  From the story in the LA Times:

    Dr. Jeffery Steinberg, an Encino-based fertility specialist, testified Wednesday at a hearing held before Administrative Law Judge Daniel Juarez in downtown Los Angeles, the most recent in a series of hearings related to Kamrava's medical practices. Steinberg said he spoke with Kamrava and reviewed his records. He said he found the records justified Kamrava's aggressive treatment of Suleman because she had fertility problems and Kamrava had a low success rate at getting patients pregnant. Those aggressive treatments included implanting Suleman with six embryos in 2006, when she became pregnant with twins…

    But Steinberg, who has been practicing for 35 years and treats 200 to 480 patients annually, said many of his patients want to become pregnant with multiple babies in order to have large families. "In our eyes, those embryos belong to the patients and they have to make decisions about them," Steinberg said. Kamrava has said he counseled Suleman about reducing the number of fetuses and attempted to follow up with her after she became pregnant, but was unable to reach her. "Fetal reduction remains as our safety net with in vitro fertilization," Steinberg said. "We counsel them in advance about options and alternatives and ways to manage, and that's essentially what went on here."

I recall speaking several years ago at a bioethics conference in Banf.  A Canadian bioethicist complained that the government didn't pay for some aspects of IVF (I don't recall the specifics), and then noted that abortion was a necessary part of IVF, stating, "We turn triplets into twins."  In my comments, I said that I thought we should be honest about these things, not euphemistic. Thus, the triplets weren't really turned into twins: They remained triplets with one dead sibling.

It seems to me that Steinberg's testimony reflects a deprofessionalization of  medicine within the sector by turning fertility physicians into mere order takers.  Indeed, we now see that practitioners can't legally restrict their practices to infertile married couples in order not to be discriminatory.  More to the point, consider the crass view of embryos and fetuses these practices reflect, as basically fungible produce until they are born. After all, if we can make as many new human lives as we want, and destroy the "excess" with impunity, it means that none of then had intrinsic dignity nor were they considered unique beings. In such cases, survival primarily depends on where the fetus is being carried in the womb.

It doesn't have to be this way. Italy, for example, allows only 3 embryos to be made at a time for IVF and requires implantation of all successfully created.  That results in no selective reduction as a normal part of IVF pregnancy and no hundreds of thousands of excess embryos to be turned into mere instrumentalities, a mere resource ripe for the harvest.

So, mass creation, implantation, and abortion aren't necessary to IVF practice. Rather, they are expedient–on several levels.  Those are two different things. 

Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date: November 22, 2010

Nearly 25% of UK women in 20s have had an abortion: survey

     

The UK's Daily Mail this week finished a three-part series on the sexual habits of modern Britons with a feature linking casual sex and Britain's notoriously high rates of abortion among single women.

The Mail's survey showed that almost half of British women (48%) in their 20s have had a one-night stand. For women in their 30s and 40s, the percentage was 46 and 45 percent, respectively. Twenty-three per cent of women in their 20s have had at least one abortion, with 17 and 22 per cent for women in their 30s and 40s.

More than one-third of women surveyed in their 50s have had casual sexual encounters.

Anthony Ozimic, communications officer for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, told LifeSiteNews.com that the pro-abortion lobby is largely to blame for having created this sexual free-for-all that is damaging women.

"In every field of human activity or science," he said, "young people are taught that good habits help them to avoid bad consequences - except in the field of sex and relationships."

The Mail said, however, that few women expressed any regret at their behavior. One woman, 46-year-old Jayne Price Cambridge, was among the few who said she wished she had not slept around in her younger days. "Sadly, while at the time I thought I was just having fun, it is a part of my past I wish I could erase," she said.

Ashleigh Taylor, 25, shared her story with the Mail of a one-night-stand that she had before entering university, and the long term psychological consequences of the abortion that followed.

"For two days after the termination I lay in bed, shocked and exhausted — it was horrendous. I told Mum I had a very heavy period.

"Then I went back to my job and, three months later, started university. I coped by blanking it out. And, although I still believe I did the right thing, I'm paranoid about getting pregnant again and haven't had a successful relationship since the abortion."

Of her one-night encounter, Ashleigh said, "It was an isolated moment of madness and one I bitterly regret,' she says. 'But I couldn't have brought a baby into the world at that time.'

"The pro-abortion lobby is squarely to blame for the heart-breaking damage inflicted on countless numbers of young women through dysfunctional relations with men," said Ozimic about the Mail's findings. "It is the pro-abortion lobby that have sold young women the lie that sex can safely be separated from love, marriage and children.

"Women were at the forefront of the much-derided Victorian-era campaigns to reform public morals, precisely because women and their children, both born and unborn, were the main victims of irresponsible sexual behaviour."

The Mail quoted Dr. Andrew Fergusson of the Christian Medical Fellowship, saying, "We have reached a point where abortion is seen as just another method of contraception. For years, the effects have been swept under the carpet and evidence is only just beginning to emerge of real physical and psychological implications for some of the women who have abortions."

"There is also evidence of increased suicide attempts and episodes of depression among women who have had abortions."

For women in unexpected pregnancies, abortion is routinely offered by medical practitioners as the only solution. Amy Connolly, 28, a receptionist from South-West London, told the Mail that when she became "accidentally" pregnant, "Neither my GP nor anyone else suggested I might have the baby."

"I expected to feel relief after the termination. Instead, I felt grief and huge self-loathing. I'd ended a life."

Contact: Hilary White
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 19, 2010

Pope outlines dangers of reproductive health care concept

     
     Pope Benedict XV1

The Pope told a recent gathering that health care cannot "divorce itself from moral rules." As an example he cited how the concept of "reproductive health" does more to work against the care of human life than for it.

The Pope's remarks on health care were sent to Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski – president of the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care – on the event of the council's 25th international conference. The group's theme this year focused on the Holy Father's latest encyclical and was titled, "Towards egalitarian and human health care in the light of 'Caritas in veritate.'"

Archbishop Zimowski explained that members from over 60 countries gathered in Rome on Nov. 18 to address some of the major threats to the health of individuals around the globe.

Pope Benedict began his message to the archbishop by underlining the need for what he called "true distributive justice" that guarantees health care for everyone, based on "objective need."

The Pontiff also stressed the need to work with greater commitment "at all levels in order for the right to health care to be effective, facilitating access to primary medical assistance."

He continued to say, however, that "the world of health care cannot divorce itself from moral rules, which must govern it in order to ensure it does not become inhuman."

"Unfortunately, along with positive and encouraging results, opinions and schools of thought exist which harm this justice," he wrote. "I am thinking of questions such as those associated with so-called 'reproductive health,' the use of artificial procreation techniques that involve the destruction of embryos, and legalized euthanasia."

Pope Benedict said that the defense of life from conception until natural death "must be supported and proclaimed, even if this means going against the tide."

"For this reason," he added, "I would advocate the adoption of a model of development based on the centrality of the human person, on the promotion and sharing of the common good, on responsibility, on a realization of our need for a changed lifestyle, and on prudence, the virtue which tells us what needs to be done today in view of what might happen tomorrow."

"Only by looking at the world with the gaze of the Creator, which is a gaze of love, will humanity learn to live on earth in peace and justice, equitably sharing the planet and its resources for the good of each man and woman," he said. 

Source: CNA/EWTN News
Publish Date: November 21, 2010

Thomas More Society Rallies Illinois State's Attorneys in Support of Parental Notice

"Friend of the Court" Brief Submitted in 15-Year Battle for Parental Notice of Abortion

    

Today, the Thomas More Society took another step toward the long-overdue enforcement of Illinois' Parental Notice of Abortion Act. Society attorneys filed a "friend of the court" brief in the Illinois Appellate Court on behalf of a bipartisan group of Illinois State's Attorneys, urging the rejection of the American Civil Liberties Union's latest attack on the Act's constitutionality. The ACLU contends that the Act violates the privacy, due process and equal protection guarantees in the Illinois Constitution of 1970.

The parental notice law requires an abortion doctor to notify a parent, grandparent, stepparent living in the household or legal guardian before performing an abortion on a minor, unless the minor states in writing that she is a victim of abuse or secures a confidential "judicial bypass." Although the Illinois General Assembly enacted the current parental notice law on a bipartisan basis more than 15 years ago, the law has not gone into effect because of the ACLU's federal and state court challenges. Though upheld by a Cook County judge, the law's enforcement was still "stayed" by agreement of the ACLU and Attorney General, pending a final ruling on the ACLU's appeal. Illinois is the Midwest's only state without a parental notice or consent law in effect.

"We are thrilled that so many county prosecutors throughout Illinois support a parent's right to know before a minor is taken for an abortion," said Peter Breen, executive director and legal counsel at the Thomas More Society. "It's long past time for Illinois to protect its daughters from 'secret' abortions by affirming the right of parents to be involved in their children's medical decisions."

The amicus brief argues the following points:

    * The Illinois Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. On the contrary, the 1970 Constitutional Convention referred abortion issues to the legislature.
      
    * Numerous other federal and state courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have repeatedly upheld parental notice as constitutional.
      
    * The Illinois General Assembly properly found that parental consultation prior to an abortion promotes many legitimate state interests.

Thomas More Society special counsel Paul Benjamin Linton drafted the brief, which thirteen State's Attorneys from across Illinois have joined.

Contact: Stephanie Lewis
Source: Thomas More Society
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

U.S. Senate committee considering ratification of pro-abort UN treaty

    
     Rep. Chris Smith (R-New Jersey)

The Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Human Rights and Law is holding hearings today to consider whether the United States should ratify a radical UN treaty that could lead to mandated federal funding of abortion and the violation of the conscience rights of pro-life health professionals.

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), for which the subcommittee is considering approval, was signed by President Jimmy Carter in 1980 but has never garnered enough support in the Senate to be ratified into law.

In the announcement for the hearing, the subcommittee billed the treaty as protecting "fundamental human rights." However, pro-life Rep. Chris Smith (R-New Jersey) has pointed out that ratification of CEDAW would "subject (the U.S.) to the pro-abortion ideology" of a UN oversight committee that enforces the treaty.

Though CEDAW itself never directly mentions abortion, Article 12 has been used by the committee that oversees enforcement of the treaty to attempt to force abortion on numerous countries where it is outlawed.

Article 12 states, "States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of health care in order to ensure … access to health care services, including those related to family planning."

In a letter addressed to members of Congress, Smith explained that the CEDAW Committee interprets Article 12 to mean that all member countries must publicly fund elective abortions. Further, the Committee uses Article 12 to argue that pro-life physicians do not have the right to refuse participation in procedures that violate their consciences.

Rep. Smith pointed to several of many statements the Committee has made over the years displaying their overt pro-abortion ideology.

In 1998, the Committee wrote an opinion to Croatia in which it reprimanded the country for laws protecting pro-life doctors' rights saying: "It [the Committee] is also concerned about information regarding the refusal, by some hospitals, to provide abortions on the basis of conscientious objection of doctors. The Committee considers this to be an infringement of women's reproductive rights."

Further, the Committee also encouraged the small African country of Burkina Faso to federally subsidize abortion. In 2000, it told the country, "It [the Committee] also recommends that the State party should review its legislation on abortion and provide for coverage by social security."

Under the U.S. Constitution, a treaty that is signed by a president and ratified by the Senate would have the force of law. Smith points out that this means statements made by the CEDAW committee could be used by courts in the U.S. to strike down pro-life laws, including those requiring parental consent, protecting conscientious objectors, and banning partial birth abortion.

"Since legalized abortion is not sufficient to satisfy the extreme views of the CEDAW Committee, common sense laws in the United States and the fifty states will be under attack," says Smith.

"If CEDAW is ratified by the Senate, the United States (U.S.) will not escape their overreaching efforts to impose abortion on our country as an international obligation."

Contact: Matthew Anderson
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

National pro-life group urges more bills to stop late-term abortionists

    

In the wake of massive pro-life gains on November 2, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) is calling on State legislatures to mimic the Nebraska law that forced notorious late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart to shut down his Nebraska facility.

Carhart was forced to go elsewhere to continue his abortion business after the Nebraska legislature passed Legislative Bill 103 (L.B. 103), which bans abortions over 20 weeks post-conception, based on the fact that science has definitively proven a child is capable of feeling pain at that age.

Carhart, who relies on late-term abortions for the bulk of his business, announced last week that he is looking to set up new facilities in Iowa and Maryland, with a third in Indiana providing only early term abortions. He specifically mentioned that he had to leave because of the new law.

"This sort of forced us. We had to do it," Carhart told the Omaha World Herald. "In Iowa and Maryland, we can do the later cases."

NRLC's Director of State Legislation Mary Spaulding Balch, J.D. said today that other states should adopt similar laws to L.B. 103 to bring an end to late-term abortions. "Nebraska's groundbreaking law protecting pain-capable unborn children is an example for other states in the nation."

"LeRoy Carhart's hopscotching around the nation to find areas that allow abortion for any reason, at any time, underscores the need for other states to pass similar legislation to put Carhart and the hundreds of other abortionists who perform abortions late in pregnancy out of business."

NRLC said it is planning on holding a State Legislative Strategy Conference on December 7 to plan how best to capitalize on pro-life gains made in state legislative and gubernatorial elections. The conference will concentrate on a model bill based on Nebraska's L.B. 103.

Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

I had an Abortion and I Hate Myself

     

Note: Kelly Clinger, a performer and former backup singer for the pop star Britney Spears, had two abortions when she was in her early twenties. She tells her abortion stories in more depth here. This article, written this week, tells of her continuing struggles to come to terms with the aftermath of those abortions.

This week has been a complete hell.

Someone asked if I had heard about the doctor in Orlando who has been in a lot of trouble, and when I searched for news about it, I realized it was James Pendergraft, the doctor who did my abortions.  He has now had his medical license suspended for the fourth time, this time for performing late term abortions past the time when they are legal.

When I saw a picture of the clinic, I crumbled.  When I saw a picture of the doctor, I began weeping and I couldn't stop.

Every sight, every sound, every feeling came back.  I can still remember the poster on the ceiling.  It was the last thing I saw before I fell asleep from the anesthesia, and the first thing I saw when I woke up.

The article was full of stories about women like me … ones who have suffered for months, even years, because of incomplete abortions.

There was a woman who was awake and saw her baby being pulled from her as his body fell apart in the doctor's hands.  They had her frantic 911 call as she decided she wanted the baby to live after seeing that it actually is a baby, but no one at the clinic would help.  By the time the ambulance arrived, the baby was dead.

It's an uncomfortable subject … because if I call it a baby, if I admit that it was a boy or a girl who had 10 fingers and 10 toes and a life that was already mapped out by God, then I am calling myself a killer.  If I talk about it, blog about it, pray about it, then that makes it real.

But just when I think I've pushed the memories far enough behind that they won't catch up with me, there they are again.

The self-hatred is paralyzing.  It lurks closely and tells me that I don't deserve happiness.  The guilt is suffocating.  It has affected every relationship I have.  I can't trust or attempt intimacy.

I would take a bullet for my out-of-the-womb children.  Why didn't I protect the ones inside?

I have given up hope that the past could have been different.  I cannot change what I did.  Every bible study, counseling session, and prayer seems to just be a band-aid over a wound that will never heal.

So, I will be a voice for my children who only know heaven.  I will be a voice for the millions of women who live in regret, guilt, self-hatred and fear of being "found out".  I will be painfully honest about every feeling I have, and I will stand up for life even when it's unpopular and politically incorrect.  So, please spare me your pro-life/pro-choice arguments.  I know what I saw.  I know how I feel.  I will never be the same.  I will never get over it.

And if I don't take this pain and make it my purpose, I think it might kill me.

Click here for Kelly Clinger's blog. This article reprinted by LifeSiteNews.com with permission.

Contact: Kelly Clinger
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

The Feminist Treaty

    

The rapid-fire rate at which Democrats seem to be pandering to far-left constituencies has left social conservatives next to breathless.

Just this week, Democrats in the U.S. Senate swiftly lined up hearings on a number of objectionable executive and judicial nominees, as well as extreme domestic and international legislation – some that could even fly in the face of the U.S. Constitution.

One of the most troubling hearings was called by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who resurrected the U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).  The move is seen as attempt to move the treaty – for the first time – to the Senate floor for a vote.

FULL-COURT (FEMINIST) PRESS

CEDAW was first introduced in 1979 at the United Nations. To date, 186 of 193 nations have ratified the treaty. The holdouts are: The U.S., Iran, Quatar, Somalia, Sudan and four Asian Pacific or Central Asian countries.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – who coined the phrase in the 1990′s: "Human rights are women's rights, and women's rights are human rights" – is one of the staunchest proponents of seeing this feminist treaty passed.

To that end, the Obama administration became the first one since 1980 to submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification. Previous administrations have steadfastly resisted the liberal push – and for good reason, according to social conservatives.

SEEING THROUGH CEDAW

Conservative groups – including CitizenLink – have long opposed this treaty and are alarmed at the brazenness of the administration and Senate Democrats to push this legislation during the lame-duck session.

Ashley Horne, federal issues analyst for CitizenLink, said that despite a few laudable declarations used to "dress up" the treaty, the underlying intent is both shrewd and destructive to national sovereignty, the institution of marriage, family formation and religious freedom.

"One of the core – and evil – elements of this treaty is to systematically remove any gender distinction in all aspects of society." Horne said. "This would not only impact marriage, child-rearing, and religious freedom, but also the laws governing these foundational institutions."

Horne warned that, if fully implemented, CEDAW would be the greatest foreign intrusion ever into the government and military relations and policies, as well as that of every person, business and community.

She added that there are basically 10 main reasons that every Christian – every American –should be aware of:

Its foundational principle is erroneous

   1. It violates the U.N. Charter
   2. It violates the U.S. Constitution
   3. It imposes pressure illegally on the U.S. to implement quota systems for elections and government offices
   4. It would be more harmful to women than beneficial
   5. It would harm children
   6. It would attack and destroy healthy roles for men and women
   7. It would harm marriage, families and religious freedoms
   8. It would be used to promote abortion
   9. It could be used to pressure the U.S. to legalize prostitution

Click here to read full explanations

The Heritage Foundation maintains the U.S. can do better.

    "Unfortunately, much of the agenda and activities that comprise the (treaty) is, at best, a distraction from the real threats to women's human rights and, at worst, antithetical to the values and needs of women worldwide.

    "To better elevate the status of women and girls, especially in places where they are most vulnerable, the U.S. should reject much of the (CEDAW) agenda and instead reinvigorate its efforts to promote and defend the universally accepted human rights of women and men around the world."

Contact: Catherine Snow
Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

"Stunning Upset" Walsh Wins!

    
    
     Joe Walsh and his wife Helene Walsh

Former congresswomen Melissa Bean called Joe Walsh to concede! 

Sean Hannity announced it on air pm Tuesday!  

We have a new, Pro-life congressmen after six years.

Lake County Right to Life is pleased to announce the election of Joe Walsh as the 8th Congressional District Representative.
 
The election results were released after all of the absentee and provisional ballots were counted. This election is a victory for the pro-life movement.  Representative-elect Walsh had a 100% pro-life candidate survey and was endorsed by Lake County Life PAC, the Pro-Life Victory PAC of McHenry County and Illinois Federation for Right to Life PAC .  
 
The Daily Herald is reporting that "With all ballots finally counted...  Republican Joe Walsh appears to have pulled a stunning upset over three-term Democratic incumbent Melissa Bean". His 291 vote lead could be challenged by Congresswoman Bean, "whose only hopes now may lie in a possible recount".

The Herald also reported that "Walsh currently is attending a weeklong orientation program in Washington, D.C. for newly elected congressmen".
 
Joe Walsh will join a majority in the House of Representatives who will vote to protect life.  An added bonus will be that our members will have a an open door and a sympathetic ear when they contact their Congressional Representative to express their concerns about the issues most important to them.

Lake County Right to Life is looking forward to a close working relationship with Representative-elect Walsh.

Source: Lake County Right to Life
Publish Date: November 16, 2010

Pro-abort Pelosi re-elected as head of House Dems; pro-life Boehner to lead GOP

    
     Representative John Boehner (R)

House Republicans and Democrats chose their respective leaders today, electing to renew a rivalry between Rep. John Boehner and Rep. Nancy Pelosi that became famous during the debate over health care. Boehner and Pelosi hold drastically different views, particularly on issues of life and family.

Boehner, who acted as Minority Leader for the Republicans in the previous Congress, was unanimously chosen by the House GOP conference to be the next Speaker, a position for which he ran unopposed. In a strange coincidence, it was noted that Boehner was elected the 61st Speaker of the House on his 61st birthday.

As leader of the Republicans, Boehner was a major force in the overwhelming victories in the midterm elections. He was also one of the representatives behind the "Pledge to America," a document that outlined the GOP's agenda for the upcoming years and that included a section pledging to eliminate federal funding of abortion. The preamble of the "Pledge" stated, "We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values."

Rep. Boehner has a long pro-life history. He has a 0% pro-choice voting record from the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL). Conversely, he has a 100% pro-life voting record from the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).

On Monday, Boehner reaffirmed his commitment to overturning Obamacare and protecting the rights of children, at a reception put on by the Susan B. Anthony List and Students for Life of America for new members of the House.
On the other side of the aisle, Nancy Pelosi was elected by Democrats to be their Minority Leader when the 112th Congress convenes. Pelosi has been seen as a lightening rod for controversy since the mid-term elections, as many have blamed her for the overwhelming losses Democrats suffer.

In the last few days, pro-life Rep. Heath Shuler challenged Pelosi for the leadership position. Pelosi won in the end, though, with a vote of 150-43 in her favor. However, the results of the closed-door election reveal that there is a significant block of Democrats unhappy with her leadership.

Pelosi, who identifies herself as Catholic despite her views on abortion, was the continual target of Republican ads during the mid-term campaigns. Defeated Florida Rep. Allen Boyd called Pelosi the "face of our defeat."

In contrast to her successor Boehner, Pelosi is a staunch abortion advocate. She scores a 100% pro-choice rating from NARAL and is publicly backed by Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, who cites Pelosi's support for abortion funding in the health care bill as the reason she needs to remain Democratic leader.

Richards recently wrote that, "Nancy Pelosi understands women's health issues in a deeply personal way -- and when she stands for women, it matters…Women need her now more than ever to protect their gains from those who are anxious to roll back health care and undermine their rights under the law."

Both Boehner and Pelosi will be officially selected for their positions of leadership when the 112th congress convenes in January.

Contact: Matthew Anderson
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 17, 2010

Non-discrimination treaty denies the obvious

    
     CEDAW: Convention on the Elimination of
     All Forms of Discrimination against Women

A Senate subcommittee will hold a hearing today on a U.N. treaty that pro-family groups claim is a very dangerous.

The hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on human rights and law concerns the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which is an international "bill of rights" for women. Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America (CWA), tells OneNewsNow that though it appears the treaty is meant to promote women's rights, the "anti-constitutional," "anti-woman" contract was actually crafted in the 1970s by what she calls "extreme feminists."

"This treaty would require countries to deny the obvious -- that men and women are different -- and it covers every aspect of life: government, schools, business [and] even family life [comes] under authority of this treaty," she explains.

 The Convention prides itself as the only human rights agreement that affirms the reproductive rights of women and "targets culture and tradition as influential forces shaping gender roles and family relations." But Wright thinks some senators apparently missed the message voters sent them in the midterm elections.

 "It just screams that these senators are more interested in appeasing the liberal, radical elitists who think that the United States is immoral and needs to come under the patriarchal views of the radicals at the United Nations," she laments.

 The CWA president decides this is a good example of why the public should stay informed and show its opposition to the treaty because some senators are trying to sneak this hearing through during the lame-duck session while few people are paying attention.

Contact: Bill Bumpas
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

'Bella' saving the unborn

   
    Bella, the movie

A pro-life movie that was released three years ago has gained international attention and awards and is still saving lives of unborn babies.
 
Jason Jones, co-executive producer of Bella, the movie used by pregnancy centers as a counseling tool, launched the Bella HERO initiative as part of his non-profit, the Human rights Education and Relief Organization (HERO).

 "I think I was inspired by the Holy Spirit for this program," he shares. "I wanted to get Bella in the hands of as many young, pregnant women as I could, so we came up with the idea of donating Bella DVDs to pregnancy centers. We've given out over 10,000 DVDs."

 So far, 203 women have credited the movie with their decision to turn against abortion and give their unborn babies life. In fact, three reported changing their plans in one day. A number of pregnancy centers already distribute the video to their abortion-minded clients, but Jones hopes to keep using Bella to spread the pro-life message.

 "Our website is BellaHero.com, and if you're a pregnancy center, you just go up there and sign up, and we'll send you a kit," he explains. "We work with over 500 centers right now. We'll send you a free start-up kit and the Bella DVDs. If you ever need Bella DVDs for your pregnancy center, shoot us an e-mail or contact us through our website," the pro-lifer urges.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

Michigan bills seek dignified burial for abortion victims

    
      Right to Life Michigan

A new set of bills that has cleared the Michigan Senate would protect the remains of aborted babies if passed into law. The proposed legislation comes in response to the revelation in late October that abortion clinics in Delta Township and Saginaw had been illegally dumping fetal remains and medical records into a dumpster.

The new package of bills passed the Senate on November 10 with a vote of 30-8. Right to Life of Michigan (RLM) says that they have assurances from sponsors of the bill that the issue will be taken up in the House at the beginning of the next legislative session in January.

The bills aim to give greater dignity to the remains of unborn children killed in abortion. According to Right to Life Michigan, one bill (H.B. 5928) would change the Michigan health code "so that fetal remains will no longer be classified as 'products of conception,' along with the placenta, umbilical cord, and other uterine contents."

Two other bills (S.B. 1563 and H.B. 5929) would directly legislate the methods hospitals and abortion clinics use to dispose of fetal remains. RLM says that these two bills would "require hospitals and abortion facilities to bury or cremate any fetus or part of a fetus that has recognizable anatomical parts or has completed at least 8 weeks gestation."

Earlier this year 17 aborted babies were found in a dumpster used by the Women's Choice clinic in Delta Township. The remains were discovered by pro-lifer Chris Veneklase, who contacted the group Citizens for a Pro-Life Society (CPLS). Upon further investigation, Dr. Monica Miller of CPLS and Veneklase took the case to Eaton and Saginaw County Sheriffs.

After a 7-month investigation, the Sheriffs departments determined that the Women's Choice clinic in Delta Township and another in Saginaw were dumping fetal remains and patient records in dumpsters. However, the Sheriffs department was unable to file charges since abortion clinics are allowed to dispose of fetal remains in dumpsters under certain conditions. The Sheriffs also found that the clinics were improperly incorporated, and thus could not face prosecution for the dumping of patient records.

A funeral mass will be held for the 17 unborn babies at 11 am on November 20 in St. Mary's Cathedral. The mass will be celebrated by Bishop Earl Boyea of the Diocese of Lansing. A burial is scheduled to follow at St. Joseph's Cemetary in Lansing.

Contact: Matthew Anderson
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 17, 2010

Rotary Urged to Withdraw Invitation to Speaker from Planned Parenthood

    
     Rotary Club International

The Planned Parenthood watchdog organization Life Decisions International has urged Rotary Club of Walla Walla (RCWW) to cancel a planned event titled, "Serving Our Community With Vital Health Care -- Planned Parenthood," which is scheduled for February 10, 2011. The speaker for the event will be Anna Franks, chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho.

"We are not surprised that a Rotary Club is involved with Planned Parenthood," said Kenneth C. Garvey, director of communications for Life Decisions International. "But we continue to be appalled by the increasingly close relationship between the two pro-population-control groups."

In 2007, Life Decisions International published a report showing that Rotary International funds pro-abortion UNICEF, allows its chapters to fund abortion-committing Planned Parenthood, and works closely with the rabidly pro-abortion and pro-population-control UNFPA. Moreover Rotary's intense fascination with and promotion of population control from within its own organization through the Rotarian Fellowship for Population & Development is exposed. Titled, "Rotary's Dance With Death: Population Control Agenda And Ties To Pro-Abortion Groups Eclipse Good Works," the report specifically refutes the disingenuous statements made by Rotary officials in their absurd attempts to make people believe Rotary is not involved in such controversial and highly distressing activities.

The report concludes with these words: "It is impossible for any person with an intact conscience to turn a blind eye to Rotary's ungodly associations and population control works. One may offer up any excuse or justification he or she desires, but there is no way that anyone who truly cares about human life, born and preborn, could be associated with Rotary International. No way whatsoever."

"Rotary has been in bed with Planned Parenthood on many occasions," Garvey said. "We suggest that Rotary protect itself from further denunciation by canceling the event scheduled for February 2011."

RCWW is headed by Pedrito Maynard-Reid, who holds a doctorate in theology. Maynard-Reid once studied at Fuller Theological Seminary. The Seminary's "Purpose and Mission Beyond the Mission" states, "We aim to participate in other concerns that rightly evoke the attention of many Christians [including] the cavalier attitude toward human life which has encouraged the frightening rise in abortions."

Maynard-Reid is currently a professor of biblical studies at Walla Walla University (WWU), which is associated with the Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDAC). Its official policy on abortion makes it clear that the SDAC is not pro-life: "The Church does not serve as conscience for individuals; however, it should provide moral guidance. Abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, or convenience are not condoned. Women, at times however, may face exceptional circumstances that present serious moral or medical dilemmas, such as significant threats to the pregnant woman's life, serious jeopardy to her health, severe congenital defects carefully diagnosed in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. The final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or not should be made by the pregnant woman after appropriate consultation. She should be aided in her decision by accurate information, biblical principles, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, these decisions are best made within the context of healthy family relationships. Therefore, any attempts to coerce women either to remain pregnant or to terminate pregnancy should be rejected as infringements of personal freedom."

Life Decisions International urges pro-life advocates, especially those who are, for now, Rotarians, to contact RCWW and strongly urge that the event be canceled. It is advisable that all pro-life people, particularly those who intend to contact RCWW, read the aforementioned report.

Contact: Dr. Pedrito Maynard-Reid, President, Rotary Club of Walla Walla, P.O. Box 418, Walla Walla, WA 99362; Phone: (509) 529-0135.

Please send a copy to Mr. David W. Hull, President-Elect, at the same address.

Source: Life Decisions International
Publish Date: November 18, 2010

Shumlin working to legalize assisted suicide

    
     Vermont Governor-elect Peter Shumlin (D)

Doctor assisted suicideFollowing the campaign promise of Governor-elect Peter Shumlin (D), Vermont is again a target for passage of legislation that would legalize doctor-assisted suicide.
 
Mary Hahn Beerworth of the Vermont Right to Life Committee recalls Shumlin's past pro-euthanasia speeches in which he expressed his belief that the government should not come between patients and their doctors. So she expects Shumlin to deliver on his pledge.

"He's been quoted a number of occasions as saying that he will, in fact, get that done, get it into law in the first part of 2011," Beerworth notes. "He has a terrible attitude toward vulnerable people and has kind of got a sneering sort of attitude toward those who are no longer 'productive,' as he calls it."

Mary Hahn Beerworth (Vermont Right to Life Committee)She thinks Vermont residents have every reason to believe the situation in the state is dire as she suspects there are enough votes in the House and Senate to pass Shumlin's legislation and have it on the governor's desk by March. But the pro-lifer assures that will not happen without a fight, even though some members are unconvinced that people will be at risk.

"They're clearly aware that people who do not want to die will die, and they seem to be immune from that kind of compassionate plea for those who are in a weak state, who are susceptible to be bullied by relatives or friends into suicide," Beerworth laments. "It falls on deaf ears for those who are intent on having this option."

The battle against assisted suicide in Vermont will begin when the legislature is gaveled into session in January.

Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 15, 2010

All charges dropped against pro-life pastor

    

The Appellate Division of the Alameda Superior Court has dismissed all criminal charges against Oakland pro-life witness Pastor Walter Hoye.

Hoye was arrested in May of 2008, charged, found guilty and imprisoned for peacefully counseling and picketing at a local abortion clinic.

He was charged under a 2008 City of Oakland bubble zone ordinance, which prohibits pro-life protesters outside abortion facilities from standing within 8 feet of women seeking abortions. His lawyers claimed the bubble zone ordinance was enacted for the sole purpose of keeping Hoye away from the Oakland abortuary and was an infringement on his constitutional right of free speech.

In January 2009, Hoye was found guilty of two counts of unlawfully approaching women entering an abortion facility, a misdemeanor enshrined in city law the previous spring.

At the sentencing hearing, Judge Stuart Hing of the Alameda Superior Court stated that would not impose any fine or jail time on Rev. Hoye if he would agree to stay away from the abortion facility. Rev. Hoye refused these terms.

Judge Hing then imposed a 30-day jail sentence, a $1130 fine, and also ordered him to stay one hundred yards away from the abortion facility for three years.

In August 2009, an appeal by Hoye to federal court failed when U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer ruled that Oakland's bubble zone ordinance was constitutional.  He said the law protects access to health care, while also allowing protesters to express their opinion.

At the time, one of Hoye's lawyers, Michael Millen of the Life Legal Defense Foundation (LLDF), announced his intention to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit appellate court, and commented on Judge Breyer's decision.

"It is now illegal to stand still on the sidewalk and extend your arm to hand out a piece of literature," he said.  "I don't think the Ninth Circuit is going to buy it."

"Mark this day down," he continued. "On this day, a federal court judge ruled that it is constitutional to put someone in jail for a year for holding out a hand with a leaflet."

Three months ago, the appellate court overturned Pastor Hoye's criminal conviction for violating Oakland's law restricting sidewalk counseling. In its published verdict, the appellate court agreed with Hoye's attorneys that the trial court had erred, and granted Hoye a new trial.

The case was remitted back to the trial court on September 24. However, in the appellate court's decision, Hoye was to have been brought to trial within thirty days of that date. When the time lapsed, attorney Millen asked the court to dismiss the case.

The Alameda County District Attorney's Office agreed with Millen's evaluation of the case and the court promptly ordered all charges against Hoye dismissed.

"We are pleased that Pastor Hoye is no longer under threat of further prosecution on these charges," said Katie Short, Legal Director of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, in a press release.

Short cautioned, however, that, "This is only one side of the battle. We now await the Ninth Circuit's decision on our constitutional challenge to the ordinance under which he was prosecuted."

A decision in the federal case is expected in the next few months.

Rev. Hoye told reporters that he is overjoyed at the decision and is looking forward to resuming his life-saving sidewalk witness at the Oakland abortuary.

Contact: Thaddeus M. Baklinski
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 16, 2010

Congressman Drops Election Complaint Against Pro-Life Group

     

The Ohio Elections Commission announced today that defeated U.S. Rep. Steve Driehaus, D-Ohio, withdrew his election complaint against the Susan B. Anthony (SBA List) – a national, pro-life advocacy organization that seeks to affect public policy.

Driehaus claimed that SBA List falsely accused him of voting for taxpayer funding of abortion when he cast his vote for President Obama's health care law.

The three-member commission panel said it found probable cause to investigate the charges and scheduled a Dec. 2 hearing. With Driehaus' withdrawal, the case likely will be dismissed.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president and CEO of SBA List, said that today's announcement is a bittersweet victory.

"Despite his efforts, Rep. Driehaus could not avoid facing the consequences of his health care vote at the ballot box," she said.  "On Election Day, Driehaus' constituents sent a clear message by siding with the SBA List and voting him out of office."

Dannenfelser added that they will continue to pursue a federal lawsuit challenging the state's law.

"We remain gravely concerned," she said, "that the statute allowing Rep. Driehaus to launch his complaint … can be used to silence free speech again."

Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: November 16, 2010

No Charges for Unlicensed Abortionist as ND Prosecutors Ignore Laws

     

State's Attorney Birch Burdick has announced that he will not file criminal charges against an abortionist Lori Lynn Thorndike, who committed illegal abortions at the Red River Women's Clinic in Fargo, North Dakota, while her medical license was lapsed.
 
Brudick used abortion clinic rhetoric word for word by describing Thorndike's licensing issues as "an administrative oversight" and noted that she had active medical licenses in South Dakota and Colorado at the time she was doing abortions on a lapsed license in North Dakota.
 
"North Dakota laws are very explicit.  It is a Class B Felony to commit abortions in that state without a valid North Dakota medical license. Burdick has decided all on his own that the laws of North Dakota that were enacted for the protection of vulnerable women should not be enforced," said Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullenger.
 
Sullenger also received a letter today from the North Dakota Board of Medical Examiners Executive Secretary Duane Houdek, dated November 9, 2010, informing her, "At this point we are soliciting additional information regarding the complaint against Dr. Thorndike. All of this information will be forwarded to the members of one of the Board's investigative panels who will decide whether formal proceedings should be brought against this physician."
 
The letter went on to say that the matter would be discussed at a meeting of the Board scheduled for November 18, 2010. However, the day after the letter was written, the Board unilaterally decided to reinstate Thorndike's license without a hearing of the Board, and has since equivocated on whether or not the matter will be brought up at the referenced meetings.
 
"There is obviously some kind of monkey business at work in North Dakota. In this case, no one is saying that Thorndike did not break the law. They simply refuse to enforce the laws that were broken," said Sullenger.

"When authorities give abortion abuses a wink and a nod, it only serves to reinforce the dangerous notion that is prevalent among abortionists that they are above the law," said Sullenger. "Allowing abortionists to break the law without consequences creates an atmosphere that opens the door to further abuses that eventually cost women their health and sometimes their lives. Burdick and Houdek will have a lot to answer for when - not if - their lack of good judgment comes back to haunt the women of North Dakota."

Contact: Troy Newman
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: November 17, 2010

Closure of Two More Abortion Clinics Continues National Trend

Surgical abortion clinics continue to close at a rate of nearly two per month

     

Two notorious abortion mills have closed or are scheduled to close, contributing to the national trend of clinic closures first documented by Operation Rescue last year in "Project Daniel 5:25."

In Yakima, Washington, the Cedar Women's Clinic, which was the first abortion clinic to open in that city 31 years ago, closed Monday due to a dramatic decrease in the demand for abortions. According to statistics kept by the state, the abortion rate for women ages 15 to 44 dropped from 18 per 1,000 in 2008 to 16.7 per 1,000 in 2009. One abortion clinic remains in Yakima.

     

In Michigan, Womancare of Downriver in Southgate owned by the troubled owner, abortionist Alberto Hodari, is currently in escrow to a physician whose practice does not include abortions. Once escrow closes, so will the abortion clinic.

One woman, Jennifer McCoy, is particularly relieved that Hodari's Southgate abortion clinic has been tentatively sold. That was where she says Hodari forced an abortion on her when she was 16-years old. "That clinic will never do another abortion again," she said.

All of Hodari's six Detroit area abortion clinics were put up for sale last year. Hodari appeared to be liquidating his assets so he could leave the country after repeated complaints, fines, and lawsuits have recently overwhelmed him.

The closures continue a national trend of decreasing numbers of abortion clinics. Operation Rescue conducted extensive research and documented that over two-thirds of America's abortion clinics have closed since 1991, when there were over 2,100 clinics nationwide.

"When we released our 'Project Daniel 5:25' listing of all remaining surgical abortion clinics in the United States last December, there were 713. Today, counting the Southgate mill, which will soon close, there are only 694," said Operation Rescue spokesperson Cheryl Sullenger. "That great news for women and their pre-born babies."

Twenty abortion clinics have closed in the past 11 months at a rate of nearly 2 per month.

Operation Rescue maintains the most accurate listing of abortion clinics available on its Project Daniel 5:25 page. The project was named after the Biblical story of Daniel, who was able to read the handwriting on the wall and predict the fall of a wicked kingdom.

As a new feature, Operation Rescue has added names of some abortionists to the clinic list with links to documentation of their legal problems and abortion abuses.

"Government funding continues to artificially prop up a failing abortion industry. Without tax-funding, more of these clinics would fold," said Sullenger. "Until we can encode legal protections for the pre-born, we must work to expose and defund the abortion industry. Closing clinics is a proven way to reduce abortions and save lives."

Contact: Troy Newman
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: November 17, 2010

USCCB again urges: no contraception, sterilization mandates in health care

     

Addressing the Institute of Medicine's Committee on Preventive Services for Women on November 16, Deirdre McQuade, spokeswoman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, urged that contraception and sterilization be excluded from the list of "preventive services" that insurance companies will be compelled to provide free of charge, without copayments, under the health care legislation passed in March.

While the Obama administration has not included contraception and sterilization in the list of preventive services in its "Interim Final Rules," Planned Parenthood is lobbying for their inclusion.

"The Conference has a particular concern that contraceptives and sterilization not be mandated as 'preventive' services," said McQuade. "To prevent pregnancy is not to prevent a disease—indeed, contraception and sterilization pose their own unique and serious health risks to women and adolescents. In addition, contraceptives and sterilization are morally problematic for many stakeholders, including religiously-affiliated health care providers and insurers."

"Use of prescription contraception actually increases a woman's risk of developing some of the very conditions that the 'preventive services' listed in the Interim Final Rules are designed to prevent, such as stroke, heart attacks and blood clots (especially for women who also smoke), so a policy mandating contraceptive services as 'preventive services' would be in contradiction with itself," she continued, adding:

Currently, such employers and insurance issuers [who object to contraception and sterilization] are completely free under federal law to purchase and offer health coverage that excludes these procedures. They would lose this freedom of conscience under a mandate for all plans to offer contraception and sterilization coverage. 

Thus the Administration's promise that Americans who like their current coverage will be able to keep it under health care reform would become a hollow pledge.

Source: CWNews.com
Publish Date: November 17, 2010

Striking down Prop. 8 would have 'Roe v. Wade' impact, Archbishop Kurtz says

     

If the hotly debated Proposition 8 in California is overturned by the judicial system, the cultural impact of defeating the traditional marriage initiative will be "akin to Roe v. Wade," said Archbishop Joseph Kurtz at the ongoing fall bishops' meeting.

Archbishop Kurtz, who is the Chairman of the U.S. bishops' Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage and Family Life, made his comments Nov. 15 at the bishops' three-day fall assembly in Baltimore, Maryland.

During his remarks, the archbishop asserted that if Prop. 8 – which is expected to reach the Supreme Court – is struck down, "the decision will have a moral, legal and cultural impact" similar to the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion.

"In our nation we find ourselves at a moment of great opportunity but also great consequence," he said.

"The urgency of our priority to promote, protect and strengthen marriage has not abated," he said, noting that over the last year, attempts to redefine marriage have moved from the state level to the federal level.

"So, in a sense, today is like 1970 for marriage," he said. "If, in 1970, you knew that Roe v. Wade were coming in two or three years, what would you have done differently?"

"And so now, the vital question that stands before all of us in this country is: What will we do for marriage?"

Archbishop Kurtz then recalled the Pope's visit to the U.S. in 2008, where the Pontiff "summoned us to remember our duty as bishops" and to "boldly" proclaim and uphold the institution of marriage – defined as between one man and one woman.

The Ad Hoc committee, he noted, "seeks to assist this proclamation."

Briefly updating the bishops on the recent work of the committee in conjunction with Knights of Columbus, the archbishop discussed the launching of their "Marriage: Unique for a reason" instructional campaign, including video and booklets.

A short video from the next series on the topic of marriage's benefits for children called "Made for Life" was also screened at the conference.

"Brothers," he told his fellow bishops, "our proclamation makes a difference. Even recent polling indicates this difference, as those who go to church every Sunday are more likely to support the true meaning of marriage."

"And this support has remained steady, despite the challenges of our culture," he emphasized.

Source: CNA/EWTN News
Publish Date: November 16, 2010

Don Berwick's Death Panel?

    

Are Medicare director Don Berwick and the Obama administration delaying or denying patients access to medical innovations? That's a question the Senate's Finance Committee should ask Berwick, who heads up the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), when he testifies November 17.

The timing couldn't be better. Medicare won't pay for Provenge, the first cancer vaccine, since it was approved in April. It's waiting for the Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee (MEDCAC) -- also meeting on the 17th -- to decide whether the Food and Drug Administration, the National Cancer Institute, and cancer experts are right in supporting Provenge use for prostate cancer patients.

MEDCAC was established in 1998 so CMS could ask leading scientists and doctors to recommend what information should be collected to determine the best use of new technologies. But recently MEDCAC has -- under CMS direction -- begun evaluating whether innovations are cost-effective.

In November 2008 Medicare bureaucrats asked MEDCAC: At current Medicare prices, how confident are you that CTC has a similar ratio of cost per LYS (Life Years Saved) as optical colonoscopy? In 2009 CMS asked MEDCAC: What are the desirable measures of the cost-effectiveness of screening genetic tests for the prevention or early detection of illness or disability? By 2010 CMS was simply asking MEDCAC whether CMS should cover new technologies unless there was evidence of its cost and clinical effectiveness from long and expensive studies. As one speaker at a MEDCAC hearing about genetic tests noted, "if clinical outcomes as defined… become[] a requirement for reimbursement, it will reduce investment in new genetic tests and the market introduction of these tests, and ultimately their use. "

That's the goal. But given Provenge's high profile, asking about its cost-effectiveness would be controversial. Since the one-time treatment runs about $90,000, CMS thought it could ask if Provenge was effective without mentioning cost. Hence, Dr. Louis Jacques, the director of the Coverage and Analysis Group at Medicare, told Forbes: "We've been getting questions from people," says Jacques. "'Well, what's up with Provenge? Is it a drug? Is it a biologic? Is it something else? Does it really work? It has been interesting to look at the evidence around it."

Does it really work?!

Maybe Dr. Jacques didn't get the memo about the FDA approving Provenge. The FDA said Provenge "substantially improved survival to patients with a fatal disease. The risks… are minor relative to the benefit of improved survival." Or perhaps he didn't see the May 6 National Cancer Institute statement asserting: "The field of cancer immunotherapy received an important boost last week with the FDA's approval" of Provenge. On May 29 the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Drugs & Biologics Compendium added Provenge to its list of standard therapies. On June 15 Aetna said it would cover Provenge.

Federal law requires that CMS cover any cancer drug approved by the FDA or NCCN compendium therapy. Instead, on June 30, an anonymous individual requested that CMS hold a MEDCAD hearing on Provenge before it covered the drug. CMS immediately accepted the query from the secretive party. Perhaps the Finance Committee can find out who that was.

MEDCAC will render its decision based on a just released evaluation of the FDA data conducted by the Agency for Health Research and Quality (AHRQ). AHRQ tried to pretend it wasn't second-guessing the FDA and the NIH. In October, the report name was changed on AHRQ's website from "The Efficacy and Safety of Sipuleucel T" (Provenge) to "The Outcomes of Sipuleucel T." The reviewers determined the FDA data used to approve Provenge was "adequate" but not entirely convincing. You might wonder: What expertise in prostate cancer did the authors use to draw to that conclusion? The answer is none unless you count nursing, a master's degree in statistics, or a PhD in sociology. Apparently CMS believes AHRQ's collective wisdom towers over the oncology expertise of the FDA, NCI, and NCCN.

The AHRQ report understates the impact of Provenge on survival. First, it begrudges the fact that many patients receiving chemotherapy after taking Provenge live longer. It focuses on the median survival benefit of 4.5 months (which tells you the midpoint of patient survival but not how many patients lived longer and for how long). Then it raises doubts about safety. And finally the study glosses over the finding that terminal prostate cancer patients who received Provenge were 40 percent more likely to be alive in three years than those who did not receive it. The AHRQ report is ideology masquerading as medical facts. The routine and expanding using of AHRQ to guide life or death decisions undermines the legitimacy of real science.

MEDCAC meets this week but CMS can take months to decide. This callous and possibly illegal process reflects Berwick's stated belief that only a centralized entity should decide what's best for us. People with prostate cancer have died and will die waiting. If that's not a death panel, I don't know what is.

Contact: Robert M. Goldberg
Source: The American Spectator
Publish Date: November 16, 2010

Feminist Majority Foundation to offer free condom placement

Well, that's all they have left to do.

    

The Feminist Majority Foundation released a remarkably indicting statement today.

Entitled, "Unintended pregnancies linked to ineffective contraception use," it admits "many" baby-averse but sexually active females don't use the contraceptives they know they should or are sloppy or lazy about them. Well, that's not quite how FMF put it…

    A recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey of over 7,000 women revealed that many women, despite their desire to avoid pregnancy, fail to use birth control or do so improperly and ineffectively. The CDC reports that approximately 50% of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended.

    Though oral contraception is 92-99% effective when used correctly, many women who rely on this method fail to take the pill consistently – at the same time everyday. Similarly, condoms are reported to be about have a 95% effectiveness rate, but their actual effectiveness is about 85% due to frequent improper usage.

FMF links to a CDC report that indicates by "many" it actually meant "darn near all":

    In the US, almost half of all pregnancies are unintended…. [M]ost women of reproductive age use birth control. In 2002, 98% of women who had ever had sexual intercourse had used at least one method of birth control. However, 7.4% of women who were currently at risk of unintended pregnancy were not using a contraceptive method.

If half of all pregnancies are accidents, but 98% of sexually active females not only know about but have demonstrated they can use contraceptives, then only 2% of unintended pregnancies are of mothers who are completely ignorant about contraception. These would have to include young girls who are victims of rape and incest.

What, unintended pregnancies are not entirely the fault of abstinence education, or mostly, or even somewhat? Rather, they're predominantly the fault of usually unmarried (83%)  young women (18-29) who have been taught how to be sexually active but lack the maturity or wherewithal to protect themselves?

The CDC adds:

    Since 2000, several new methods of birth control have become available in the US, including the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, the hormonal contraceptive patch, the hormonal contraceptive ring, the hormonal implant, a 91-day regimen of oral contraceptives, two new barrier methods, and a new form of female sterilization.

So there is a wide array of contraceptive options available, something for everyone.

One other point. Guttmacher states "about half" of abortions are repeats. So its post-abortive comprehensive sex ed is also a pathetic failure – at least 50%, not counting mothers becoming accidentally pregnant again who decide against an abortion redo.

Now Planned Parenthood is spearheading a drive for a government panel to declare contraceptives "preventive" medicine, so they'll be provided free as part of Obamacare?

Due to the dismal failure of the 1960s contraceptive mentality social experiment, part of the cost of this "preventive" care will have to be employing workers to physically dispense the Pill every day in little cups woman to woman or stand by for condom placement.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: JillStanek.com
Publish Date: November 16, 2010