July 3, 2020

Supreme Court Protects Federal Government's Right to Deny Funding to International Orgs Based on Policy

Supreme Court of the United States
Photo Credi: Jeff Kubina / Flickr
On June 29, the Supreme Court ruled in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc that the United States government has the right to deny funding to international organizations that refuse to comply with policy guidelines. This has important implications for the federal government's right to stop providing funds to foreign organizations that support abortion.

Justices Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch ruled in favor of the United States foreign aid agency USAID, which had one of its rules challenged by foreign organizations who argued their freedom of speech was being violated. The USAID policy in question required humanitarian organizations to have policies opposing prostitution and sex trafficking to receive US funding to help combat HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. When passing foreign aid legislation to fight these diseases, US congressmen understood that prostitution and sex trafficking had a negative impact on their spread, so they put this requirement in place to make sure the funds were being used more efficiently.

The SCOTUS decision declared that “as a matter of American constitutional law […] foreign citizens outside U.S. territory do not possess rights under the U.S. Constitution.” In other words, foreign organizations cannot claim that the US government is infringing upon their right to freedom of speech because the US constitution only provides rights to Americans.

This has important implications for the pro-life movement. The Mexico City Policy, which prevents US funding from going to pro-abortion groups overseas, is now supported by judicial precedent in addition to the Constitution and common sense.

AP Investigation Shows "Demographic Genocide" of Chinese Muslims Involving Forced Abortion

Chinese President Xi Jinping
Photo Credit: Janne Wittoeck / Flickr
In an investigative article released on June 28, the Associated Press again exposed the Chinese government for attempting to systematically control the population of Chinese Muslims by forcing intrauterine devices, sterilization, and abortion on minority women.

Minority families who break China's arbitrary child limit face large fines, imprisonment in re-education camps, or government agents taking their children away to orphanages for indoctrination. The AP's sources called China's actions "demographic genocide."


Dr. Joanne Smith Finley, Senior Lecturer in Chinese Studies at Newcastle University in the U.K., told the AP, “It’s genocide, full stop. It’s not immediate, shocking, mass-killing on the spot type genocide, but it’s slow, painful, creeping genocide. These are direct means of genetically reducing the Uighur population.”

Forced abortion as a means of population control by a totalitarian government is a horrible violation of human rights. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made a statement to Reuters about the situation, saying, “We call on the Chinese Communist Party to immediately end these horrific practices and ask all nations to join the United States in demanding an end to these dehumanizing abuses.”

July 2, 2020

Biden Responds to June v. Russo: Women Have a "constitutional right to choice under any circumstance"

Democrat Presidential Candidate Joe Biden
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr
In response to the recent Supreme Court decision in June v. Russo, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden released a short statement affirming his support for an unlimited right to abortion.

"Women’s health care rights have been under attack as states across the country have passed extreme laws restricting women’s constitutional right to choice under any circumstance," the statement reads. "Today, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed that states cannot put in place laws that unduly burden a women’s right to make her own health care decisions with her doctor."

Louisiana's law put no restriction's on a woman's ability to choose to have an abortion. It required abortionists to maintain admitting privileges at a hospital. It was designed to keep the safety standards of Louisiana abortion clinics the same as the standards at any other surgical facility in the state.

Biden's statement goes on to say, "As President, I will codify Roe v. Wade and my Justice Department will do everything in its power to stop the rash of state laws that so blatantly violate a woman’s protected, constitutional right to choose."

Pro-abortion candidates make this statement surprisingly frequently. In addition to showing their unabashed enthusiasm for abortion under any circumstances, a desire to codify Roe v. Wade into the Constitution implies that the right supposedly given in the Supreme Court decision isn't reflected in the Constitution's text. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will soon be made up of justices who believe the same.

Judge Issues Temporary Injunction Against Iowa 24-Hour Wait Period Law

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds
On Monday, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed into law a bill that requires women to take 24 hours of reflection between their first appointment and having an abortion. The very next day, District Court Judge Mitchell Turner placed a temporary injunction against the law's enforcement pending the decision in a lawsuit by Planned Parenthood of the Heartland.

According to the Des Moines Register, Planned Parenthood “'established a likelihood of success' on its claim that the law was passed unconstitutionally by being added to an unrelated piece of legislation at the last minute.”

The Iowa law requires abortion clinics to provide relevant information at an initial appointment before a woman can have an abortion at a second appointment at least 24 hours later. At this initial appointment, women must be offered the ability to see an ultrasound image of their child and materials about life-affirming alternatives such as adoption.

July 1, 2020

New CMP Video Shows Testimony from Planned Parenthood on Organ Harvesting Practices

Screen Capture from
Center for Medical Progress Video
The Center for Medical Progress (CMP) released a new video Tuesday showing testimony from Planned Parenthood employees during their suit against the CMP and undercover journalists who exposed them for profiting from the sale of body parts harvested from aborted children.

Click here or look below to see the video.


Advanced Bioscience Resources Procurement Manager Perrin Larton said under oath that "once every couple of months" a pregnant woman would come into the abortion clinic and deliver an intact fetus. She also testified that she saw the beating hearts of some of these babies after they were removed from the child's body. She may not have considered them to be "alive" or "viable," but these statements can and should lead many to believe that Planned Parenthood killed and dissected live human beings to harvest body parts for research.

The video shows testimony from several other people involved in the trafficking of fetal body parts, including Dr. Deborah Nucatola and CEO of Planned Parenthood Orange and San Bernardino Counties Jon Dunn.

Missouri Gov. Chooses Not to Appeal Court Ruling Granting Dangerous St. Louis Planned Parenthood a Renewed License

A 2016 protest at the
St. Louis Planned Parenthood clinic
Photo Credit: Paul Sableman / Flickr
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson said that he would not be appealing a decision by the Missouri Administrative Court to grant a renewed license to the Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis, Missouri.

Gov. Parson said that this decision was influenced by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS), which was unwilling to pursue legal action after the court decision. At least one official from the DHSS has suggested that the department is satisfied with changes the abortion clinic made since the DHSS originally denied the renewal of its license in June of 2019.

Many are surprised and upset by the sudden halt in legal action against the St. Louis clinic, including Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. Operation Rescue is a pro-life organization that keeps track of abortion clinics that injure and hospitalize women, so it is very aware of the potential harm the St. Louis clinic could do if allowed to remain open.

“The DHSS comments are extremely na├»ve,” said Newman. “This is an abortion facility that has injured over 75 women, publicly lied about policies of the DHSS, obstructed Department investigations, and blatantly ignored regulations. There is no reason to believe that these arrogant people won’t continue to disregard the law and patient care standards when it suits them as they have done for years.”

While the courts temporarily allowed the clinic to operate without a license, it sent all women seeking abortions to the new Fairview Heights Planned Parenthood clinic in Illinois. This clinic was constructed in secret to serve as a potential location for Missouri women to get abortions if the St. Louis clinic was forced closed, but it likely also helped the St. Louis clinic pass its new licensing inspection after the Administrative Court ruling. By sending abortion-minded women to Illinois, the St. Louis clinic could make sure that it kept itself out of trouble until after it got a new license. Now that it has one, it can go back to injuring women like it has so many times in the past.

June 30, 2020

Supreme Court Rules 5-4 Against Louisiana's Admitting Privileges Requirement for Abortionists

After a long debate, the Supreme Court finally ruled on June v. Russo Monday in a 5-4 decision blocking a Louisiana law that would require abortion clinics to maintain hospital admitting privileges. The decision and all written opinions can be read here.

The Supreme Court originally agreed to hear the challenge to Louisiana's Act 620, known as “The Unsafe Abortion Protection Act,” on October 4, 2019. It was a bipartisan bill written by State Sen. Katrina Jackson (D) to make abortion clinics abide by the same standards as other surgical facilities in Louisiana (which were already required to maintain hospital admitting privileges).



Pro-life and pro-abortion advocates waited anxiously, believing that recent Trump-appointed justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh might swing the Supreme Court's decision in favor of pro-life values in line with the constitution rather than pro-abortion judicial precedents. Both Trump appointees voted in favor of Act 620, but Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the four more left-leaning justices; thus outweighing the recent changes in the Supreme Court's makeup.

Although he sided with the liberal justices in his decision, he did not contribute to their written opinion and instead wrote his own. “The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons,” Roberts wrote. “Therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents.”

Confusingly, Roberts voted in favor of the Texas law he referenced in his opinion. Notre Dame law school professor Rick Garnett told CNA that Justice Roberts has sided against judicial precedent before. “It is difficult to see why he did not do so here, too,” Garnett said. “Four years hardly seems like enough time to convert a judicial mistake [the 2016 Whole Woman’s Health decision Roberts referenced in his opinion] into an unmovable monument.”

The rest of the justices siding with the majority opinion argued that abortionists had issues gaining admitting privileges for reasons "unrelated to competency," and the law, therefore, placed an undue burden on abortion access.

In their dissenting opinions, pro-life judges argued that abortionists had no legal standing to sue the State over Louisiana's law, arguing that physicians don't have a legal right to perform abortions without regulation. The dissenting justices also took issue with the fact that plaintiffs claimed to be suing the state on behalf of possible future customers whose access to abortion may be impacted by abortionists' inability to receive admitting privileges. While claiming to sue on behalf of women seeking abortions, they were actively challenging a law designed to keep abortion safe.

Justice Samuel Alito argued that the plaintiffs in the case could easily have acted in bad faith to help prove their case. Justice Alito wrote, "[The plaintiffs] had an incentive to do as little as they thought the District Court would demand," because if they failed to receive admitting privileges it would help prove their case. If they received admitting privileges, they would be held to a higher medical standard without any monetary benefit and likely fail to overturn Act 620. If they failed to receive admitting privileges (which they did), they could potentially overturn the law (which they also did).

June 29, 2020

Doctors Left Quadriplegic COVID-19 Patient to Starve and Die Because of Disability

Photo Credit: Texas Right to Life
47-year-old Michael Hickson passed away due to COVID-19 on June 11 after doctors denied him food and treatment for six days. The reason? He was paralyzed and "didn't have much quality of life" according to them.

Hickson became quadriplegic in May 2017 after going into cardiac arrest. He was revived with CPR but became permanently paralyzed due to the lack of oxygen to his brain. He recovered enough to speak and move his head in response to people around him, but he contracted COVID-19 from a staff member at the nursing home he stayed in. He was admitted to St. David’s South Austin Medical Center in Texas, where he died when doctors refused to provide treatment or food. His wife, Melissa Hinckson, had no input in the decision and is left grieving.


“I’m struggling to understand how and why this could ever happen. I lost my best friend, my better half, the other half of my heart,” She said. “I was stripped of my rights as a wife and left helplessly watching my husband be executed. I now have no husband, a widow at 47. My children left with no father to celebrate Father’s Day. All taken away from us. I have no other words to express how I feel today except hurt, angry, and frustrated.”

Missouri's Only Abortion Clinic Receives One-Year License After Year-Long Legal Battle

Photo Credit: Paul Sableman / Flickr
The Missouri health department issued a one-year license to Planned Parenthood Reproductive Health Services of the St. Louis Region last week, following a decision by a state administrative hearing judge. The St. Louis abortion clinic is the only remaining clinic in the state of Missouri. The state nearly became abortion-free after the Missouri health department investigated health violations at the clinic and elected not to renew its license, but this will not be the case for now.

Missouri's health department cited multiple issues with the clinic leading to its initial decision to deny a renewed license: An “unprecedented lack of cooperation” with health department officials, a “failure to meet basic standards of patient care,” and a refusal to perform pelvic examinations before abortion procedures despite its agreement to do so.

The clinic had been operating without a license since June 2019, due to judges granting a temporary stay on the health department's decision not to renew its license, but the Administrative Hearing Commission finally made its official decision last month. After another inspection by the Missouri health department, the Planned Parenthood clinic is licensed once again.

The decision may come as a surprise even to Planned Parenthood, which responded to the situation by secretly constructing and opening a new Planned Parenthood facility in Fairview Heights, Illinois just across the state line. If the St. Louis clinic was forced closed, Planned Parenthood could avoid Missouri's safety requirements for abortion clinics by drawing women into Illinois where virtually no abortion regulations exist at all.

If the Missouri health department wants to appeal the Administrative Hearing Commission's ruling, it must do so by June 29.

June 26, 2020

Trump Signs Executive Order to Improve Foster Care and Adoption

On June 24, President Trump signed an executive order titled the “Historic Child Welfare Executive Order” to help foster and adoptive parents. This is an important win for pro-life advocates since adoption is one of the major alternatives to abortion that pregnant mothers can consider.

The Health and Human Services press release mentions three specific ways that the order is designed to improve the foster care and adoption systems in the United States. It aims to create and strengthen partnerships between state government agencies and private, public, and faith-based organizations;  improve the resources given to caregivers and the children they care for; and improve federal oversight over key statutory child welfare requirements.

“‘President Trump’s executive order demonstrates how his administration has prioritized placing each of America’s foster kids with the loving, permanent family they deserve,” said U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar. “Since the President took office, we have focused on promoting adoption unlike any previous administration, and we’ve begun to see results.”

WHO Continues Using Pandemic to Push for Global Abortion Rights

On June 1, the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) updated its interim guidance regarding essential medical services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The old document vaguely mentioned "reproductive health, but the updated guidance explicitly calls for increased global access to abortions.

Specifically, the guidance asks that member nations make abortion available “to the full extent of the law” and “consider reducing barriers that could delay care.” This would include increasing access to DIY "teleabortions" in which women could receive abortion pills in the mail while never meeting with a doctor in person. Pro-abortion advocates argue that increasing access to abortion pills via telemedicine could slow the spread of COVID-19 since there would be fewer in-person appointments, but these actions could also prove dangerous or deadly for pregnant mothers in addition to their unborn children.

Doctors using video conferencing or telephone calls to determine the "correct" abortion method for a woman will be unable to perform ultrasounds, which help them understand the gestational age and condition of an unborn child. Without this information, a doctor may prescribe abortion pills past the date when they are a safe abortion method for the mother, or fail to diagnose a condition such as ectopic pregnancy (when an unborn child implants itself and grows outside of the mother's uterus). In these cases, a woman who attempts to complete a DIY abortion via the abortion pill regimen could face severe complications including hemorrhage or death.

President Trump already took action to cut US funding from the WHO at the end of last month. His reasoning for doing so was mostly related to the organization's alleged relationship with China, claiming that the WHO helped China cover up the danger and spread of COVID-19.

June 25, 2020

Planned Parenthood Sues to Block Iowa 24-Hour Wait Period

Photo Credit: bloomsberries / Flickr
On June 23, Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit against the state of Iowa to block legislation that would require a woman to have a 24-hour wait period after her first appointment to consider her decision to abort. The law, which passed on June 14, created this waiting period to make women consider the decision carefully and not impulsively end an unborn life.

“The waiting period would force women to go to an extra appointment before receiving an abortion. That is medically unnecessary and could take several extra days or even weeks,” said Erin Davison-Rippey, Planned Parenthood’s Iowa executive director.

The bill requires this additional appointment so that the abortion clinic can provide materials such as ultrasound images of the unborn child and a description of other life-affirming options such as adoption.

Rep. Shannon Lundgren pointed out on the floor of the Iowa House of Representatives that there are several other situations in which Iowa law mandates waiting periods for important decisions. A family must wait three days after their child is born to place the child for adoption, and 90 days must pass after a divorce decree is served for a marriage to be officially dissolved.

June 24, 2020

Abortion Clinic Hospitalizes Two Women After Botching Two Late-Term Abortions

Photo Credit: Jonnica Hill / Unsplash
An abortion clinic in Bethesda, Maryland has recently come under fire for hospitalizing two women after botching late-term abortions. An anonymous whistleblower spoke out to Operation Rescue to describe the horrific incidents, which involved the body parts of aborted children being shoved through their mothers' uterine walls and into their abdominal cavities.

CARE abortion clinic hospitalized the women on May 12 and May 21, just nine days apart. Ironically, the woman hospitalized in the first incident left the hospital the same day that the CARE clinic hospitalized the second woman.

According to the whistleblower, both incidents involved dilation and evacuation dismemberment abortions that went wrong. Both women bled profusely and required several units of blood transfusion to save their lives. 

In the first incident, several body parts belonging to the aborted child were shoved through a tear in the mother's uterus, including a leg that was intact from the hip down. This woman's internal damage to her bowels was so severe that she received a bowel resection and needed to stay in the hospital for nine days after the incident.

The second hospitalization was similar but involved the body of a fetus that was almost fully intact. Somehow, the abortionist had forced the majority of the child through the uterine wall when attempting an abortion. The whistleblower was particularly upset about the amount of force the abortionist would have had to use to push the entire body of the fetus into the abdominal cavity.

Concerned parties have called on HHS Secretary Alex Azar to investigate injuries caused by the CARE facility.

Aurora Planned Parenthood Worker Fumbles 911 Call for Unresponsive Patient

Planned Parenthood in Aurora, IL
Photo Credit: Operation Rescue
On May, 27, a woman who just had an abortion at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Aurora, Illinois, a patient was lying unresponsive. One worker picked up the phone to dial 911 and have an ambulance pick up the patient, whom the clinic was seemingly responsible for injuring. The conversation that followed showed a complete lack of competence in the Planned Parenthood employee to convey simple and vital information to an emergency dispatcher.



The Planned Parenthood employee did not provide the street address for the clinic, despite being asked for it twice. The 911 dispatcher eventually had to look up the address herself and move on with the call to gather more information. The next exchange could be considered comical if there wasn't an injured woman in need of emergency medical assistance. The dispatcher asks the caller, "Who needs the ambulance?" To which the employee replied, "Yes." The dispatcher has to ask multiple times to get any information from the Planned Parenthood employee, wasting valuable time that could be used to help the unconscious patient.

Click here to read more from Operation Rescue.

June 23, 2020

World's Youngest Surviving Preemie Goes Home After Birth at 21 Weeks Gestation

Jemarius Jachin Harbor Jr.
Photo Credit: A Moment with Kaylor / Facebook
In December of last year, Jemarius Jachin Harbor Jr. was born at just 21 weeks gestation and weighed only 13 ounces. Now, Jemarius has successfully graduated from the NICU and will be going home with his family after receiving medical support from hospital staff.

Jemarius's parents Jessica McPherson and Jemarius Harbor Senior must have been aware that prematurely-born children are denied care by medical professionals regularly for being "non-viable," because they recalled speaking with staff at Emory Decatur Hospital in Georgia to plead for help.

“We looked at each other in the eye and I told [the doctor] just give it a try,” McPherson said to Fox5. “I just want you to try. As long as you try that’s all that matters to me. Don’t just up and say that you can’t do it. Just ‘cause you haven’t done it doesn’t mean it can’t be done.”

Before Jemarius, the record for the youngest surviving prematurely-born child was 21 weeks and four days. Jemarius broke that record by four days, proving that younger and younger children have a chance at survival if ever-improving medical professionals attempt to help.

June 22, 2020

Tennessee Legislature Passes Bill Banning Abortion after Heartbeat Detection or for Discriminatory Reasons

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee
In the early hours of Friday morning last week, the Tennessee Senate passed House Bill 2263. If signed into law by pro-life Gov. Bill Lee, who has already voiced his support of the legislation, it would ban both the abortion of children who have detectable heartbeats and the abortion of children due to their race, sex, or diagnosis with Down syndrome.

The bill also requires physicians to take several steps to inform women about their unborn children before they complete an abortion. Women who complete abortions will need to confirm that physicians offered to show them ultrasound images of their children and let them listen to their heartbeats if they are detectable. This may sound confusing since the bill already bans the abortion of children with detectable heartbeats, but the bill was cleverly designed with layers of protection for the unborn that will hopefully remain standing if certain elements of the legislation don't survive in court. The ACLU has already stated that it plans to challenge the law, so the additional protections may prove necessary.

According to The Tennessean, the bill goes on to ban abortion at 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 weeks of gestation if courts strike down the ban on abortion when a heartbeat is detected. These layers not only provide additional protection for unborn children, but they force judges to specifically define exactly what gestational age they believe is acceptable if they do try to take protections away.

June 19, 2020

Missouri Woman Saves Her Unborn Child with Abortion Pill Reversal

Photo Credit: Maria Ionova / Unsplash
Pregnancy Help News published the story on their website of a Missouri woman this week, telling how she came to save her child with abortion pill reversal after she took Mifepristone, the first part of the abortion pill regimen.

The woman, whom the article refers to as "April" was convinced by her boyfriend to have an abortion despite her initial objection. 

“Her boyfriend started pressuring her to have an abortion about two weeks after she found out she was pregnant,” said Pregnancy Resource Center (PRC) of Rolla Executive Director Joseph Dalton. “He said she was ruining his life. That it was her fault.”

He even threatened to take her to court to take custody of the child away from her if she did decide to give birth.

April traveled to Hope Clinic in Granite City, Illinois to obtain a chemical abortion (abortion pills), but she immediately felt regret after taking Mifepristone, the first part of the abortion pill regimen. Luckily, her Google searches led her to Heartbeat International's abortion pill reversal hotline. Nurses with the Abortion Pill Rescue Network and the PRC of Rolla helped April acquire Progesterone, which can reverse the effects of Mifepristone.

Mifepristone kills an unborn child by blocking a pregnant mother's natural progesterone, which helps the mother's body provide oxygen and nutrients to her child. By taking more progesterone quickly, pregnant mothers may be able to save their child by restoring the normal flow of sustenance from the mother's body to the child.

April and her child are now happy and healthy. She expects to give birth to a boy this fall.

Kentucky Attorney General Asks Full 6th Circuit to Hear Dismemberment Abortion Ban Case

Kentucky Attorney General
Daniel Cameron
Earlier this week, Pro-life Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron asked the full 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the case involving a Kentucky law banning dismemberment abortion.

A three-judge panel on the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a district judge's permanent injunction against Kentucky's dismemberment abortion ban, which would have banned a common method of abortion which involves tearing individual limbs off an unborn child to remove them from a mother's body, usually before the child is killed. This means that the children suffer great pain and die in their mother's wombs by bleeding out. Abortionists choose this method of abortion when an unborn child has grown too large for a mother to safely abort the child via the abortion pill regimen or vacuum aspiration.

The three-judge panel from the 6th Circuit found that Kentucky's ban on this method of abortion was “unduly burdening the right to elect abortion,” but Attorney General Cameron tendered a petition for the full Appeals Court to rehear the case.

“We’re exhausting every possible option to ensure that this law continues to be defended and is ultimately enforced,” said Attorney General Cameron in a statement. “The law extends compassion and dignity to the unborn by ensuring they are not subjected to the horror and pain of the dismemberment process while still alive. We would never allow the dismemberment of any other living being, and we are going to continue fighting, all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary, so that it can’t happen to unborn children.”

June 18, 2020

Pro-Abortion Org Founder Tells Reporters 9/11 Terrorist Attack "Saved" Abortion Drug Mifepristone

Photo Credit: Cyril Attias / Flickr
Beverly Winikoff was the Director for Reproductive Health for the pro-abortion Population Council during the time when the abortion drug Mifepristone had recently been approved by the FDA. In a recent interview with Columbia University journalists, she said that the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 "saved" the abortion pill by covering up a news story that could have created a lot of controversy for the abortion drug.

"I remember the first day we heard about a death [from the abortion pill]," Beverly told the reporters. "It was September 10, 2001… And that’s [the 9/11 terrorist attack] what saved mifepristone."

"And that was like, existential, like, ‘Oh my God. What is going on?’ And ‘is this going to be a problem?’ … Planned Parenthood was very worried and was thinking of taking [the abortion pill] out of its clinics. And this was after it was registered."

A Canadian woman died after taking the abortion pill during Canada's clinical trials on Sept. 10. She developed a bacterial infection called Clostridium sordellii after completing her abortion.

It's also interesting to see that Planned Parenthood considered ending its use of the pill after this story broke. Planned Parenthood has only moved toward more radical positions on abortion over time, however. When once it may have accepted legislation preventing discriminatory abortions or adding protective measures for women seeking abortions. Planned Parenthood recently demanded that abortion clinics remain open to provide elective abortions when other elective surgeries were prohibited due to the pandemic. It has been exposed for harvesting the body parts of aborted children so they can be sold to researchers.

Mississippi Legislature Passes "Life Equality Act" Banning Discriminatory Abortions

Photo Credit: Martin Cathrae / Flickr
Mississippi legislators voted to pass the "Life Equality Act" early this week, and it will soon be sent to pro-life Democrat Gov. Tate Reeves to be signed. The bill would make it illegal for a physician to abort an unborn child simply because the parents take issue with the child's race, gender, or possible genetic abnormality.

“We are simply saying all these rights that have been won over the years in the area of racism or sexism should be applied to the unborn in Mississippi,” said Mississippi Senator Joey Fillingane.

Surprisingly few states have passed this common-sense legislation. According to the Guttmacher Institute, nine states have banned abortion based on an unborn child's sex, two have banned it based on their race and two have banned abortion in cases when doctors believe the child may have a genetic abnormality. Missouri is the only state which has successfully banned abortion in all three cases. Kentucky has also passed legislation to do this, but a court order put it on hold, preventing it from coming into effect.