July 21, 2020

Kanye West at Campaign Stop Talks about Abortion Conversations with His Wife; Says Abortion Shouldn't be Banned

Kanye West Campaigning in North Carolina
screen capture from Associated Press video
Kanye West made a campaign stop in North Charleston, North Carolina this weekend for his announced presidential bid, in which he spoke about his thoughts and experiences regarding abortion; both as a son and a father. At the same time, West maintained that abortion should remain legal.

"And for one month, and two months and three months, we talked about her not having this child. [Kim Kardashian] had pills in her hand. You know, these pills you take it and it's a wrap — the baby is gone."

"She said, 'We are going to have this child,’” West said, describing a later phone conversation they had. “I know people who are 50 years old who don't have a child. So even if my wife were to divorce me after this speech, she brought North into the world, even when I didn't want to. She stood up and she protected that child.”


"Forty-three years ago, who do you think protected a child? My mom saved my life," Kanye said. "My dad wanted to abort me! My mom saved my life. There would have been no Kanye West, because my dad was too busy!" West broke down as he spoke about the parallels between his father's actions and his own.

“I almost killed my daughter!” West emotionally confessed, crying. “I love my daughter!”

At the same time, West argued that abortion should remain legal. The Chicago Sun-Times reported that Kanye suggested financial incentives for mothers to keep their babies. “Everybody that has a baby gets a million dollars,” he said as a (fairly unrealistic) example.

West's presidential bid has confused many. He has missed the filing deadlines to appear on the ballots of several states, he reportedly did not have permission from his wife to discuss their conversations about abortion publicly, and entertainment news sites have reported that "sources close to the family" believe that Kanye is in the middle of a severe bipolar episode but won't seek professional help.

Federal Bailouts Could Subsidize States Funding Planned Parenthood

Photo Credit: Weston Brophy / Flickr
A recent article from The Daily Signal pointed out a common trend among many states that are asking for coronavirus bailout funding from the federal government: They have collectively given hundreds of millions of dollars to the nation's largest abortion business, Planned Parenthood.

Govs. Larry Hogan and Andrew Cuomo of Maryland and New York respectively asked Congress in April for $500 billion to bail out states during the coronavirus pandemic. Opponents to the idea point out that many of the states that would take advantage of bailout funding are ones that already struggled to manage their budgets before the pandemic hit. One such way that many states have done so is to provide funding to Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses.

The Daily Signal's research found that Maryland pays on average $4 million per year on average to Planned Parenthood, while New York paid $115 million over its last four fiscal years.

Natives of Illinois are not strangers to the state's annually scheduled budget crisis, but Illinois nonetheless stands as one of the states asking the government for a bailout funded by federal taxes. At the same time, Illinois gave $1,767,137.32 to Planned Parenthood during the 2019 fiscal year.

These states, and the many others listed in the Daily Signal's article, could easily take advantage of bailout funding to subsidize additional state funding to abortion businesses. Citizens need to keep their governments accountable and end the government-funded killing of innocent children.

July 20, 2020

New Planned Parenthood Ad Promotes Joe Biden

Democratic Presidential Candidate Joe Biden
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr
On July 13, Planned Parenthood's PAC launched its first digital ad in support of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. This is one of the first ads it has launched since it announced its record-breaking $45 million effort to promote pro-abortion candidates in several battleground states during the 2020 election cycle.

In the announcement for its "Planned Parenthood Votes" ad campaign, the abortion organization said that it planned to target the battleground states of Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin with the ads in hopes of getting pro-abortion candidates elected, including presumed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

The ad mentions many issues, including immigration, racism, healthcare, and abortion, while also ironically stating that Joe Biden “seeks to help, not punish the most vulnerable.” A candidate that endorses abortion as a healthcare choice rather than a saddening act that ends the life of a human being is, in fact, punishing the most vulnerable.

The ad also uses a clip in which Joe Biden states "I would codify Roe v. Wade and Casey [v. Planned Parenthood.]" Statements like this from pro-abortion candidates are admissions that the current language of the U.S. Constitution does provide a right to abortion. This supposed "right" would need to be codified to stand the test of time against the multiple generations of Supreme Court justices.

Planned Parenthood stands to gain a lot from electing pro-abortion politicians. If pro-abortion politicians successfully repeal the Hyde Amendment, which Biden has stated he would do as president, Planned Parenthood could gain hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding that previously would have been prevented by the legislation.

July 17, 2020

A New Doctor Steps Forward to Give Baby Tinslee Another Chance

Tinslee Lewis
17-month-old Tinslee Lewis may have another chance at life since a new doctor has stepped forward offering to provide treatment.

Tinslee's life has been the subject of an ongoing legal battle between Cook Children’s Medical Center in Fort Worth, Texas and the child's family. The hospital attempted to invoke Texas's 10-day rule last year, which would have allowed the hospital to stop providing life-sustaining treatment for Tinslee and simply let her die.

In a legal brief, Cook Children's Medical Center staff argued that Tinslee's treatment is painful to her, will not improve her condition, and is not fair for the staff or Tinslee: “She cannot move. She cannot cuddle. She is rarely, if ever, held,” the staff wrote. “The physician who has been treating her since birth has never seen her smile.”

Dr. Glenn E. Green, a professor of otolaryngology at the University of Michigan, stepped forward to examine Tinslee personally, and his conclusion has granted new hope to Tinslee's family. He believes that the "dying spells" described by Cook's Medical Center might be attributed to airway issues, which could be solved with a simple procedure. Dr. Green says that he would evaluate Baby Tinslee for airway malacia and perform a tracheostomy.

Dr. Patrick Roughneen, a physician from Galveston, Texas, also examined Tinslee in-person and concurred with his assessment. The two doctors have filed declarations with the court saying that the tracheostomy request was medically appropriate. Trinity Lewis, Tinslee's mother, has requested to both Cook Children's Medical Center and the court that Dr. Green be allowed to evaluate Baby Tinslee and provide her with medical care.

“Baby T.L. should be treated no differently than any other child who has been on a ventilator this long,” Dr. Roughneen said in a statement to Texas Right to Life. “Tracheotomies are routinely performed for patients after 14-days on a ventilator. Baby T.L. has been on a ventilator for over 10 months. It is not within the standard realm of care to leave a patient on a ventilator this long and refuse a tracheostomy. The benefits of a tracheostomy versus a ventilator are decreased work of breathing, reduction in airway dead space, avoidance of tracheo-innominate fistula [a lethal complication of an indwelling tracheostomy tube] and management of pulmonary secretions. Hence there are very specific patient benefits to performing this procedure.”

Teenagers Recorded Beating Pregnant Mother and her Toddler in Brooklyn, Illinois

Screen capture from Twitter video
A disturbing video began circulating Twitter this week which showed a group of teenagers attacking a pregnant mother and a toddler in Brooklyn, Illinois.
In the video, two teenage women are shown punching a pregnant woman, pulling her hair, and dragging her to the ground while a teenage boy is shown drop-kicking the mother's toddler in the face. The boy then proceeds to kick the pregnant woman's head and even slams her into a door frame by kicking her in the back once she is allowed to get up. Throughout the entire incident, the toddler can be heard screaming in pain and fear.

Brooklyn police confirmed that they responded to a "disturbance" on Friday which involved minors and adults. The police said that the woman suffered minor head injuries, but was able to identify her assailants. The police are investigating the incident and the individuals involved are pending charges.

July 16, 2020

Alexis McGill Johnson Becomes Permanent President of Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill
Photo Credit: Crossroads Foundation / Flickr
Alexis McGill Johnson has officially been named the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood after spending a year as the interim president of the abortion company.

Leana Wen, the previous president of Planned Parenthood, says that her firing last July was because she wanted to make the organization less political and focus more on women's health care than the abortion argument. The argument makes sense, given that McGill previously worked on the board of Planned Parenthood's PAC. If the organization really wanted someone whose motives were to fight political fights more than improve the lives of women, they found a person for that.

The hiring may also come in response to backlash Planned Parenthood is facing for its racist origins. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was a eugenicist who believed that convincing African Americans to abort their children would be beneficial because she did not want their population to increase. Despite this, Planned Parenthood had awards and buildings named after their founder. The organization has stopped giving Margaret Sanger awards, is renaming buildings, and recently fired the Planned Parenthood of New York CEO after over 350 former and current employees accused her of racist behavior. Because Johnson is an African American woman, the announcement can serve at least in part to save the company's face during its current PR mess.

Trump Administration Ends Obamacare Definition of "Sex-discrimination" that Included Abortion

President Donald Trump
Photo Credit: James Skidmore / Flickr
Last weekend, the Trump administration officially ended a rule created under the Obama administration that redefined "sex-discrimination" to include a person's "internal sense of gender" and "termination of pregnancy."

The Obama administration changed the definition of "sex-discrimination" as part of the Affordable Care Act in May of 2016, but the enforcement of the new definition was blocked by the courts in December of that year. Now, the HHS has officially finalized a new rule which will prevent the Obama rule from going into effect simply because a different judge rules in favor of it.

“HHS will enforce Section 1557 by returning to the government’s interpretation of sex discrimination according to the plain meaning of the word ‘sex’ as male or female and as determined by biology,” the HHS announced on Sunday.

Several organizations have already filed lawsuits challenging the rule change, but the outcome of those challenges is uncertain. The previous form of the HHS rule was blocked by federal courts, but the Supreme Court recently made a decision that included transgenderism in the definition of "sex-discrimination" as it relates to the Civil Rights Act. The abortion-related portion of the rule does not appear to have any major legal challenges given these challenges, however.

July 15, 2020

Federal Judge Suspends REMS Restrictions on Abortion Pill Distribution

On Monday, a federal judge ruled that the FDA's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) protocol could no longer be enforced on the distribution of abortion pills. This allows abortion providers to send pills over the mail for pregnant women to complete DIY-abortions.

REMS requirements are placed on drugs with the risk of complications and limited the distribution of abortion pills to hospitals, clinics, and medical offices. Women who wanted abortion pills would have to go to one of those locations in order to obtain them.

Pro-abortion advocates have used the COVID-19 pandemic to argue for the suspension or elimination of REMS requirements on abortion pills, but now a judge has sided with them in a lawsuit against the FDA.

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang ruled that “in-person requirements” for obtaining the abortion pill create a “substantial obstacle” to abortion, saying, “in light of the limited timeframe during which a medication abortion or any abortion must occur, such infringement on the right to an abortion would constitute irreparable harm.” He added, “By causing certain patients to decide between forgoing or substantially delaying abortion care, or risking exposure to COVID-19 for themselves, their children, and family members, the In-Person Requirements present a serious burden to many abortion patients.”

He is saying that the delay caused by needing to travel to a medical professional to obtain drugs which not only are designed to kill unborn children, but also can pose risk to women can cause "irreparable harm" (likely referring to the child's gestational age surpassing a state's maximum legal abortion age). Not only is this absurd, since traveling to a physician is hardly a "substantial obstacle," but it creates a danger to women. DIY abortions completed with the abortion pill regimen can potentially have life-threatening side-effects such as hemorrhage, and the risk is amplified if a woman has not had a medical professional check their pregnancy for potential conditions such as ectopic pregnancy.

Federal Judge Rules Against Georgia Heartbeat Law

Georgia state capitol
Photo credit: Robert Wilson / Flickr
On Monday, a federal judge ruled against a Georgia heartbeat law that would have banned most abortions once an unborn child's heartbeat is detectable.

Georgia's Living Infants Fairness and Equality (LIFE) Act signed in May 2019 would have made it illegal for abortionists to kill an unborn child once a fetal heartbeat is detected, with exceptions for rape, incest, physical medical emergencies, and pregnancies deemed “medically futile.”

A lawsuit from the ACLU, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and Planned Parenthood convinced U.S. District Judge Steve Jones to block the law before it could take effect, and now Jones has ruled that the law is unconstitutional, potentially blocking it permanently.

“HB 481’s specific references to Roe v. Wade and ‘established abortion related precedents’ ... lends support to plaintiffs' argument that the purpose of H.B. 481 was to ban or de facto ban abortion,” Jones wrote.

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr said that they plan to appeal the ruling.

July 14, 2020

Woman Found Guilty of Illegally Selling Abortion Pills after Man Bought them to Kill Girlfriend's Child

Photo credit: Wheeler Cowperthwaite / Flickr
A New York woman was sentenced to two years probation and $10,000 in fines this week after having pled guilty to conspiracy for illegally selling abortion pills over the internet. Law enforcement connected the case to another one in which a man attempted to trick his girlfriend into aborting their child by dissolving abortion pills in her drink.

Abortion pills require a prescription to purchase in the United States, but this woman purchased them from overseas and used an online jewelry store as a front to resell the drugs in the US to people without prescriptions. “Unjust laws should not be respected,” she told the website Mother Jones. She went on to say that she hopes others follow her example, saying, “I want some copycats. There’s not enough people doing this.”

One customer who purchased abortion pills from her was Jeffrey Smith from Grand Rapids, Wisconsin. He is now accused of first-degree murder for dissolving abortion drugs into his girlfriend's water when she refused to abort their child. She took her water bottle to the police after she noticed residue inside, and they confirmed the presence of the abortion drug mifepristone. His trial is scheduled for December.

Abusive men often use abortion as a tool to control women and remove themselves from the consequences or responsibilities that can come with fathering a child. Access to abortion pills without a prescription allows men like Smith to use them against women who do not want to kill their children and poses danger to both the mother and her child. Abortion pills can have dangerous side effects such as hemorrhaging, infection, and potentially death if a mother has an undiagnosed pregnancy condition such as ectopic pregnancy.

Tennessee Heartbeat Bill Signed and Blocked Within One Hour

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee
On Monday, July 13, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed into law
House Bill 2263, which would ban discriminatory abortions based on sex, race, or disability as well as any abortions that take place after a fetal heartbeat is detected. Only an hour after the bill was signed into effect, U.S. District Judge William Campbell granted a temporary restraining order against it pending lawsuits from pro-abortion organizations.

The bill would have required all abortionists to perform ultrasounds before attempting an abortion. If a fetal heartbeat was detected by the ultrasound, the abortionist would be forbidden from killing the child.

In a Facebook live broadcast of him signing the bill, Gov. Lee said, “Life is precious and everything that is precious is worth protecting. We know that in Tennessee and I certainly know that in my heart, which is why we worked so hard together with the legislature to make sure that this piece of legislation got done.”

The ACLU, Center for Reproductive Rights, and Planned Parenthood all filed lawsuits against the new law and successfully convinced Judge Campbell to grant a temporary restraining order against its enforcement until he makes a decision on its constitutionality. Campbell stated, “bound by the Supreme Court holdings prohibiting undue burdens on the availability of pre-viability abortions.”

Tennessee legislators had the foresight to ban abortions at eight, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 weeks of gestation in preparation for the eventual pro-abortion lawsuit challenging the abortion ban starting at the detection of a fetal heartbeat.

July 13, 2020

Federal Judge Strikes Down Indiana Law Requiring Abortionists to Report Complications

Photo credit: Bill Oxford / Unsplash
U.S. District Judge Richard Young ruled on Wednesday, July 8 that an Indiana law requiring abortionists to report any complications during abortion procedures to the state was unconstitutional.

The ruling comes two years after Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb signed SEA 340 into law. Shortly afterward, Judge Young placed an injunction against the law blocking it from taking effect until he made his decision. Some of the potential abortion complications that required reporting under the now struck-down law included uterine perforation, infection, hemorrhaging, and parts of an aborted baby being left inside a woman after an abortion. It also required abortionists to report to the state if they learned that a woman was seeking an abortion due to abuse, coercion, harassment, or trafficking.

“The statute simply lacks any standard to guide physicians in determining whether a condition qualifies as an abortion complication for purposes of reporting,” Young wrote in his decision according to ABC News. “The indeterminacy of the statute’s requirements denies fair notice to physicians and invites arbitrary enforcement by prosecutors.”

Young did uphold a different provision that mandates an annual state inspection of abortion facilities, however; arguing that this provision could catch someone like the late abortionist Ulrich Klopfer. Klopfer is infamous for hoarding the bodies of thousands of aborted children in his home and car. His horrifying collection went unnoticed until a lawyer going over Klopfer's will went to check on Klopfer's property.

July 10, 2020

Biden Pledges to Reinstate Obamacare Birth Control and Abortifacient Mandates

Democratic Presidential Candidate Joe Biden
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr
After the Supreme Court took a step towards protecting the conscience rights of employers in Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said Wednesday that he would reinstate Obama-era policies that would require employers to guarantee their employees access to birth control and abortifacients.

“If I am elected I will restore the Obama-Biden policy that existed before the [Supreme Court’s 2014] Hobby Lobby ruling: providing an exemption for houses of worship and an accommodation for nonprofit organizations with religious missions,” said a statement released by the Biden campaign. “This accommodation will allow women at these organizations to access contraceptive coverage, not through their employer-provided plan, but instead through their insurance company or a third-party administrator.”

The Little Sisters of the Poor, despite being a religious charity group, was unable to get an exemption to the Obamacare contraception and abortifacient mandate due to the fact that it does not exclusively employ or serve Catholics. The group has repeatedly stated that simply using a third party to administer abortion and contraception coverage would not stop the practice from violating their beliefs. No pro-life employer should have abortion coverage forced upon their employees.

Trump Administration Begins Process to Withdraw from WHO

After over a month of questioning the World Health Organization's (WHO) competence and allegiance (which included the withdrawal of US funding), the Trump administration has finally announced that it is beginning the process of withdrawal from the WHO.

The pro-abortion UN organization has been accused of downplaying and misleading the public about the danger of COVID-19 during its early development to cover for the Chinese government.

"In December, the WHO refused to act on or publicize Taiwan’s warning that the new respiratory infection emerging in China could pass from human to human," Florida Senator Marco Rubio wrote in the National Review

"In mid January, despite accumulating evidence of patients contracting what we now know as COVID-19 from other people, the organization repeated the CCP’s [Chinese Communist Party's] lie that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission. In January the WHO, at Beijing’s behest, also blocked Taiwan from participating in critical meetings to coordinate responses to the coronavirus and even reportedly provided wrong information about the virus’s spread in Taiwan. These actions are unacceptable and should not be allowed to continue."

The process to withdraw from the UN requires a full year of advance notice, so the United States would not separate from the WHO until July 6, 2021. This would require President Trump's reelection and likely the approval of Congress. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has already said that he will cancel the United States' withdrawal on his first day in office if he is elected.

While it may not be the main reason for the United States' withdrawal from the WHO, taking this action will also separate US ties with an organization that consistently uses international health funding and initiatives to promote abortion globally.

According to CNA, "The WHO’s coronavirus pandemic plans for Ecuador includes Minimum Initial Service Packages from the United Nations Population Fund, which include instruments used in the context of abortion: vacuum extractors, craniocrasts for the crushing of fetal skills, and drugs to perform abortions. The equipment comes with manuals from the abortion provider IBIS, which explain how the equipment can be used for abortion."

Up until the end of May when President Trump withdrew US funding from the WHO, US tax dollars contributed to $200 million of the organization's budget yearly.

July 9, 2020

Supreme Court Protects Conscience Rights in Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, But the Fight isn't Over

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor in a 7-2 decision protecting their conscience rights from government mandates, but sadly their long battle in court is not yet over.

The full opinions of the Supreme Court Justices can be read here.

The Little Sisters of the Poor is a Catholic charity run by nuns who work to serve the elderly and the poor. For several years, however, they have been stuck in a legal battle against government powers attempting to force them to accept the Obama administration's "contraception mandate" under the Affordable Care Act. The mandate requires employers to provide coverage for contraceptives, sterilizations, and “emergency birth control” in employee health plans.

“We are overjoyed that, once again, the Supreme Court has protected our right to serve the elderly without violating our faith,” said Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters in a statement. “Our life’s work and great joy is serving the elderly poor and we are so grateful that the contraceptive mandate will no longer steal our attention from our calling.”

The Supreme Court decision supports employers' right to seek an exemption from the contraception mandate and also lifts a nationwide injunction on the Trump administration's conscience protection rule that would help employers do so.

"We hold today that the Departments had the statutory authority to craft that exemption, as well as the contemporaneously issued moral exemption," Justice Thomas wrote in the majority opinion. "We further hold that the rules promulgating these exemptions are free from procedural defects. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the cases for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

The case is being sent back to the lower courts, where they will decide whether the Trump administration rule offering religious and moral exemptions to employers is "arbitrary and capricious." 

Justice Alito was troubled by this part of the Supreme Court's decision. In his concurring opinion (joined by Justice Gorsuch) Justice Alito wrote, 

"This will prolong the legal battle in which the Little Sisters have now been engaged for seven years—even though during all this time no employee of the Little Sisters has come forward with an objection to the Little Sisters’ conduct. I understand the Court’s desire to decide no more than is strictly necessary, but under the circumstances here, I would decide one additional question: whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) does not compel the religious exemption granted by the current rule. If RFRA requires this exemption, the Departments did not act in an arbitrary and capricious manner in granting it.

Alito later added, "And in my judgment, RFRA compels an exemption for the Little Sisters and any other employer with a similar objection…"

Justice Ginsburg (joined by Justice Sotomayor) argued against the ruling in her dissenting opinion:

"In accommodating claims of religious freedom, this Court has taken a balanced approach, one that does not allow the religious beliefs of some to overwhelm the rights and interests of others who do not share those beliefs.  Today for the first time, the Court casts totally aside countervailing rights and interests in its zeal to secure religious rights to the nth degree."

Wednesday's decision protects the rights of employers from being trampled on by employees and by the government, and it does not take the supposed right to abortion away from employees. Even if access to abortion is considered a right, that right does not require employers to pay for their employees' abortions. Employers' rights were challenged by the contraception mandate, and the Supreme Court decision reflects this.

“One of our most fundamental rights is the right to the free exercise of our beliefs and that these beliefs are not trampled by government overreach,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “We are pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the importance of protecting conscience rights.”

It would be unsurprising if the Little Sisters of the Poor once again found themselves in front of the Supreme Court arguing this same case in the future. Courts across the nation need to recognize the right of employers to object to the morally awful practice of abortion.

July 8, 2020

Gallup Poll Shows Pro-Life Lead vs. Pro-Choice Single-Issue Voters

Pro-life advocates at March for Life 2015
Photo Credit: American Life League / Flickr
A new Gallup poll shows promising information for pro-life advocates in coming elections. The percentage of pro-life Americans who see abortion as a "threshold issue" when voting for any candidate is significantly higher than pro-abortion Americans.

Gallup posted an article called "One in Four Americans Consider Abortion a Key Voting Issue" discussing its recent poll and how the statistics differ from previous years. For pro-lifers, one statement in particular sticks out: "Currently, 30% of those in the pro-life camp and 19% in the pro-choice camp say they are single-issue voters when it comes to abortion." This means that a pro-life voter is more likely to refuse to vote for a candidate who supports abortion than a pro-abortion candidate is to refuse to vote for a pro-life candidate. 

Gallup also noted that this stat follows a trend: "The latest findings, from Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs poll conducted May 1-13, show the continuation of a trend seen since 2001 whereby Americans who consider themselves to be pro-life are more likely than those who identify as pro-choice to say abortion is a threshold issue."

Pro-life advocates are passionate, and it is easy to imagine the number of pro-life voters who refuse to vote for candidates who disagree on the issue of abortion going even higher than 30% in the future.

Missouri Renews $6 Million in Funding for "Alternatives to Abortion" Program

Missouri State Capitol
Photo Credit: Shellie Gonzalez / Flickr
Before the 4th of July holiday, MO. Gov. Mike Parson signed into law a budget bill that renewed $6 million in funding to the state's Alternatives to Abortion program.

Under the program, Missouri women can qualify for a variety of services if they are pregnant and live at or below 185% of the poverty level. Once they are accepted, Alternatives to Abortion assists women for a year after their child is born. The services the program provides include child care, domestic abuse protection, drug and alcohol treatment, educational services, food, clothing, pregnancy supplies, housing, job training and placement, medical and mental health care, parenting education, prenatal care, transportation, ultrasounds, utilities, and adoption assistance.

Rather than feeling pressured into abortion, low-income women in Missouri can receive support from their state government which helps them have the resources to choose life for their children. Illinois tries to undercut this by turning itself into an abortion hub for neighboring pro-life states. It's sad to see a neighboring state make sacrifices to help women and children while in Illinois children are sacrificed for the sake of convenience.

July 7, 2020

Anonymous Rape Victim of Jeffrey Epstein Says Epstein Forced Her to Abort

In an interview with Fox News reporter Bryan Llenas, an anonymous woman said that she was forced to abort her child after being repeatedly drugged, assaulted, and raped by deceased sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

The anonymous woman said that she was raped over 20 times between the ages of 14 and 16, and it only stopped after she aborted a child that she conceived with Epstein.

“The fact that I had to kill my child really affected me and my family,” she told Llenas.

She went on to say that Maxwell, Epstein and a group of others drugged and gang-raped her as punishment one last time when they suspected that she talked with her grandparents about aborting her child. “I was dumped off in my grandparents' yard naked, and was told that I wouldn’t come back alive the next time,” she said.

“I would definitely take the stand and testify because I believe she deserves to be where she is today and she deserves to stay there for the rest of her life,” she said, referring to Ghislaine Maxwell who was recently charged and imprisoned for contributing to the Epstein's abuse against young women. “I hope by me coming forward, it encourages other victims.”

The abortion industry is often used as a tool by pedophiles and rapists to attempt to cover-up their crimes or escape from the consequences of conceiving a child. As more of these cases come to light, the world will have the opportunity to see and discuss this truth instead of sweeping it aside. Abortion businesses enable rapists and devalue their victims as the necessary collateral damage of "choice."

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Chicago "Bubble Zone" Law

Photo Credit: www.ccPixs.com
On July 2, just three days after deciding against Louisiana's admitting privileges requirement, the Supreme Court decided it would not hear challenges to two pro-abortion "bubble zone" laws (including a Chicago ordinance) banning or limiting pro-life speech outside abortion clinics.

The 2009 Chicago ordinance bans pro-life advocates who are within 50 feet of an abortion clinic from coming within eight feet of someone who is visiting the clinic. Pro-life advocates challenged the law after the Supreme Court unanimously struck down a Massachusetts law that created a 35-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics.

In the ruling for the Massachusetts law, the justices said it was an “extreme step of closing a substantial portion of a traditional public forum to all speakers” to prohibit free speech on “a public way or sidewalk adjacent to a reproductive health care facility.”

The court did not comment on its decision to not hear "bubble zone" cases from Chicago or Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, but the court's order did note that Justice Clarence Thomas would have heard the Chicago case.

July 6, 2020

Documents Indicate FDA Purchased Aborted Body Parts from Advanced Bioscience Resources

Photo Credit: Ron Dyar / Unsplash
On June 23, Judicial Watch announced that it received 165 pages of FDA records through a Freedom of Information request and lawsuit revealing that the FDA had contracts with Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) for the purchase of aborted baby tissue.

According to Judicial Watch, the documents revealed that the FDA had purchased 8 contracts with ABR between 2012 and 2018 worth a total of $96,370.

A June 28, 2017 email exchange between an FDA contract specialist and an ABR official shows that in one contract the FDA asked for livers and thymuses harvested from aborted children with an age range of 16-24 weeks. It further specifies that “Tissue must be fresh and never frozen.”

“These documents are a horror show,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These records show that the FDA was trafficking in human fetal parts. Incredibly, there continues to be a push to reopen these monstrous experiments!”