Compassion and Choice's Elastic Definition of "Terminal Illness" and "Intolerable Dying Process" The assisted suicide ideologues at Compassion and Choices–formerly the Hemlock Society–pretend that their agenda is very limited and constrained, merely a teensy-weensy safety valve for use when nothing else can be done to relieve suffering. That's all phony, baloney of course. The ultimate agenda is expansive, well beyond the actively dying. Proof of this is found in answers to interrogatories C & C filed in connection with its Montana lawsuit, that asked its definition of a "terminally ill adult patient," who the complaint claimed had a state constitutional right to assisted suicide. Usually, as in Oregon, this means 6 months or less to live regardless of the medical treatment available to the patient. But C & C's definition for Montana turns that more precise definition on its head. From its interrogatory answer # 4 (no link, my emphasis): The term "terminally ill adult patient," as used in the complaint, means a person 18 years of age or older who has an incurable and irreversible condition that, without the administration of life-sustaining treatment, will in the opinion of his or her attending physician, result in death within a relative short time. The definition is not limited to any specific set of illnesses, conditions or diseases… In other words, the patient won't die even if he or she receives life sustaining or curative care, but if no such care is rendered. That's a very elastic definition. Think about it: If a 20-year-old diabetic refuses insulin, he will die within "a relatively short time," but if he takes insulin, could live for decades, a full life span. Ditto, AIDS patients taking the viral inhibitors, cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, patients on kidney dialysis, perhaps even psychiatric patients who are not suicidal only because of anti depressants, etc. Also, get their description of "intolerable dying process," for which assisted suicide is the supposed remedy: This is a subjective determination made by the individual patient based upon his or her medical condition, and circumstances, symptoms, and personal values and beliefs. In other words, it is whatever a patient says it is at the time he/she wants to commit suicide. Such looseness over who qualifies makes impossible any meaningful controls over assisted suicide–which of course is the point. C & C are very cagy. But in Montana, they have shown more of their true colors, for example, disdaining the kind of "protective guidelines" put into Oregon and Washington law. So be very clear, the assisted suicide agenda is not narrow. It is very broad. Activists here–unlike their counterparts overseas–just generally lack the candor that would permit us to have a true debate about the means and ends of the ultimate assisted suicide/euthanasia agenda. Contact: Wesley J. Smith Source: Secondhand Smoke Publish Date: December 2, 2009 Link to this article. Send this article to a friend. |
December 2, 2009
Compassion and Choice’s Elastic Definition of “Terminal Illness” and “Intolerable Dying Process”
NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY
| NEWS SHORTS FOR WEDNESDAY (Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.) Abortions of Down Syndrome Babies 'Double Official Level' As Doctors Spare Women's Feelings But Not Babies'  Abortionists in the UK are aborting twice as many unborn babies because the children have Down Syndrome (DS) as official figures suggest, an independent body has revealed. Doctors are trying to spare women's feelings at aborting disabled children by failing to classify the abortions as Down abortions, it was claimed. Instead, they record them as "social" abortions, which make up most abortions in the UK. Click here for the full article. Strip Mall Abortions: Upgraded Planned Parenthood Opens In Revamped Mall  MADISON, WI - When it was time to get a urine sample from patients at the old Planned Parenthood facility on Park Street, staff members would put a collection cup inside a brown paper bag and escort the patient down a long hallway outside the clinic to the nearest bathroom. They tried to make the process as discreet as possible, but the setup was far from ideal, notes Deborah Hobbins, regional vice president of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin. "It put the miles on," she notes dryly. Click here for the full article. March for life attracts 50,000 in Costa Rica  San José, Costa Rica - Some 50,000 people participated in the "Costa Rica March for Life and the Family" on November 28, which concluded with an address calling on officials to reject any law that would attack these fundamental values. The address commits participants "to defend all human life" from conception to natural death. It also urges that marriage and the family be protected, "and for this reason we oppose, and we call on our representatives in the executive branch, legislative assembly and municipalities to reject any bill, policy or institutional activity" to the contrary. Click here for the full article. ACLU Sues to Block Alaska Personhood Initiative  ANCHORAGE, Alaska - In the latest in a string of court proceedings against personhood initiatives nationwide, the Alaskan branch of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is backing a lawsuit against state officials for giving voters an opportunity to decide on a ballot initiative that would declare all human beings "persons." The suit alleges that the proposed language does not adequately present to voters the possible consequences of its enactment, such as the outlawing of abortion, and thus Lieutenant Governor Craig Campbell should not have approved it. Plaintiffs, including Vic Fisher, a former Alaska Democratic legislator, argue that the signature-collecting process should be halted immediately. Click here for the full article. Adult Stem Cells Heal Human Hearts  In a newly-published study, scientists from several institutions across the country report that use of adult stem cells can repair hearts damaged from heart attack. The researchers say that it's some of the strongest evidence yet that adult stem cells can turn into new heart cells to repair damaged tissue. The study suggests that adult stem cells, in this case derived from bone marrow, are more flexible than previously thought. The published study looks at 53 patients who had heart attacks within the previous ten days. Patients were injected intravenously with mesenchymal adult stem cells; the cells migrated to the damaged heart and began repair. Patients who received the adult stem cells showed improvement over those who did not receive the cells. According to Dr. Joshua Hare, a University of Miami cardiologist and lead author of the 10-university study... Click here for the full article. |
December 1, 2009
'60 Minutes' Segment Explores the Ideas of Rationing, 'Pulling the Plug on Grandma'
'60 Minutes' Segment Explores the Ideas of Rationing, 'Pulling the Plug on Grandma'
"60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft took an in-depth look at one of the most expensive aspects of modern health care - the cost of end of life care. However, he didn't highlight the federal government's culpability in driving up those costs, or what it might mean for health care reform. "Every medical study ever conducted has concluded 100 percent of all Americans will eventually die," Kroft said. "This comes as no great surprise. But, the amount of money being spent at the end of people lives probably will. Last year, Medicare paid $50 billion just for doctors' and hospital bills during the last two months of patients lives. That's more than the budget of the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Education. And it's been estimated that 20 to 30 percent of these medical expenditures may have had no meaningful impact."
"60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft took an in-depth look at one of the most expensive aspects of modern health care - the cost of end of life care. However, he didn't highlight the federal government's culpability in driving up those costs, or what it might mean for health care reform. "Every medical study ever conducted has concluded 100 percent of all Americans will eventually die," Kroft said. "This comes as no great surprise. But, the amount of money being spent at the end of people lives probably will. Last year, Medicare paid $50 billion just for doctors' and hospital bills during the last two months of patients lives. That's more than the budget of the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Education. And it's been estimated that 20 to 30 percent of these medical expenditures may have had no meaningful impact."
CDC Abortion Data Reveals Small Uptick in 2006, but Overall Decline over Past Decade
CDC Abortion Data Reveals Small Uptick in 2006, but Overall Decline over Past Decade
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The US Center for Disease Control (CDC) has released its latest available figures on abortion submitted to the federal agency, which shows an overall decrease in the number of abortions for the ten years between 1997 and 2006, but with a small uptick in abortion rates and ratios between 2005 and 2006, which CDC analysts believe may be attributable to an accompanying rise in fertility rates.
While the CDC report provides an analysis of trends in abortion patterns, it qualifies that its data reflects approximately 65 to 69 percent of the actual total numbers of abortions in the US: three states - California, Louisiana, and New Hampshire - do not submit any abortion data to the federal health agency, and not all reporting areas use the CDC forms for data collection. CDC data on the rate of abortions consistently remains 11 percent lower than those figures recorded by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, which solicits data directly from abortion providers.
Forty-nine reporting areas show that in 2006, a total of 846,181 abortions were documented. Between 1997 and 2006, the total number of abortions declined 5.7 percent, the rate of abortions (abortions per 1000 women aged 15-44) declined 8.8 percent, and the ratio of abortions (abortions per thousand live births) also fell 14.8 percent.
The CDC showed that the greatest rate of decline occurred in the years between 1996 and 2000, when total abortions fell on average by 20,605 per year. For the years between 2001 and 2006, the number of abortions fell by a much smaller margin, decreasing an average 2,163 abortions per year.
But 2006, the last year of available collected data, showed a small uptick in abortion that diverges from this downward trend. The total number of abortions in 2006 increased from 2005 levels by 3.1 percent: 820,151 abortions up to 846,181 abortions; the abortion rate rose by 3.2 percent from 15.6 to 16.1 (abortions per 1000 women aged 15-44), while the ratio of women aborting their unborn children remained the same in both years (236 abortions per 1000 live-births).
However, the CDC surmised that the abortion rate remained stable, and a rise in overall fertility for 2006 may serve as a likely explanation for the increase. For that year, the CDC found that the number of live births and the fertility rate (live births per 1000 women aged 15-44) increased by three percent, which the CDC said was the "largest single-year increase in more than 15 years."
The federal agency said that additional surveillance data would be necessary over the next few years to establish conclusively whether abortions are increasing without an accompanying increase in fertility.
Women in their twenties accounted for the majority of all abortions, at 56.8 percent. Abortion rates were highest in the 20-24 age demographic, with 29.9 abortions per 1000 women in that range, and 22.2 abortions per 1000 women in the 25-29 age group.
Among adolescents, CDC analysts noted that while abortion rates among adolescents (15-19 years) increased between 2005-2006, the number of live-births increased by an even greater proportion, which they stated "might be attributable to an increasing tendency for adolescents to continue their pregnancies." This is suggested by data that shows the ratio of abortion continued to decline in that period, despite the increased abortion rate.
Marital status also had an impact on those who were likely to seek abortions. Approximately 83.5 percent of women aborting their children were unmarried in the 43 areas that reported marital status.
In terms of race and ethnicity, whites (including Hispanic whites) accounted for 55.8 percent of the total number of abortions, with a rate of 10.8 abortions per 1000 women and 162 abortions per 1000 live births.
Breaking those values down further: data showed that Hispanic women account for 20.1 percent of the total number of abortions, a proportion that has increased over the 10 years between 1997-2006. In 1997, Hispanic women accounted for 17 percent of abortions. The CDC surmised this increase could be attributable to the fact that Hispanics now constitute a greater proportion of the resident US population.
Nevertheless, the overall rate of Hispanic women seeking abortion is down 19.1 percent from 1997: 28.7 to 23.2 abortions per 1000 women in that group, along with the abortion ratio: 292 to 223 abortions per 1000 live-births.
However, black women bear a staggeringly high proportion of abortions, accounting for 36.4 percent of the total number of abortions. Black abortion rates (33.9 abortions per 1000 women) and ratios (459 abortions for 1000 live-births) were higher than all the other reported racial groups. Nevertheless, only among black women did the abortion rate decline in 2006, in opposition to the general uptick in abortion that occurred that year.
Click here to see teh full CDC abstract with accompanying data, including tables and figures.
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The US Center for Disease Control (CDC) has released its latest available figures on abortion submitted to the federal agency, which shows an overall decrease in the number of abortions for the ten years between 1997 and 2006, but with a small uptick in abortion rates and ratios between 2005 and 2006, which CDC analysts believe may be attributable to an accompanying rise in fertility rates.
While the CDC report provides an analysis of trends in abortion patterns, it qualifies that its data reflects approximately 65 to 69 percent of the actual total numbers of abortions in the US: three states - California, Louisiana, and New Hampshire - do not submit any abortion data to the federal health agency, and not all reporting areas use the CDC forms for data collection. CDC data on the rate of abortions consistently remains 11 percent lower than those figures recorded by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, which solicits data directly from abortion providers.
Forty-nine reporting areas show that in 2006, a total of 846,181 abortions were documented. Between 1997 and 2006, the total number of abortions declined 5.7 percent, the rate of abortions (abortions per 1000 women aged 15-44) declined 8.8 percent, and the ratio of abortions (abortions per thousand live births) also fell 14.8 percent.
The CDC showed that the greatest rate of decline occurred in the years between 1996 and 2000, when total abortions fell on average by 20,605 per year. For the years between 2001 and 2006, the number of abortions fell by a much smaller margin, decreasing an average 2,163 abortions per year.
But 2006, the last year of available collected data, showed a small uptick in abortion that diverges from this downward trend. The total number of abortions in 2006 increased from 2005 levels by 3.1 percent: 820,151 abortions up to 846,181 abortions; the abortion rate rose by 3.2 percent from 15.6 to 16.1 (abortions per 1000 women aged 15-44), while the ratio of women aborting their unborn children remained the same in both years (236 abortions per 1000 live-births).
However, the CDC surmised that the abortion rate remained stable, and a rise in overall fertility for 2006 may serve as a likely explanation for the increase. For that year, the CDC found that the number of live births and the fertility rate (live births per 1000 women aged 15-44) increased by three percent, which the CDC said was the "largest single-year increase in more than 15 years."
The federal agency said that additional surveillance data would be necessary over the next few years to establish conclusively whether abortions are increasing without an accompanying increase in fertility.
Women in their twenties accounted for the majority of all abortions, at 56.8 percent. Abortion rates were highest in the 20-24 age demographic, with 29.9 abortions per 1000 women in that range, and 22.2 abortions per 1000 women in the 25-29 age group.
Among adolescents, CDC analysts noted that while abortion rates among adolescents (15-19 years) increased between 2005-2006, the number of live-births increased by an even greater proportion, which they stated "might be attributable to an increasing tendency for adolescents to continue their pregnancies." This is suggested by data that shows the ratio of abortion continued to decline in that period, despite the increased abortion rate.
Marital status also had an impact on those who were likely to seek abortions. Approximately 83.5 percent of women aborting their children were unmarried in the 43 areas that reported marital status.
In terms of race and ethnicity, whites (including Hispanic whites) accounted for 55.8 percent of the total number of abortions, with a rate of 10.8 abortions per 1000 women and 162 abortions per 1000 live births.
Breaking those values down further: data showed that Hispanic women account for 20.1 percent of the total number of abortions, a proportion that has increased over the 10 years between 1997-2006. In 1997, Hispanic women accounted for 17 percent of abortions. The CDC surmised this increase could be attributable to the fact that Hispanics now constitute a greater proportion of the resident US population.
Nevertheless, the overall rate of Hispanic women seeking abortion is down 19.1 percent from 1997: 28.7 to 23.2 abortions per 1000 women in that group, along with the abortion ratio: 292 to 223 abortions per 1000 live-births.
However, black women bear a staggeringly high proportion of abortions, accounting for 36.4 percent of the total number of abortions. Black abortion rates (33.9 abortions per 1000 women) and ratios (459 abortions for 1000 live-births) were higher than all the other reported racial groups. Nevertheless, only among black women did the abortion rate decline in 2006, in opposition to the general uptick in abortion that occurred that year.
Click here to see teh full CDC abstract with accompanying data, including tables and figures.
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
New Presidential Bioethics Commission
New Presidential Bioethics Commission
The previous President's Council on Bioethics was terminated before its time by President Obama back in June. Its charter was scheduled to expire in September, and there was some thought it was booted early to clear the deck for a new bioethics group aligned with the president. But no new bioethics council was formed to fill the void. Seems likely the old bioethics council was just giving contrary signals to the President (10 of the 18 members criticized the President after his March 9 speech where he opened the possibility of using more human embryos for research, including creating cloned human embryos for experiments.) Given that the NIH was preparing to promulgate new guidelines for using human embryos, including the steps to take for their destruction to allow federal taxpayer funding of their harvested cells, the "President's" bioethics council presented an official unwelcome burr under the saddle.
Finally, well after the old council's term would have expired, we now have the announcement that a new Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues will be established (Executive Order 13521). The announcement actually was made a week ago, on November 24. However, as of this writing the Executive Order still does not appear on the White House website (they must have been in a hurry to get to the state dinner.) However, the Executive Order was finally published in the Federal Register on Monday, November 30. The press release names the chair (Amy Gutmann, President of the University of Pennsylvania) and vice chair (James Wagner, president of Emory University) but does not name the other members of the commission (not more than 13 members total.) An interesting part of the Executive Order states that "at least one and not more than three of whom may be bioethicists or scientists drawn from the executive branch, as designated by the President." So, there is a chance to seed the commission with like-minded folks. Nature notes that the new group is "explicitly charged with recommending legislative and regulatory action and promises to have more influence on policy." The article also quotes George Annas opinion that the previous bioethics council had a "narrow, embryo-centric agenda". Nothing could be further from the truth, as evidenced by the range of topics covered by the previous council, including aging, genetic screening, and determination of death (the council's archived website should soon be available from the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature).
It will be interesting to see the final composition of this new presidential bioethics group, and whether they can live up to the openness, education of the public, and representation of diverse views seen with the last bioethics council. If not, it will just be a rubber stamp for presidential policies.
Contact: David Prentice
Source: FRCBlog
Publish Date: December 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The previous President's Council on Bioethics was terminated before its time by President Obama back in June. Its charter was scheduled to expire in September, and there was some thought it was booted early to clear the deck for a new bioethics group aligned with the president. But no new bioethics council was formed to fill the void. Seems likely the old bioethics council was just giving contrary signals to the President (10 of the 18 members criticized the President after his March 9 speech where he opened the possibility of using more human embryos for research, including creating cloned human embryos for experiments.) Given that the NIH was preparing to promulgate new guidelines for using human embryos, including the steps to take for their destruction to allow federal taxpayer funding of their harvested cells, the "President's" bioethics council presented an official unwelcome burr under the saddle.
Finally, well after the old council's term would have expired, we now have the announcement that a new Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues will be established (Executive Order 13521). The announcement actually was made a week ago, on November 24. However, as of this writing the Executive Order still does not appear on the White House website (they must have been in a hurry to get to the state dinner.) However, the Executive Order was finally published in the Federal Register on Monday, November 30. The press release names the chair (Amy Gutmann, President of the University of Pennsylvania) and vice chair (James Wagner, president of Emory University) but does not name the other members of the commission (not more than 13 members total.) An interesting part of the Executive Order states that "at least one and not more than three of whom may be bioethicists or scientists drawn from the executive branch, as designated by the President." So, there is a chance to seed the commission with like-minded folks. Nature notes that the new group is "explicitly charged with recommending legislative and regulatory action and promises to have more influence on policy." The article also quotes George Annas opinion that the previous bioethics council had a "narrow, embryo-centric agenda". Nothing could be further from the truth, as evidenced by the range of topics covered by the previous council, including aging, genetic screening, and determination of death (the council's archived website should soon be available from the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature).
It will be interesting to see the final composition of this new presidential bioethics group, and whether they can live up to the openness, education of the public, and representation of diverse views seen with the last bioethics council. If not, it will just be a rubber stamp for presidential policies.
Contact: David Prentice
Source: FRCBlog
Publish Date: December 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
New York magazine asks, "Just how pro-choice is America?" and answers, "Not so much"
New York magazine asks, "Just how pro-choice is America?" and answers, "Not so much"
I'm surprised NARAL linked to this piece yesterday in New York magazine, calling it a "[t]hought-provoking piece." It's no-spin depressing for the other side, actually. The article is long but a good read. And, with a reminder that this was written by a pro-abort, it makes quite the convincing case for incrementalism. Stay strong, pro-lifers, we're winning. Here are some "choice" excerpts...
Most New Yorkers hadn't heard of Bart Stupak before he attached his devastating anti-abortion amendment to the House's health-care-reform bill 3 weeks ago....
And the results sent chills through the pro-choice world.... But... [w]as Stupak's truly the minority view?
According to a Gallup poll from July, 60% of Americans think abortion should be either illegal or "legal only in a few circumstances."... Just 2 months before the health-care bill's passage in the House, a Rasmussen poll found that 48% of the public didn't want abortion covered in any government-subsidized health plan, while just 13% did....
"Because there's a Democratic majority in Congress and the president is pro-choice," says Nancy Keenan, the current director of NARAL, "it sometimes gets lost how truly numerically challenged we are."...
The idea that a bunch of pro-life rogue wingnuts have hijacked the agenda and thwarted the national will is a convenient, but fanciful, belief. Even with an 81-person margin in the House, and even with a passionately committed female, pro-choice Speaker, it was the Democrats who managed to pass a bill that, arguably, would restrict access to abortion more aggressively than any state measure or legal case since the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade....
From the moment abortion was legalized nationally in 1973, the American public wasn't especially comfortable with it.... As Jeffrey Rosen, the legal scholar at George Washington University, wrote in The Atlantic 3 years ago, Roe v. Wade was one of the few Supreme Court decisions that was out of step with mainstream public opinion....
If forced to choose, Americans today are far more eager to label themselves "pro-life" than they were a dozen years ago. The youngest generation of voters - those between the ages of 18 and 29, and therefore most likely to need an abortion - is the most pro-life to come along since the generation born during the Great Depression, according to Michael Hais and Morley Winograd, authors of Millennial Makeover, who got granular data on the subject from Pew Research Center.
Crisis Pregnancy Centers... now outnumber the country's abortion providers, who themselves are a rapidly aging group (2/3 are over 50, according to a National Abortion Federation study from 2002). In the wake of the murder of Dr. George Tiller this year, the Senate couldn't even pass a resolution condemning violence against abortion providers.
Abortion counselors will also tell you that the stigma attached to the procedure is worse than it's been in years....
One could say, in a sense, that the pro-choice movement has always had the harder job. The choice argument is an analytical one, grounded in theories of privacy and the rights of the mother; the pro-life side has the case with instant visceral and emotional appeal: This is life we're talking about. Things were also bound to get worse when the national tide turned Democratic; whenever a pro-choice person occupies the White House, those who fret about the issue stop giving money to NARAL and the pro-life side reasserts itself (indeed, says Cecile Richards, the head of Planned Parenthood, protests at her clinics are up, up, up).
But these explanations alone can't fully account for the shift in tide. Rather, it's a confluence of things--starting, I'd argue, with technological advances. Generally, science is the friend of progressive political causes. Not this one.
As fetal ultrasound technology improved during the nineties, abortion providers, conditioned to reassure patients that the fetus was merely tissue, found it much harder to do so once their patients were staring at images that looked so lifelike.... [O]rganizations like Focus on the Family began to use this technology to their advantage, sending ultrasound machines to CPCs....
Perhaps just as important, the pro-life movement got very shrewd about its politics, realizing that it had a highly conflicted electorate on its hands. As William Saletan shows with depressing cogency in Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War, the pro-choice movement was never going to win its case on the basis of women's rights. Men, especially southern white men, didn't care. The most persuasive argument it had was an old American standby: The government has no right meddling in your business.
It didn't take long for the pro-life movement to use this argument to its own advantage, realizing that if the public didn't like the government making decisions about abortions, it could force pro-choice legislators to admit that the public wouldn't like the government funding them either. They were right. Soon, pro-choice candidates were running away from public funding and toward parental consent - another constraint the public overwhelmingly prefers, as well as 24-hour waiting periods - and a more libertarian Supreme Court upheld these restrictions in landmark cases in 1989 and 1992.
Yet that still wasn't the worst of it. Until the mid-90s, the political debate over abortion remained mostly in the theoretical realm, with the role of government at its center. Had it stayed there, it's possible we'd be in a different place today.
But in late 1995... FL Republican congressman... Charles Canady had a stroke of insight that would shift it to the realm of both the metaphysical and brutally physical, which is precisely where the pro-life movement wanted it all along.
On the floor of the House, he introduced a bill that would ban so-called "partial-birth abortions".... The procedure was extremely upsetting to behold. In it, the fetus - or is it a baby? - is removed from the uterus and stabbed in the back of the head with surgical scissors. It's a revolting image, one to which the public was ritualistically subjected on the evening news as the debate raged on the House and Senate floors. Defending it was a pro-choice person's nightmare....
Clinton still vetoed the ban in 1996, but it was eventually signed into law in 2003 and withstood a Supreme Court challenge in 2007. More important, women were spooked. "A lot of our patients started asking whether or not the fetus felt pain after that, even if they were early along in their pregnancy," says Albert George Thomas, who until 2 years ago had spent 18 years as the head of the family-planning clinic at Mt. Sinai....
[I]f you want to hear honest talk about the realities of abortion, go speak with... abortion counselors and providers. Even the most radically pro-choice will tell you that the political discourse they hear about the subject, with its easy dichotomies and bumper-sticker boilerplate, has little correspondence to the messy, intricate stories of her patients. They hear about peace and guilt, relief and sin. And it is they who will acknowledge, whether we like it or not, that the rhetoric and imagery of the pro-life movement can touch on some basic emotional truths. Peg Johnston, who manages Access for Women in upstate NY, remembers the 1st time her patients unconsciously began to co-opt the language of the protesters outside. "And it wasn't that these protesters were brainwashing them," she says. "It's that they were tapping into things we all have some discomfort about."
This is quite a brave confession for Johnston - or any pro-choice person - to make. It means making oneself vulnerable to opportunist pro-life activists, who'll happily take those words about uncertainty or moral qualms and repurpose them for their own ends....
But Harris raises a very real and terrible dilemma for those of us who are pro-choice: Engage these questions and you play into the hands of the pro-life movement; refuse to engage in them and you risk living in a political vacuum....
NARAL's Nancy Keenan likes to say that abortion's biggest defenders right now are a "menopausal militia" - a rueful, inspired little joke. These baby-boomers, whose young adulthoods were defined by the fight over the right to choose, will soon be numerically overtaken by a generation of twentysomethings who is more pro-life than any but our senior citizens. As GOP strategists Christopher Blunt and Fred Steeper have pointed out, this group came of age during the partial-birth debate and was the first to grow up with pictures of sonograms on their refrigerators. The major development in reproductive technology during their lifetimes wasn't something that prevented pregnancies but something that created them: IVF....
Given this demographic shift, plus the Stupak Amendment, plus the unavoidable fact that abortion's essential nature is unchanging - it will always involve some brutal nexus of the heart and the mind - it's hard for a pro-choice person like myself to see how the ball rolls forward.
Perhaps Obama will help. This is, after all, a president who went to Notre Dame, a school with a 167-year history of Roman Catholic orthodoxy, and dared to give a speech about abortion.
But what he said was hardly his usual optimistic, paradigm-shifting oratory. All it was was a sober recitation of the problem, one that all-too-painfully explained why public opinion on the subject hasn't budged in 36 years. "I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away," he told his audience. "No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable."
Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
I'm surprised NARAL linked to this piece yesterday in New York magazine, calling it a "[t]hought-provoking piece." It's no-spin depressing for the other side, actually. The article is long but a good read. And, with a reminder that this was written by a pro-abort, it makes quite the convincing case for incrementalism. Stay strong, pro-lifers, we're winning. Here are some "choice" excerpts...
Most New Yorkers hadn't heard of Bart Stupak before he attached his devastating anti-abortion amendment to the House's health-care-reform bill 3 weeks ago....
And the results sent chills through the pro-choice world.... But... [w]as Stupak's truly the minority view?
According to a Gallup poll from July, 60% of Americans think abortion should be either illegal or "legal only in a few circumstances."... Just 2 months before the health-care bill's passage in the House, a Rasmussen poll found that 48% of the public didn't want abortion covered in any government-subsidized health plan, while just 13% did....
"Because there's a Democratic majority in Congress and the president is pro-choice," says Nancy Keenan, the current director of NARAL, "it sometimes gets lost how truly numerically challenged we are."...
The idea that a bunch of pro-life rogue wingnuts have hijacked the agenda and thwarted the national will is a convenient, but fanciful, belief. Even with an 81-person margin in the House, and even with a passionately committed female, pro-choice Speaker, it was the Democrats who managed to pass a bill that, arguably, would restrict access to abortion more aggressively than any state measure or legal case since the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade....
From the moment abortion was legalized nationally in 1973, the American public wasn't especially comfortable with it.... As Jeffrey Rosen, the legal scholar at George Washington University, wrote in The Atlantic 3 years ago, Roe v. Wade was one of the few Supreme Court decisions that was out of step with mainstream public opinion....
If forced to choose, Americans today are far more eager to label themselves "pro-life" than they were a dozen years ago. The youngest generation of voters - those between the ages of 18 and 29, and therefore most likely to need an abortion - is the most pro-life to come along since the generation born during the Great Depression, according to Michael Hais and Morley Winograd, authors of Millennial Makeover, who got granular data on the subject from Pew Research Center.
Crisis Pregnancy Centers... now outnumber the country's abortion providers, who themselves are a rapidly aging group (2/3 are over 50, according to a National Abortion Federation study from 2002). In the wake of the murder of Dr. George Tiller this year, the Senate couldn't even pass a resolution condemning violence against abortion providers.
Abortion counselors will also tell you that the stigma attached to the procedure is worse than it's been in years....
One could say, in a sense, that the pro-choice movement has always had the harder job. The choice argument is an analytical one, grounded in theories of privacy and the rights of the mother; the pro-life side has the case with instant visceral and emotional appeal: This is life we're talking about. Things were also bound to get worse when the national tide turned Democratic; whenever a pro-choice person occupies the White House, those who fret about the issue stop giving money to NARAL and the pro-life side reasserts itself (indeed, says Cecile Richards, the head of Planned Parenthood, protests at her clinics are up, up, up).
But these explanations alone can't fully account for the shift in tide. Rather, it's a confluence of things--starting, I'd argue, with technological advances. Generally, science is the friend of progressive political causes. Not this one.
As fetal ultrasound technology improved during the nineties, abortion providers, conditioned to reassure patients that the fetus was merely tissue, found it much harder to do so once their patients were staring at images that looked so lifelike.... [O]rganizations like Focus on the Family began to use this technology to their advantage, sending ultrasound machines to CPCs....
Perhaps just as important, the pro-life movement got very shrewd about its politics, realizing that it had a highly conflicted electorate on its hands. As William Saletan shows with depressing cogency in Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War, the pro-choice movement was never going to win its case on the basis of women's rights. Men, especially southern white men, didn't care. The most persuasive argument it had was an old American standby: The government has no right meddling in your business.
It didn't take long for the pro-life movement to use this argument to its own advantage, realizing that if the public didn't like the government making decisions about abortions, it could force pro-choice legislators to admit that the public wouldn't like the government funding them either. They were right. Soon, pro-choice candidates were running away from public funding and toward parental consent - another constraint the public overwhelmingly prefers, as well as 24-hour waiting periods - and a more libertarian Supreme Court upheld these restrictions in landmark cases in 1989 and 1992.
Yet that still wasn't the worst of it. Until the mid-90s, the political debate over abortion remained mostly in the theoretical realm, with the role of government at its center. Had it stayed there, it's possible we'd be in a different place today.
But in late 1995... FL Republican congressman... Charles Canady had a stroke of insight that would shift it to the realm of both the metaphysical and brutally physical, which is precisely where the pro-life movement wanted it all along.
On the floor of the House, he introduced a bill that would ban so-called "partial-birth abortions".... The procedure was extremely upsetting to behold. In it, the fetus - or is it a baby? - is removed from the uterus and stabbed in the back of the head with surgical scissors. It's a revolting image, one to which the public was ritualistically subjected on the evening news as the debate raged on the House and Senate floors. Defending it was a pro-choice person's nightmare....
Clinton still vetoed the ban in 1996, but it was eventually signed into law in 2003 and withstood a Supreme Court challenge in 2007. More important, women were spooked. "A lot of our patients started asking whether or not the fetus felt pain after that, even if they were early along in their pregnancy," says Albert George Thomas, who until 2 years ago had spent 18 years as the head of the family-planning clinic at Mt. Sinai....
[I]f you want to hear honest talk about the realities of abortion, go speak with... abortion counselors and providers. Even the most radically pro-choice will tell you that the political discourse they hear about the subject, with its easy dichotomies and bumper-sticker boilerplate, has little correspondence to the messy, intricate stories of her patients. They hear about peace and guilt, relief and sin. And it is they who will acknowledge, whether we like it or not, that the rhetoric and imagery of the pro-life movement can touch on some basic emotional truths. Peg Johnston, who manages Access for Women in upstate NY, remembers the 1st time her patients unconsciously began to co-opt the language of the protesters outside. "And it wasn't that these protesters were brainwashing them," she says. "It's that they were tapping into things we all have some discomfort about."
This is quite a brave confession for Johnston - or any pro-choice person - to make. It means making oneself vulnerable to opportunist pro-life activists, who'll happily take those words about uncertainty or moral qualms and repurpose them for their own ends....
But Harris raises a very real and terrible dilemma for those of us who are pro-choice: Engage these questions and you play into the hands of the pro-life movement; refuse to engage in them and you risk living in a political vacuum....
NARAL's Nancy Keenan likes to say that abortion's biggest defenders right now are a "menopausal militia" - a rueful, inspired little joke. These baby-boomers, whose young adulthoods were defined by the fight over the right to choose, will soon be numerically overtaken by a generation of twentysomethings who is more pro-life than any but our senior citizens. As GOP strategists Christopher Blunt and Fred Steeper have pointed out, this group came of age during the partial-birth debate and was the first to grow up with pictures of sonograms on their refrigerators. The major development in reproductive technology during their lifetimes wasn't something that prevented pregnancies but something that created them: IVF....
Given this demographic shift, plus the Stupak Amendment, plus the unavoidable fact that abortion's essential nature is unchanging - it will always involve some brutal nexus of the heart and the mind - it's hard for a pro-choice person like myself to see how the ball rolls forward.
Perhaps Obama will help. This is, after all, a president who went to Notre Dame, a school with a 167-year history of Roman Catholic orthodoxy, and dared to give a speech about abortion.
But what he said was hardly his usual optimistic, paradigm-shifting oratory. All it was was a sober recitation of the problem, one that all-too-painfully explained why public opinion on the subject hasn't budged in 36 years. "I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away," he told his audience. "No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable."
Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NRLC Leter to the Senate Re: Mikulski Amendment
NRLC Leter to the Senate Re: Mikulski Amendment
The U.S. Senate yesterday (November 30th) began the process of considering amendments to Senator Reid's health care legislation. The first amendment offered was Mikulski Amendment No. 2791, dealing with federally mandated coverage of "preventive care." Late today, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) sent senators a letter opposing the Mikulski Amendment, unless it is revised. A copy of the letter is below. It is not yet known when the Senate will vote on the Mikulski Amendment.
To the Honorable Members of the U.S. Senate:
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), representing affiliated right-to-life organizations in all SO states, is opposed to the pending Mikulski Amendment No.2791, unless the amendment is modified in the manner discussed below.
Section 1001 of Senator Reid's pending substitute, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," would create a new Section 2713 of the Public Health Services Act, dealing with "Preventive Health Services." Under this provision, all private health plans would be mandated to cover, without cost-sharing, "(1) evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of 'A' or' B ' in the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force."
The Mikulski Amendment No.2791 retains that mandate, but further specifies that all health plans would also be mandated to cover "with respect to women, such additional preventive care and screenings not described in paragraph (1) as provided for in comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration for purposes of this paragraph." In short, the Reid language makes the "recommendations" of the United States Preventive Services Task Force, regarding "preventive services," into mandates that will bind all health plans. The Mikulski Amendment No.2791 would further empower political appointees at the HRSA to issue mandates that all health plans cover any service "with respect to women" that is declared to constitute "preventive care."
If Congress were to grant any Executive Branch entity sweeping authority to define services that private health plans must cover, merely by declaring a given service to constitute "preventive care," then that authority could be employed in the future to require all health plans to cover abortions. Therefore, NRLC opposes both the Mikulski Amendment No.2791, and the underlying language of Section 1001, unless additional language is added to explicitly exclude abortion from the universe of services that might be mandated as "preventive care."
Our concern on this point is not hypothetical -prominent pro-abortion advocates are already on record discussing abortion as a category of "preventive health care." For example, a 2009 publication cosponsored by the National Abortion Federation, Providing Abortion Care, explicitly stated that " APCs [ Advanced Practice Clinicians] are especially well positioned within the health care system to address women's need for comprehensive primary preventive health care that includes abortion care." (emphasis added).
It is also noteworthy that when Senator Mikulski offered a similar amendment in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, it was backed by a long list ofproabortion advocacy groups, including NARAL Pro-Choice America, Catholics for Choice, Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Medical Students for Choice. A July 8, 2009 letter from these groups asserted that by allowing the Health Resources and Services Administration to issue binding guidelines on preventive services, the "unique preventive health needs ofwomen" would be addressed.
Moreover, when a constituent wrote to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca..) earlier this year to urge that abortion be excluded from pending health care legislation, he received an e-mail response dated August 3,2009, in which Sen. Feinstein wrote: "Thank you for writing to me to express your support for proposed restrictions on private coverage of preventative services for reproductive care in health reform legislation. ...I understand your opinion that private coverage of abortion services should be restricted in health reform. However, I believe that reproductive health services should be treated no differently than any other health care service or benefit."
There will be some who endeavor to dismiss our concern that the term "preventive care" could be construed to encompass abortion. However, anyone who genuinely believes that abortion properly will remain outside the scope of future "preventive care" mandates should have no objection to explicitly writing such a rule of construction into the legislation.
In summary: The National Right to Life Committee opposes the Mikulski Amendment No. 2791, unless it is revised to explicitly remove abortion from the universe of services that could be defined as mandated "preventive care" by either the Health Resources and Services Administration or the United States Preventive Services Task Force.
Thank you for your consideration of the concerns of the National Right to Life Committee on this
subject.
Source: NRLC
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
The U.S. Senate yesterday (November 30th) began the process of considering amendments to Senator Reid's health care legislation. The first amendment offered was Mikulski Amendment No. 2791, dealing with federally mandated coverage of "preventive care." Late today, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) sent senators a letter opposing the Mikulski Amendment, unless it is revised. A copy of the letter is below. It is not yet known when the Senate will vote on the Mikulski Amendment.
To the Honorable Members of the U.S. Senate:
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), representing affiliated right-to-life organizations in all SO states, is opposed to the pending Mikulski Amendment No.2791, unless the amendment is modified in the manner discussed below.
Section 1001 of Senator Reid's pending substitute, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," would create a new Section 2713 of the Public Health Services Act, dealing with "Preventive Health Services." Under this provision, all private health plans would be mandated to cover, without cost-sharing, "(1) evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of 'A' or' B ' in the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force."
The Mikulski Amendment No.2791 retains that mandate, but further specifies that all health plans would also be mandated to cover "with respect to women, such additional preventive care and screenings not described in paragraph (1) as provided for in comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration for purposes of this paragraph." In short, the Reid language makes the "recommendations" of the United States Preventive Services Task Force, regarding "preventive services," into mandates that will bind all health plans. The Mikulski Amendment No.2791 would further empower political appointees at the HRSA to issue mandates that all health plans cover any service "with respect to women" that is declared to constitute "preventive care."
If Congress were to grant any Executive Branch entity sweeping authority to define services that private health plans must cover, merely by declaring a given service to constitute "preventive care," then that authority could be employed in the future to require all health plans to cover abortions. Therefore, NRLC opposes both the Mikulski Amendment No.2791, and the underlying language of Section 1001, unless additional language is added to explicitly exclude abortion from the universe of services that might be mandated as "preventive care."
Our concern on this point is not hypothetical -prominent pro-abortion advocates are already on record discussing abortion as a category of "preventive health care." For example, a 2009 publication cosponsored by the National Abortion Federation, Providing Abortion Care, explicitly stated that " APCs [ Advanced Practice Clinicians] are especially well positioned within the health care system to address women's need for comprehensive primary preventive health care that includes abortion care." (emphasis added).
It is also noteworthy that when Senator Mikulski offered a similar amendment in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, it was backed by a long list ofproabortion advocacy groups, including NARAL Pro-Choice America, Catholics for Choice, Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Medical Students for Choice. A July 8, 2009 letter from these groups asserted that by allowing the Health Resources and Services Administration to issue binding guidelines on preventive services, the "unique preventive health needs ofwomen" would be addressed.
Moreover, when a constituent wrote to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca..) earlier this year to urge that abortion be excluded from pending health care legislation, he received an e-mail response dated August 3,2009, in which Sen. Feinstein wrote: "Thank you for writing to me to express your support for proposed restrictions on private coverage of preventative services for reproductive care in health reform legislation. ...I understand your opinion that private coverage of abortion services should be restricted in health reform. However, I believe that reproductive health services should be treated no differently than any other health care service or benefit."
There will be some who endeavor to dismiss our concern that the term "preventive care" could be construed to encompass abortion. However, anyone who genuinely believes that abortion properly will remain outside the scope of future "preventive care" mandates should have no objection to explicitly writing such a rule of construction into the legislation.
In summary: The National Right to Life Committee opposes the Mikulski Amendment No. 2791, unless it is revised to explicitly remove abortion from the universe of services that could be defined as mandated "preventive care" by either the Health Resources and Services Administration or the United States Preventive Services Task Force.
Thank you for your consideration of the concerns of the National Right to Life Committee on this
subject.
Source: NRLC
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Obama Education Czar + Planned Parenthood Sex Education = High Teen Pregnancy Rate
Obama Education Czar + Planned Parenthood Sex Education = High Teen Pregnancy Rate
How many times and how many ways can Planned Parenthood say that it is reducing teen pregnancy with its horrifyingly graphic, immoral sex education, when evidence shows quite the contrary to be true?
With Planned Parenthood's own Guttmacher Institute conducting all of the studies on the efficacy of its programs, and Planned Parenthood supervising its own programs in schools, it sometimes appears our teens are doomed to never-ending abuse by the abortion-mongering, sex-hawking organization that exists to "liberate" our society from sexual mores and kill any preborn babies that may get in the way of its push toward "sexual rights" for all, including children.
One case in point is Robeson High School in Chicago. The school made headlines recently because of a revelation that one in seven of its female students is pregnant.
Some media outlets jumped on the opportunity to blame the high pregnancy rate on the fact that the parents are not doing enough at home and that the school is encouraging pregnancy by helping pregnant teens continue with their education.
No mention was made of the fact that Planned Parenthood has been a highly paid consultant with the Chicago public school system for years.
From February 27, 2001, through August 31, 2004, Planned Parenthood was awarded $1,608,100 in consulting fees by Chicago public schools "on a non-competitive basis because of Consultant's unique qualifications to provide a teen pregnancy prevention program." (Emphasis added.) The money emanated from the school's operating fund.
In return, Planned Parenthood was to provide a teen pregnancy prevention program for seventh and ninth graders in 45 Chicago public schools. Students were also given special times to access Planned Parenthood's places of business "for support and guidance."
Incredibly, Planned Parenthood was given authority to oversee itself and "assess the program's efficiency and evaluate participating students' progress in the program."
From September 1, 2004, through August 31, 2006, an additional $1 million was awarded to Planned Parenthood for the same "services." It continued to allow the group to monitor itself and left open the option of renewal for two more time periods.
In 2006, the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health, which includes Planned Parenthood, led the charge to remove any vestiges of "abstinence-only" education from Chicago public schools by holding a fundraiser at the headquarters of Playboy Enterprises.
The Chicago Board of Education adopted a requirement that "students in sixth grade and beyond" take a comprehensive sex education program (of the Planned Parenthood type) beginning in 2007. (Emphasis added.)
According to a 2006 news report from the Chicago Tribune,
The new program ... [will] provide "age-appropriate and medically accurate information concerning the emotional, psychological, physiological, hygienic and social responsibility aspects of family life."
The courses will be taught in Grades 6 through 12 and include instruction on how to prevent pregnancy through abstinence and contraception, as well as the emotional and psychological consequences of premarital sex and pregnancy.
And who was overseeing the Chicago public schools from 2001 to 2008, when Planned Parenthood was paid in excess of $2 million to reduce teen pregnancy? None other than Arne Duncan, who was appointed U.S. Secretary of Education in January of this year.
It's enough to make a grown woman cry. But instead of crying, it's time to shout. Planned Parenthood must be removed from our schools and our communities. Parents must educate their local school board members about the immorality of Planned Parenthood programs and the dangers they pose to our children.
STOPP's proven plan for defeating Planned Parenthood includes a strategy for defeating its sex education programs. Time and time again, when parents have followed this plan, they have been successful in getting Planned Parenthood removed from local schools. Don't wait for someone else to do it. Act now to protect our children from the hellish vice of Planned Parenthood that holds our children hostage to the slavery of unbridled sex and its consequences, and steals their very souls.
Contact: Rita Diller
Source: American Life League via LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: December 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
How many times and how many ways can Planned Parenthood say that it is reducing teen pregnancy with its horrifyingly graphic, immoral sex education, when evidence shows quite the contrary to be true?
With Planned Parenthood's own Guttmacher Institute conducting all of the studies on the efficacy of its programs, and Planned Parenthood supervising its own programs in schools, it sometimes appears our teens are doomed to never-ending abuse by the abortion-mongering, sex-hawking organization that exists to "liberate" our society from sexual mores and kill any preborn babies that may get in the way of its push toward "sexual rights" for all, including children.
One case in point is Robeson High School in Chicago. The school made headlines recently because of a revelation that one in seven of its female students is pregnant.
Some media outlets jumped on the opportunity to blame the high pregnancy rate on the fact that the parents are not doing enough at home and that the school is encouraging pregnancy by helping pregnant teens continue with their education.
No mention was made of the fact that Planned Parenthood has been a highly paid consultant with the Chicago public school system for years.
From February 27, 2001, through August 31, 2004, Planned Parenthood was awarded $1,608,100 in consulting fees by Chicago public schools "on a non-competitive basis because of Consultant's unique qualifications to provide a teen pregnancy prevention program." (Emphasis added.) The money emanated from the school's operating fund.
In return, Planned Parenthood was to provide a teen pregnancy prevention program for seventh and ninth graders in 45 Chicago public schools. Students were also given special times to access Planned Parenthood's places of business "for support and guidance."
Incredibly, Planned Parenthood was given authority to oversee itself and "assess the program's efficiency and evaluate participating students' progress in the program."
From September 1, 2004, through August 31, 2006, an additional $1 million was awarded to Planned Parenthood for the same "services." It continued to allow the group to monitor itself and left open the option of renewal for two more time periods.
In 2006, the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health, which includes Planned Parenthood, led the charge to remove any vestiges of "abstinence-only" education from Chicago public schools by holding a fundraiser at the headquarters of Playboy Enterprises.
The Chicago Board of Education adopted a requirement that "students in sixth grade and beyond" take a comprehensive sex education program (of the Planned Parenthood type) beginning in 2007. (Emphasis added.)
According to a 2006 news report from the Chicago Tribune,
The new program ... [will] provide "age-appropriate and medically accurate information concerning the emotional, psychological, physiological, hygienic and social responsibility aspects of family life."
The courses will be taught in Grades 6 through 12 and include instruction on how to prevent pregnancy through abstinence and contraception, as well as the emotional and psychological consequences of premarital sex and pregnancy.
And who was overseeing the Chicago public schools from 2001 to 2008, when Planned Parenthood was paid in excess of $2 million to reduce teen pregnancy? None other than Arne Duncan, who was appointed U.S. Secretary of Education in January of this year.
It's enough to make a grown woman cry. But instead of crying, it's time to shout. Planned Parenthood must be removed from our schools and our communities. Parents must educate their local school board members about the immorality of Planned Parenthood programs and the dangers they pose to our children.
STOPP's proven plan for defeating Planned Parenthood includes a strategy for defeating its sex education programs. Time and time again, when parents have followed this plan, they have been successful in getting Planned Parenthood removed from local schools. Don't wait for someone else to do it. Act now to protect our children from the hellish vice of Planned Parenthood that holds our children hostage to the slavery of unbridled sex and its consequences, and steals their very souls.
Contact: Rita Diller
Source: American Life League via LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: December 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Around the World
Around the World
Pro-Life Victory as Northern Ireland
Pro-life advocates in Northern Ireland are celebrating a major court victory today as the Belfast High Court has ordered the recall of health guidelines that they said would have undermined and effectively overturned the province's pro-life laws.
Lord Justice Girvan found that the guidelines failed to deal properly with conscientious objection to abortion and counseling on abortion. The judge said the guidelines were open to misinterpretation, saying the language was "ambiguous" and left doctors and staff unclear as to what was expected of them. The judge said the guidelines needed to be absolutely clear, otherwise they represented "a trap to the unwary." Click here for more.
Italy Delays Sale of RU 486
The Italian Senate has blocked the sale of RU 486 in the country pending investigations into the abortion drug's safety. Antonio Tomassini, the leader of the committee studying the issue cited the "many doubts" surrounding the drug and the panel voted to postpone its distribution.
This summer the Italian Pharmaceuticals Agency (AIFA) approved the drug, stipulating that it must be administered by physicians in hospitals up to the 49th day of pregnancy, but not sold over the counter in pharmacies. This decision came despite AIFA documentation that noted the deaths of at least nine women who had taken it. In 2008, the Italian Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics reported 16 maternal deaths associated with RU 486.
The committee said it is also concerned with the drug's compatibility with Italian law that allows abortion on demand up to 90 days of pregnancy. Maurizio Sacconi, the Welfare and Health Minister, said, "Italy's abortion laws were not conceived with a pharmaceutical solution in mind." Click here for more.
France Rejects Euthanasia
The French National Assembly has rejected an attempt to legalize euthanasia in a 326 to 202 vote.
"Euthanasia is not a medical act. The right to die is not a medical act," said Union for a Popular Movement party deputy Jean Leonetti, author of a 2005 law on dying that promotes the use of palliative care.
The Alliance for Human Life welcomed the vote, saying that the bill "played on the ambiguity of the word 'dignity'" and "contributed to the confusion on a difficult topic."
Xavier Mirabel, president of the Alliance said, "The French do not want aggressive treatment. When they understand that aggressive treatment does not include euthanasia, most of our citizens are reassured. We therefore ask that the Leonetti law be known and more fully implemented, which requires a more proactive promotion of palliative care." Click here for more.
Drive Starts to Make Dutch Psychiatrists Justify Not Killing Suicidal Patients!
Of the 2,331 cases reviewed by the regional euthanasia review committees in 2008 only two involved psychiatric patients. All doctors are obligated to report assisted suicides to the committees, who then investigate if all the legal requirements were met. [Me: Studies show that about half are not reported.] "Psychiatrists have a holier-than-thou attitude," Hans van Dam, a nurse and a teacher, said at a symposium organised by the Right to Die-NL foundation in the Dutch town of Ede on Monday. The taboo on assisted suicide for mental patients needs to be broken, Van Dam argued. "To put it bluntly: cancer will kill you in a matter of years, but schizophrenia is forever. The suffering of psychiatric patients can be just as intolerable as many forms of physical suffering," said Eugène Sutorius, a professor of criminal law and a former president of the foundation. Click her for more.
Objections to abortion could be overruled
The Council of Europe, which is larger than the European Union, is considering a draft resolution that would deny the right of hospitals to opt out of doing abortions.
The title of the resolution is "The Women's Access to Lawful Medical Care -- the Problem of Unregulated Use of Conscientious Objection." Joseph Meany of Human Life International tells OneNewsNow that the Council is not concerned about ethics or religious beliefs. Click here for more.
Sources: LifeSiteNews.com, Secondhand Smoke, OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 30, 2009, December 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-Life Victory as Northern Ireland
Pro-life advocates in Northern Ireland are celebrating a major court victory today as the Belfast High Court has ordered the recall of health guidelines that they said would have undermined and effectively overturned the province's pro-life laws.
Lord Justice Girvan found that the guidelines failed to deal properly with conscientious objection to abortion and counseling on abortion. The judge said the guidelines were open to misinterpretation, saying the language was "ambiguous" and left doctors and staff unclear as to what was expected of them. The judge said the guidelines needed to be absolutely clear, otherwise they represented "a trap to the unwary." Click here for more.
Italy Delays Sale of RU 486
The Italian Senate has blocked the sale of RU 486 in the country pending investigations into the abortion drug's safety. Antonio Tomassini, the leader of the committee studying the issue cited the "many doubts" surrounding the drug and the panel voted to postpone its distribution.
This summer the Italian Pharmaceuticals Agency (AIFA) approved the drug, stipulating that it must be administered by physicians in hospitals up to the 49th day of pregnancy, but not sold over the counter in pharmacies. This decision came despite AIFA documentation that noted the deaths of at least nine women who had taken it. In 2008, the Italian Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics reported 16 maternal deaths associated with RU 486.
The committee said it is also concerned with the drug's compatibility with Italian law that allows abortion on demand up to 90 days of pregnancy. Maurizio Sacconi, the Welfare and Health Minister, said, "Italy's abortion laws were not conceived with a pharmaceutical solution in mind." Click here for more.
France Rejects Euthanasia
The French National Assembly has rejected an attempt to legalize euthanasia in a 326 to 202 vote.
"Euthanasia is not a medical act. The right to die is not a medical act," said Union for a Popular Movement party deputy Jean Leonetti, author of a 2005 law on dying that promotes the use of palliative care.
The Alliance for Human Life welcomed the vote, saying that the bill "played on the ambiguity of the word 'dignity'" and "contributed to the confusion on a difficult topic."
Xavier Mirabel, president of the Alliance said, "The French do not want aggressive treatment. When they understand that aggressive treatment does not include euthanasia, most of our citizens are reassured. We therefore ask that the Leonetti law be known and more fully implemented, which requires a more proactive promotion of palliative care." Click here for more.
Drive Starts to Make Dutch Psychiatrists Justify Not Killing Suicidal Patients!
Of the 2,331 cases reviewed by the regional euthanasia review committees in 2008 only two involved psychiatric patients. All doctors are obligated to report assisted suicides to the committees, who then investigate if all the legal requirements were met. [Me: Studies show that about half are not reported.] "Psychiatrists have a holier-than-thou attitude," Hans van Dam, a nurse and a teacher, said at a symposium organised by the Right to Die-NL foundation in the Dutch town of Ede on Monday. The taboo on assisted suicide for mental patients needs to be broken, Van Dam argued. "To put it bluntly: cancer will kill you in a matter of years, but schizophrenia is forever. The suffering of psychiatric patients can be just as intolerable as many forms of physical suffering," said Eugène Sutorius, a professor of criminal law and a former president of the foundation. Click her for more.
Objections to abortion could be overruled
The Council of Europe, which is larger than the European Union, is considering a draft resolution that would deny the right of hospitals to opt out of doing abortions.
The title of the resolution is "The Women's Access to Lawful Medical Care -- the Problem of Unregulated Use of Conscientious Objection." Joseph Meany of Human Life International tells OneNewsNow that the Council is not concerned about ethics or religious beliefs. Click here for more.
Sources: LifeSiteNews.com, Secondhand Smoke, OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 30, 2009, December 1, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
Cord Blood Stem Cells may Help Treat Heart and Lung Disorders
Two new studies in animals suggest that stem cells from transplanted human-derived umbilical cord blood could help treat some lung and heart disorders. Scientists already know that such stem cells can differentiate into a long list of different kinds of cells in the laboratory, Dr. Won Soon Park of the Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, Korea, co-author of one of the studies, said in a news release. But it's not clear if they can develop into lung-specific cells in the body, he added.
Click here for the full article.
Mother Gives Birth to 15-Pound Baby
Some numbers are just too big to register. It was like that when Wendi Dolton heard a doctor say the number '15.6' moments after giving birth to her third child on Monday. She thought at first he was referring to the time. "And he goes, 'weight.' "And I said, 'wait for what?'" "And he goes, 'no, the weight." Wendi's next response: "Are you kidding me?" No kidding. Wendi had given birth to a baby boy weighing 15 pounds, 6 ounces. "There's been doctors and nurses that have been around here a fair amount of years and they've never seen one that big," says Mike Dolton, Wendi's husband. The Racine, Minnesota parents named their baby boy Axel LaVerne.
Click here for the full article.
Legislation Prompts Vermont Abortion Debate
A state senator is poised to introduce a bill in response to an August car crash that claimed twin fetuses a Bennington woman was carrying. Before the legislation comes off the printer, Patricia Blair knows it doesn't go far enough to recognize the lives she lost. Blair was injured when her van was struck by another car in Bennington on Aug. 10. Her 6-month fetuses — a boy and a girl — died as a result of the crash, which also seriously injured her husband, Randy Blair, leaving him unable to walk. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard Sears, D-Bennington, bill would enhance penalties for assaulting a pregnant woman, wording that he believes walks a careful line: creating consequences for harming an unborn child without unfurling a debate about abortion.
Click here for the full article.
Unborn Vitcims Bill to seek Tougher Penalties for Those who Kill a Pregnant Woman
BAYSIDE, NY -- An Arverne woman whose daughter and unborn child were killed on the daughter's due date is going to Albany this week to ask for tougher penalties for those who kill a pregnant woman. Towanda Wimms is seeking support for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in Albany, which would treat the act of killing a pregnant woman as two murders. Wimms' daughter, Niasha DeLain, a 25-year-old who worked in customer service at a Rockaway Capital One Bank branch, was killed in Ozone Park on her due date and on her father's birthday -- Oct. 25, 2008. She was also pursuing a bachelor's in accounting from the College of New Rochelle.
Click here for the full article.
Many Pregnant Women take Drugs that are Harmful to their Baby
NEW YORK -- With the help of their doctors, women planning to become pregnant should take an inventory of the medications they take, researchers from Canada advise. In a study, they found that many pregnant women still take medications long known to cause birth defects. Some medications with known fetal risk, such as drugs that control epilepsy, are essential during pregnancy, Dr. Anick Berard, at the University of Montreal in Quebec, noted in an email correspondence to Reuters Health. Other medications, such as those that treat severe acne, anxiety and psychiatric drugs, antibiotics, and many drugs prescribed for heart disease and medical conditions, "can and should be avoided," according to Berard.
Click here for the full article.
Monthly Abortion Fee in Senate Health Plan
Although its illegal to use federal money to pay for abortions, the gargantuan healthcare bill presented this week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will levy a new "abortion premium" fee on Americans in the government-run insurance plan. The much-ballyhooed 2,074-page bill (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) that will start being debated this weekend in the U.S. Senate includes a monthly abortion premium charged to all enrollees in the government-operated health plan. The $848 billion overhaul package is being touted by Reid as a measure that will "save lives" even though it covers a procedure that ends them.
Click here for the full article.
Fourteenth Fort Hood victim forgotten
Washington D.C. - Last week, Maj. Nadil Malik Hasan was indicted on 13 counts of murder for the shootings at Fort Hood which took place on Nov. 5. Missing from the list of victims is the three-month-old unborn child of Private Francheska Velez. The Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance of Christian attorneys, has sent a letter to the Office of Staff Judge Advocate at Fort Hood requesting that the murder of Velez's child be included in the case against Malik.
"It would cause a severe and negative impact on morale if Army women were made to believe that the Army valued their children less than they did adult victims of crime. We respectfully request that you enforce UCMJ Article 119a against the suspect," the ADF's letter stated.
Click here for the full article.
(Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
Cord Blood Stem Cells may Help Treat Heart and Lung Disorders
Two new studies in animals suggest that stem cells from transplanted human-derived umbilical cord blood could help treat some lung and heart disorders. Scientists already know that such stem cells can differentiate into a long list of different kinds of cells in the laboratory, Dr. Won Soon Park of the Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, Korea, co-author of one of the studies, said in a news release. But it's not clear if they can develop into lung-specific cells in the body, he added.
Click here for the full article.
Mother Gives Birth to 15-Pound Baby
Some numbers are just too big to register. It was like that when Wendi Dolton heard a doctor say the number '15.6' moments after giving birth to her third child on Monday. She thought at first he was referring to the time. "And he goes, 'weight.' "And I said, 'wait for what?'" "And he goes, 'no, the weight." Wendi's next response: "Are you kidding me?" No kidding. Wendi had given birth to a baby boy weighing 15 pounds, 6 ounces. "There's been doctors and nurses that have been around here a fair amount of years and they've never seen one that big," says Mike Dolton, Wendi's husband. The Racine, Minnesota parents named their baby boy Axel LaVerne.
Click here for the full article.
Legislation Prompts Vermont Abortion Debate
A state senator is poised to introduce a bill in response to an August car crash that claimed twin fetuses a Bennington woman was carrying. Before the legislation comes off the printer, Patricia Blair knows it doesn't go far enough to recognize the lives she lost. Blair was injured when her van was struck by another car in Bennington on Aug. 10. Her 6-month fetuses — a boy and a girl — died as a result of the crash, which also seriously injured her husband, Randy Blair, leaving him unable to walk. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard Sears, D-Bennington, bill would enhance penalties for assaulting a pregnant woman, wording that he believes walks a careful line: creating consequences for harming an unborn child without unfurling a debate about abortion.
Click here for the full article.
Unborn Vitcims Bill to seek Tougher Penalties for Those who Kill a Pregnant Woman
BAYSIDE, NY -- An Arverne woman whose daughter and unborn child were killed on the daughter's due date is going to Albany this week to ask for tougher penalties for those who kill a pregnant woman. Towanda Wimms is seeking support for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in Albany, which would treat the act of killing a pregnant woman as two murders. Wimms' daughter, Niasha DeLain, a 25-year-old who worked in customer service at a Rockaway Capital One Bank branch, was killed in Ozone Park on her due date and on her father's birthday -- Oct. 25, 2008. She was also pursuing a bachelor's in accounting from the College of New Rochelle.
Click here for the full article.
Many Pregnant Women take Drugs that are Harmful to their Baby
NEW YORK -- With the help of their doctors, women planning to become pregnant should take an inventory of the medications they take, researchers from Canada advise. In a study, they found that many pregnant women still take medications long known to cause birth defects. Some medications with known fetal risk, such as drugs that control epilepsy, are essential during pregnancy, Dr. Anick Berard, at the University of Montreal in Quebec, noted in an email correspondence to Reuters Health. Other medications, such as those that treat severe acne, anxiety and psychiatric drugs, antibiotics, and many drugs prescribed for heart disease and medical conditions, "can and should be avoided," according to Berard.
Click here for the full article.
Monthly Abortion Fee in Senate Health Plan
Although its illegal to use federal money to pay for abortions, the gargantuan healthcare bill presented this week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will levy a new "abortion premium" fee on Americans in the government-run insurance plan. The much-ballyhooed 2,074-page bill (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) that will start being debated this weekend in the U.S. Senate includes a monthly abortion premium charged to all enrollees in the government-operated health plan. The $848 billion overhaul package is being touted by Reid as a measure that will "save lives" even though it covers a procedure that ends them.
Click here for the full article.
Fourteenth Fort Hood victim forgotten
Washington D.C. - Last week, Maj. Nadil Malik Hasan was indicted on 13 counts of murder for the shootings at Fort Hood which took place on Nov. 5. Missing from the list of victims is the three-month-old unborn child of Private Francheska Velez. The Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance of Christian attorneys, has sent a letter to the Office of Staff Judge Advocate at Fort Hood requesting that the murder of Velez's child be included in the case against Malik.
"It would cause a severe and negative impact on morale if Army women were made to believe that the Army valued their children less than they did adult victims of crime. We respectfully request that you enforce UCMJ Article 119a against the suspect," the ADF's letter stated.
Click here for the full article.
November 30, 2009
Senate to Begin Debate on Obamacare
Senate to Begin Debate on Obamacare
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate opens debate on a broad healthcare overhaul on Monday with senators seeking an elusive compromise on thorny issues like a government-run insurance plan, abortion coverage and holding down costs. The debate on President Barack Obama's top domestic priority, which opens at 3 p.m. EST (2000 GMT), is expected to last three weeks or more. Republicans have vowed to do whatever they can to block or delay the bill. The Senate plan is designed to rein in costs, expand coverage to about 30 million uninsured Americans and halt industry practices such as denying coverage to those with pre-existing medical conditions. In a report that offered ammunition to both sides, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated on Monday that insurance premiums could increase by 10 percent to 13 percent by 2016 for those buying coverage independently under the new bill.
Click here for more...
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate opens debate on a broad healthcare overhaul on Monday with senators seeking an elusive compromise on thorny issues like a government-run insurance plan, abortion coverage and holding down costs. The debate on President Barack Obama's top domestic priority, which opens at 3 p.m. EST (2000 GMT), is expected to last three weeks or more. Republicans have vowed to do whatever they can to block or delay the bill. The Senate plan is designed to rein in costs, expand coverage to about 30 million uninsured Americans and halt industry practices such as denying coverage to those with pre-existing medical conditions. In a report that offered ammunition to both sides, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated on Monday that insurance premiums could increase by 10 percent to 13 percent by 2016 for those buying coverage independently under the new bill.
Click here for more...
Flyover Tells Notre Dame President Jenkins: Free the ND 88
Flyover Tells Notre Dame President Jenkins: Free the ND 88
SOUTH BEND, Indiana - An anonymous advocate for the 88 Obama protesters who were arrested on the University of Notre Dame's campus in May sent an aerial message this month to remind University President Fr. John Jenkins of the arrestees' plight for witnessing to life.
The 88 individuals arrested on the university's campus while protesting President Obama's commencement address and honorary law degree May 17 are still facing charges of trespassing in St. Joseph County court. While witnesses say pro-Obama protesters were allowed to roam free, the arrested individuals were singled out for displaying any pro-life message - including slogans on the sanctity of life, photographs of aborted children, a large wooden cross, and images of Mary.
While the case is technically out of Notre Dame's hands, Fr. Jenkins has ignored repeated requests from advocates to request leniency for the witnesses, who face up to one year in jail and a $5,000 fine if they are convicted. In a recent interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Thomas More Society President and Chief Counsel Tom Brejcha, who is representing the Notre Dame 88, said that Notre Dame's decision on the case, "would have decisive influence over whether the prosecutions went forward." Brejcha said that were Fr. Jenkins to ask for leniency, his request would "have great weight with the prosecutor."
Thus far, however, Notre Dame has not requested that the charges be dropped.
Thomas Uebbing, a freelance journalist and Notre Dame graduate, photographed a plane carrying the message "Fr. Jenkins ... Free the ND 88" circling the campus grounds just prior to a Notre Dame-Connecticut football game November 21.
Uebbing told LSN that the individual sponsoring the flyover wished to remain anonymous. In a statement, the sponsor denounced Fr. Jenkins for planning to attend January's March for Life in Washington D.C. while refusing to help the arrestees, saying the attendance would be "empty" and that Jenkins should "do the right thing" by seeking leniency.
Click here for more information on the Notre Dame 88.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
SOUTH BEND, Indiana - An anonymous advocate for the 88 Obama protesters who were arrested on the University of Notre Dame's campus in May sent an aerial message this month to remind University President Fr. John Jenkins of the arrestees' plight for witnessing to life.
The 88 individuals arrested on the university's campus while protesting President Obama's commencement address and honorary law degree May 17 are still facing charges of trespassing in St. Joseph County court. While witnesses say pro-Obama protesters were allowed to roam free, the arrested individuals were singled out for displaying any pro-life message - including slogans on the sanctity of life, photographs of aborted children, a large wooden cross, and images of Mary.
While the case is technically out of Notre Dame's hands, Fr. Jenkins has ignored repeated requests from advocates to request leniency for the witnesses, who face up to one year in jail and a $5,000 fine if they are convicted. In a recent interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Thomas More Society President and Chief Counsel Tom Brejcha, who is representing the Notre Dame 88, said that Notre Dame's decision on the case, "would have decisive influence over whether the prosecutions went forward." Brejcha said that were Fr. Jenkins to ask for leniency, his request would "have great weight with the prosecutor."
Thus far, however, Notre Dame has not requested that the charges be dropped.
Thomas Uebbing, a freelance journalist and Notre Dame graduate, photographed a plane carrying the message "Fr. Jenkins ... Free the ND 88" circling the campus grounds just prior to a Notre Dame-Connecticut football game November 21.
Uebbing told LSN that the individual sponsoring the flyover wished to remain anonymous. In a statement, the sponsor denounced Fr. Jenkins for planning to attend January's March for Life in Washington D.C. while refusing to help the arrestees, saying the attendance would be "empty" and that Jenkins should "do the right thing" by seeking leniency.
Click here for more information on the Notre Dame 88.
Contact: Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Abortion giant gives up on case against ex–clinic director
Abortion giant gives up on case against ex–clinic director
'Like so many Planned Parenthood lawsuits, this was baseless'
Former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson with Coalition for Life Director Shawn Carney (photo: Coalition for Life)
Planned Parenthood, the American abortion industry's leading player, "quietly" has dropped its lawsuit against a former clinic director who quit her job after watching an abortion.
The news comes from the Alliance Defense Fund, which had been assisting former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson.
"This was the latest in a series of national Planned Parenthood scandals," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Steven H. Aden.
"It wasn't about one woman or one clinic. Planned Parenthood is a national organization that has been kept afloat by hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding. The American people need to understand that this organization has been involved in scandal after scandal and has never owned up to them. Like so many Planned Parenthood lawsuits, this lawsuit was baseless, so we are pleased that it has been withdrawn," he said.
Among other accusations, Planned Parenthood falsely claimed Johnson violated a confidentiality agreement and breached an employment contract, even though she never had one, according to the ADF.
WND reported earlier when a judge refused to grant Planned Parenthood's demand for an injunction against Johnson.
The judge also rejected the abortion company's demand for an injunction targeting the Coalition for Life, an organization whose members oppose abortion in the College Station, Texas, area where Johnson had worked.
The ruling from Judge J.D. Langley concluded Planned Parenthood did not offer reasons that would convince him of the need for "the extreme remedy of injunctive relief."
The company had sought court intervention to block disclosure of confidential patient information, which Johnson said she never considered doing anyway.
The ADF confirmed the order withdrawing the lawsuit was issued by the Brazos County District Court.
In its request, Planned Parenthood admitted, "Plaintiffs no longer desire to pursue this cause of action against Defendants, Abby Johnson and the Brazos Valley Coalition for Life."
The request, dated Nov. 13, was signed by the court Nov. 17. Marc Hamlin, district clerk, said, "In accordance with Rule 306A Texas Rules of Civil Procedure you are hereby notified of the entry of the Order on Motion for NonSuit."
WND reported when Johnson was interviewed by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee on his Fox News Channel show:
Click here for view the video
And in an earlier interview with WND, Johnson told of Planned Parenthood's abortion quotas, which she said were needed to generate revenue for the organization.
"We'd have a goal every month for abortion clients and for family planning clients," she said.
Johnson, 29, said the Bryan, Texas, Planned Parenthood clinic performed surgical abortions every other Saturday, but it began expanding access to abortion to increase earnings. She said her turning point came when she was told to assist with an abortion.
"For whatever reason I was called in to help. My job was to hold the ultrasound probe on the abdomen," she said. "When I looked at the screen, I saw a baby on the screen. She was about 13 weeks pregnant at the time. I saw a full side profile. I saw face to feet on the ultrasound.
"I saw the probe going into the woman's uterus. At that moment I saw the baby moving, trying to get away from the probe," she continued.
"I thought, 'It's fighting for its life.' I thought, 'It's life. It's alive.'
"I dropped the ultrasound probe. I scrambled and put [the probe] back in place. So many things were going through my mind. I was thinking about my daughter, who's three," she said.
"I was just thinking, 'What am I doing here? What am I doing here? There was life in here and now there's not.'"
Johnson later was mentioned by name during the U.S. House debate over an amendment designed to limit taxpayer funding of abortions.
In remarks on the House floor, Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said, "Self-described as 'extremely pro-choice,' but now pro-life, Abby Johnson said she watched an unborn child 'crumple' before her very eyes as the infant was vacuumed and dismembered by a suction device 20-30 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner. 'I could see the baby try to move away … I just thought what am I doing … never again.'"
Contact: Bob Unruh
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: November 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
'Like so many Planned Parenthood lawsuits, this was baseless'
Former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson with Coalition for Life Director Shawn Carney (photo: Coalition for Life)
Planned Parenthood, the American abortion industry's leading player, "quietly" has dropped its lawsuit against a former clinic director who quit her job after watching an abortion.
The news comes from the Alliance Defense Fund, which had been assisting former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson.
"This was the latest in a series of national Planned Parenthood scandals," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Steven H. Aden.
"It wasn't about one woman or one clinic. Planned Parenthood is a national organization that has been kept afloat by hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding. The American people need to understand that this organization has been involved in scandal after scandal and has never owned up to them. Like so many Planned Parenthood lawsuits, this lawsuit was baseless, so we are pleased that it has been withdrawn," he said.
Among other accusations, Planned Parenthood falsely claimed Johnson violated a confidentiality agreement and breached an employment contract, even though she never had one, according to the ADF.
WND reported earlier when a judge refused to grant Planned Parenthood's demand for an injunction against Johnson.
The judge also rejected the abortion company's demand for an injunction targeting the Coalition for Life, an organization whose members oppose abortion in the College Station, Texas, area where Johnson had worked.
The ruling from Judge J.D. Langley concluded Planned Parenthood did not offer reasons that would convince him of the need for "the extreme remedy of injunctive relief."
The company had sought court intervention to block disclosure of confidential patient information, which Johnson said she never considered doing anyway.
The ADF confirmed the order withdrawing the lawsuit was issued by the Brazos County District Court.
In its request, Planned Parenthood admitted, "Plaintiffs no longer desire to pursue this cause of action against Defendants, Abby Johnson and the Brazos Valley Coalition for Life."
The request, dated Nov. 13, was signed by the court Nov. 17. Marc Hamlin, district clerk, said, "In accordance with Rule 306A Texas Rules of Civil Procedure you are hereby notified of the entry of the Order on Motion for NonSuit."
WND reported when Johnson was interviewed by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee on his Fox News Channel show:
Click here for view the video
And in an earlier interview with WND, Johnson told of Planned Parenthood's abortion quotas, which she said were needed to generate revenue for the organization.
"We'd have a goal every month for abortion clients and for family planning clients," she said.
Johnson, 29, said the Bryan, Texas, Planned Parenthood clinic performed surgical abortions every other Saturday, but it began expanding access to abortion to increase earnings. She said her turning point came when she was told to assist with an abortion.
"For whatever reason I was called in to help. My job was to hold the ultrasound probe on the abdomen," she said. "When I looked at the screen, I saw a baby on the screen. She was about 13 weeks pregnant at the time. I saw a full side profile. I saw face to feet on the ultrasound.
"I saw the probe going into the woman's uterus. At that moment I saw the baby moving, trying to get away from the probe," she continued.
"I thought, 'It's fighting for its life.' I thought, 'It's life. It's alive.'
"I dropped the ultrasound probe. I scrambled and put [the probe] back in place. So many things were going through my mind. I was thinking about my daughter, who's three," she said.
"I was just thinking, 'What am I doing here? What am I doing here? There was life in here and now there's not.'"
Johnson later was mentioned by name during the U.S. House debate over an amendment designed to limit taxpayer funding of abortions.
In remarks on the House floor, Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said, "Self-described as 'extremely pro-choice,' but now pro-life, Abby Johnson said she watched an unborn child 'crumple' before her very eyes as the infant was vacuumed and dismembered by a suction device 20-30 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner. 'I could see the baby try to move away … I just thought what am I doing … never again.'"
Contact: Bob Unruh
Source: WorldNetDaily
Publish Date: November 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Formal Complaints Ask Michigan AG for Criminal Investigation of Abortionist Hodari
Formal Complaints Ask Michigan AG for Criminal Investigation of Abortionist Hodari
LANSING, Mich. - Operation Rescue has filed formal complaints against abortionist Alberto Hodari with the Michigan Attorney General's office and with the Michigan Department of Community Health, asking for investigations in to criminal misconduct in the alleged forced abortion of Caitlin Bruce last year.
Ms. Bruce filed a civil suit against Hodari in June. In her suit, she says she withdrew her consent for an abortion after seeing her baby on an ultrasound. She accuses Hodari and his assistant of holding her down and covering her mouth to muffle her screams while Hodari viciously forced an abortion upon her.
"We have filed the appropriate complaints to insure that the correct authorities are also investigating possible criminal charges and causes for discipline against Hodari's medical license," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
Judy Climer, director of Flint Right to Life, has also filed a separate, similar complaint with the Michigan Attorney General.
Bruce never filed her own criminal complaint because "she was young and knew it wouldn't bring her baby back," according to a story that appeared Sunday in the Flint Journal.
"While these complaints are too late to help Ms. Bruce, they may serve to prevent this horror from being inflicted upon other women," said Newman. "In fact, evidence shows that Hodari has likely forced abortions on women for at least two decades."
The Flint Journal article indicated that an abortion clinic employee present during Bruce's abortion said in a statement that was filed with the suit that Hodari told Bruce that he would not do her abortion and was sending her home, but instead forced the abortion on her. He then grinned as he completed the abortion.
Another woman recently told of a similar experience with Hodari in 1988. Jennifer McCoy never considered abortion and had been taken to Hodari's clinic at age 16 under the pretence of receiving a routine obstetrical examination. Hodari assured her that he was only examining her to determine how far along she was, when suddenly Jennifer felt the sharp pain of the abortion.
"These two accounts are far too similar to be a coincidence," said Newman. "Even though Hodari denies any wrongdoing, he has also made it clear that he believes abortionists have a 'license to lie.' We are convinced that he lied to Mrs. McCoy, he lied to Ms. Bruce, and now he's lying about his culpability in these horrific crimes. Hodari's behavior is that of a maniac that has likely been abusing women for at least 20 years. It is time that the legal system brings his reign of terror to an end."
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
LANSING, Mich. - Operation Rescue has filed formal complaints against abortionist Alberto Hodari with the Michigan Attorney General's office and with the Michigan Department of Community Health, asking for investigations in to criminal misconduct in the alleged forced abortion of Caitlin Bruce last year.
Ms. Bruce filed a civil suit against Hodari in June. In her suit, she says she withdrew her consent for an abortion after seeing her baby on an ultrasound. She accuses Hodari and his assistant of holding her down and covering her mouth to muffle her screams while Hodari viciously forced an abortion upon her.
"We have filed the appropriate complaints to insure that the correct authorities are also investigating possible criminal charges and causes for discipline against Hodari's medical license," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.
Judy Climer, director of Flint Right to Life, has also filed a separate, similar complaint with the Michigan Attorney General.
Bruce never filed her own criminal complaint because "she was young and knew it wouldn't bring her baby back," according to a story that appeared Sunday in the Flint Journal.
"While these complaints are too late to help Ms. Bruce, they may serve to prevent this horror from being inflicted upon other women," said Newman. "In fact, evidence shows that Hodari has likely forced abortions on women for at least two decades."
The Flint Journal article indicated that an abortion clinic employee present during Bruce's abortion said in a statement that was filed with the suit that Hodari told Bruce that he would not do her abortion and was sending her home, but instead forced the abortion on her. He then grinned as he completed the abortion.
Another woman recently told of a similar experience with Hodari in 1988. Jennifer McCoy never considered abortion and had been taken to Hodari's clinic at age 16 under the pretence of receiving a routine obstetrical examination. Hodari assured her that he was only examining her to determine how far along she was, when suddenly Jennifer felt the sharp pain of the abortion.
"These two accounts are far too similar to be a coincidence," said Newman. "Even though Hodari denies any wrongdoing, he has also made it clear that he believes abortionists have a 'license to lie.' We are convinced that he lied to Mrs. McCoy, he lied to Ms. Bruce, and now he's lying about his culpability in these horrific crimes. Hodari's behavior is that of a maniac that has likely been abusing women for at least 20 years. It is time that the legal system brings his reign of terror to an end."
Contact: Troy Newman, Cheryl Sullenger
Source: Operation Rescue
Publish Date: November 30, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-lifers reach protesting settlement
Pro-lifers reach protesting settlement
Pro-life counselors and demonstrators have settled their disagreement with Aurora, an Illinois city, concerning pro-life protests at the city's Planned Parenthood facility.
Picketing began with the construction of what became the second-largest Planned Parenthood abortion facility in the U.S. Pro-Life Action League spokesman Eric Scheidler tells OneNewsNow they ran into a serious snag during the protest.
"From the very first hour, we had trouble with the police," Scheidler explains. "The police chief at the time came over and was throwing his weight around and really made me feel a sense of hostility from the city, and we were getting contradictory orders right from the get-go." The pro-life advocate says law enforcement officers uttered conflicting instructions like, "You can't stand on the sidewalk; you have to stand on the grass; you can't stand on the grass; you can have signs; you can't have signs; you have to keep moving; you can stand still."
It became increasingly apparent to Scheidler that the group of pro-lifers had to fight for their rights.
"We filed a lawsuit early on to secure our rights with the city of Aurora," he accounts. "And as city officials realized that they had a problem on their hands because they had not been handling our protests appropriately with respect for our rights, they asked if we would try to come to some kind of settlement."
A settlement was reached, and all parties are now on the same frequency as protesters' rights are securely protected when speaking out against abortion facilities. In return, the pro-life group has agreed to a number of provisions and plans to drop its federal lawsuit against Aurora. Demonstrators are no longer being harassed, and this agreement ends the two-year dispute between the city and pro-life advocates.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-life counselors and demonstrators have settled their disagreement with Aurora, an Illinois city, concerning pro-life protests at the city's Planned Parenthood facility.
Picketing began with the construction of what became the second-largest Planned Parenthood abortion facility in the U.S. Pro-Life Action League spokesman Eric Scheidler tells OneNewsNow they ran into a serious snag during the protest.
"From the very first hour, we had trouble with the police," Scheidler explains. "The police chief at the time came over and was throwing his weight around and really made me feel a sense of hostility from the city, and we were getting contradictory orders right from the get-go." The pro-life advocate says law enforcement officers uttered conflicting instructions like, "You can't stand on the sidewalk; you have to stand on the grass; you can't stand on the grass; you can have signs; you can't have signs; you have to keep moving; you can stand still."
It became increasingly apparent to Scheidler that the group of pro-lifers had to fight for their rights.
"We filed a lawsuit early on to secure our rights with the city of Aurora," he accounts. "And as city officials realized that they had a problem on their hands because they had not been handling our protests appropriately with respect for our rights, they asked if we would try to come to some kind of settlement."
A settlement was reached, and all parties are now on the same frequency as protesters' rights are securely protected when speaking out against abortion facilities. In return, the pro-life group has agreed to a number of provisions and plans to drop its federal lawsuit against Aurora. Demonstrators are no longer being harassed, and this agreement ends the two-year dispute between the city and pro-life advocates.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 26, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Planned Parenthood pauses personhood effort
Planned Parenthood pauses personhood effort
Pro-life forces are preparing for a court battle to decide whether voters can decide on a Personhood amendment in Missouri.
The measure would declare that a human is a person at the biological beginning of life. Personhood Missouri went through all the obstacles in order to launch a petition drive and get a slot on a future election ballot. Personhood Missouri spokesman Dr. Gregory Thompson tells OneNewsNow that a lawsuit has brought the effort to a halt.
"Planned Parenthood is the number-one murderer of babies in our country and is being represented by the ACLU, which takes on every perversion that's against God, family and country," the spokesman reports. "They're coming against the secretary of state and the state auditor because they don't like the language of the ballot title."
Thompson says Planned Parenthood wants to manipulate and step on the right the people of Missouri have to vote on the issue.
"They make hundreds of millions of dollars off of the taxpayers and they're using some of that very money to sue the state to keep us from our constitutional rights of being able to address grievances and [being] able to voice what we decide is best for our families and our nation," Thompson contends.
If the election were held and Planned Parenthood lost, the end result, according to Thompson, would take away abortion, which is the clinic's greatest financial resource.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 27, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-life forces are preparing for a court battle to decide whether voters can decide on a Personhood amendment in Missouri.
The measure would declare that a human is a person at the biological beginning of life. Personhood Missouri went through all the obstacles in order to launch a petition drive and get a slot on a future election ballot. Personhood Missouri spokesman Dr. Gregory Thompson tells OneNewsNow that a lawsuit has brought the effort to a halt.
"Planned Parenthood is the number-one murderer of babies in our country and is being represented by the ACLU, which takes on every perversion that's against God, family and country," the spokesman reports. "They're coming against the secretary of state and the state auditor because they don't like the language of the ballot title."
Thompson says Planned Parenthood wants to manipulate and step on the right the people of Missouri have to vote on the issue.
"They make hundreds of millions of dollars off of the taxpayers and they're using some of that very money to sue the state to keep us from our constitutional rights of being able to address grievances and [being] able to voice what we decide is best for our families and our nation," Thompson contends.
If the election were held and Planned Parenthood lost, the end result, according to Thompson, would take away abortion, which is the clinic's greatest financial resource.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Publish Date: November 27, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-life conference sells out months early
Pro-life conference sells out months early
Pro-life students standing in front
of a Planned Parenthood clinic
Washington D.C. - The National Conference of Students for Life of America, scheduled to be held on Jan 23, 2010, has already sold out.
"I was amazed to see our national conference sell out so quickly this year. It is a true reflection of what my staff has been witnessing on college campuses for the past several months," Kristan Hawkins, the Executive Director of Students for Life of America, told CNA.
The conference will be an opportunity for students across the U.S. to receive training on how to be effective advocates for life, be educated on all of the current issues affecting the pro-life movement, and meet and network with other pro-life students from across the country. It will be held at the Catholic University of America on January 23, the day after the March for Life in Washington, D.C.
"Pro-life students are tired of the some old politics as usual in Washington, D.C. and on their campuses. They are activating like never before to provide resources to women facing unplanned pregnancies in their communities and are standing up to the culture of death policies of Congress and the current presidential administration," Hawkins added.
The conference's website assures readers that next year's conference will be held in a larger venue. But for the 778 participants lucky enough to be registered, the day itself will feature talks on "Knowing Your Rights on Campus" and "How Abortion Affects Real Women and Men."
The afternoon will host a number of breakout sessions aimed at helping students become better and more effective ambassadors to their campuses. The sessions will discuss a variety of topics ranging from stem cell research and bio-ethical reform to sidewalk counseling and breaking through apathy on their campuses.
Click here for more information on the conference and the host organization.
Source: CNA
Publish Date: November 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Pro-life students standing in front
of a Planned Parenthood clinic
Washington D.C. - The National Conference of Students for Life of America, scheduled to be held on Jan 23, 2010, has already sold out.
"I was amazed to see our national conference sell out so quickly this year. It is a true reflection of what my staff has been witnessing on college campuses for the past several months," Kristan Hawkins, the Executive Director of Students for Life of America, told CNA.
The conference will be an opportunity for students across the U.S. to receive training on how to be effective advocates for life, be educated on all of the current issues affecting the pro-life movement, and meet and network with other pro-life students from across the country. It will be held at the Catholic University of America on January 23, the day after the March for Life in Washington, D.C.
"Pro-life students are tired of the some old politics as usual in Washington, D.C. and on their campuses. They are activating like never before to provide resources to women facing unplanned pregnancies in their communities and are standing up to the culture of death policies of Congress and the current presidential administration," Hawkins added.
The conference's website assures readers that next year's conference will be held in a larger venue. But for the 778 participants lucky enough to be registered, the day itself will feature talks on "Knowing Your Rights on Campus" and "How Abortion Affects Real Women and Men."
The afternoon will host a number of breakout sessions aimed at helping students become better and more effective ambassadors to their campuses. The sessions will discuss a variety of topics ranging from stem cell research and bio-ethical reform to sidewalk counseling and breaking through apathy on their campuses.
Click here for more information on the conference and the host organization.
Source: CNA
Publish Date: November 28, 2009
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)