June 15, 2010

Louisiana Passes Opt-Out Bill Voiding ObamaCare’s Abortion Mandate


    
     Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal

The Louisiana State House successfully has passed a measure that will make "the Bayou State" the fourth in the nation to opt-out of the abortion mandates of the recently enacted national health care reform.

Democrats and Republicans in the state Senate approved HB 1247,  the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act, authored by Representative Frank Hoffman (R-West Monroe), by an overwhelming majority of 28 – 3 on Monday.

H.R. 1247 prohibits abortion coverage by health insurers in the state-run health insurance exchange that is scheduled to go into effect in 2014 as part of President Barack Obama's health care reform law. A provision of the national law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, gives states the explicit right to ban health insurance companies receiving public subsidies under the state health exchange, from providing abortion coverage.

The Louisiana measure has just one exception for insurance companies, permitting abortion in cases where mother's life is in danger from "a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury" including "a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself." The law does not permit the killing of unborn children conceived in situations of rape and incest.

The Senate made some changes to the House bill, and therefore the state's House of Representatives is expected to hold a vote within the next few days to approve the amended bill.

The bill's original form as passed by the House would have banned all health insurance providers in Louisiana from offering policies and plans that would pay for abortions. However the Senate committee amended the bill to apply to only those health insurers participating in the state exchanges mandated by the federal health care reform.

In a telephone interview, Benjamin Clapper, Executive Director of Louisiana Right to Life Federation, said that while the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, which amended the House bill, did not allow them to ban private health insurers from providing coverage for abortions, he was not aware of any insurers that cover abortions in Louisiana anyway.

"It won't change much right now, but we certainly would have preferred that and the abortion opt out," he said. "But the committee did not allow us to do that."

Clapper said that the Bioethics Defense Fund did the heavy lifting of drafting the opt-out legislation, but the model opt-out legislation from the National Right to Life Committee gave them the idea of also banning abortion coverage by private insurers.

After the Senate's changes have been approved by the House, the bill will be sent to the desk of Gov. Bobby Jindal, who is expected to sign the measure.

In a separate statement, Clapper praised the Louisiana legislature for taking the opt-out bill over "its final major hurdle," saying that state lawmakers representing the will of the people of Louisiana, "have resoundingly sent a message to our nation that abortion is not health care."

"Once HB 1247 has been stamped by the House and signed by the Governor, we will be at least the 4th state to opt out of abortion subsidies since the President signed his national health care reform bill into law three short months ago on March 23rd," said Clapper. "We have helped initiate a growing state-by-state movement declaring that health care reform should not be used to expand abortion."

Lawmakers in Arizona, Mississippi, and Tennessee have enacted similar opt-out language for their respective states. Missouri legislators have also passed their own opt-out bill, which is awaiting their governor's signature. Opt-out language was passed by lawmakers in Oklahoma and Florida, but then vetoed by their respective governors.

Oklahoma's Gov. Brad Henry delayed his veto of his state's opt-out bill to the point where the legislature had no time to mount another veto override effort and conclude pressing budgetary matters before the end of the legislative session. Gov. Charlie Crist, who scrubbed the pro-life section of his independent campaign for governor, also vetoed opt-out legislation that also would have required women to receive an ultrasound before going in for an abortion.

Contact:
Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 14,2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY

Pro-Life Anti-Constitution Rally Bombed in Kenya

     A June 13th rally organized by pro-life and religious groups in the Kenyan capital Nairobi was bombed twice, killing six people and injuring more than 100
    
Kenya

A June 13th rally organized by pro-life and religious groups in the Kenyan capital Nairobi was bombed twice, killing six people and injuring more than 100. The police have not identified any motive for the attack, and are offering a reward of half a million shillings for information leading to arrests.

"Any person with information regarding the incident is advised and requested to report to the nearest police or administrative office," said Police Commissioner Mathew Iteere, according to Capital News.
Click here for the entire article.


Lawyer Withdraws From Abortion Clinic Threat Case

     Pictured: Dr. Warrne Hern, last year, Donald Hertz of Spokane, Wash., was accused of calling Dr. Warren Hern's clinic in Boulder, Colo., and threatening to kill members of Hern's family.
    
Dr. Warren Hern

A lawyer for a man who has twice backed out on proposed plea deals over a threat to a Colorado abortion clinic is asking to withdraw from the case. Weeks after Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller was slain last year, Donald Hertz of Spokane, Wash., was accused of calling Dr. Warren Hern's clinic in Boulder, Colo., and threatening to kill members of Hern's family. Hertz's lawyer Dustin Deissner says in documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Denver that Hertz has "cognitive limitations," and he doesn't know if Hertz still intends to plead guilty. Deissner says he's not experienced in criminal trial practice if Hertz goes to trial and that Hertz can't afford to pay Deissner as the case drags on.
Click here for the entire article.


Montgomery Abortion Clinic Agrees To Close

     Beacon Women's Center, one of seven clinics in Alabama permitted to perform abortions, is closing after state health inspectors found violations in procedures and care of patients
    
Beacon Women's Center

The Beacon Women's Center, one of seven clinics in Alabama permitted to perform abortions, is closing after state health inspectors found violations in procedures and care of patients. Under an agreement with the state health department, the Montgomery clinic gave up its license, ceased performing abortions and is closing operations this week. Rick Harris, who oversees provider standards for the state health department, said Monday the clinic was cited for numerous violations when patient complaints were checked out. In one instance, 17 abortions were performed without sedation because the key to the medicine cabinet was not on site.
Click here for the entire article.


Pro-Life Group Files Suit Aganist City and Birmingham Police

     a lawsuit has been filed against the City of Birmingham Alabama and several Birmingham police officers for the outrageous civil rights violations perpetrated against nine young people who were unlawfully arrested in February last year.
    
Birmingham Police

The Life Legal Defense Foundation has filed a lawsuit against the City of Birmingham Alabama and several Birmingham police officers for the outrageous civil rights violations perpetrated against nine young people who were unlawfully arrested in February last year. The team of pro-life activists spent more than 14 hours in jail for simply holding signs and handing out literature on a public sidewalk in front of a local high school.
Click here for the entire article.


Expert urges Mexicans to support candidates committed to life


    
     Mexican Pro-Life Vote

The spokeswoman of the Institute for the Formation of Family Values in Mexico, Claudia Simental Flores, called on Mexicans last week to vote for candidates "who see public office as an opportunity for real service to their constituents," including the protection of life from the moment of conception. In an article published in El Grafico, Flores criticized Mexico City official, Leticia Bonifaz, who said there was a lack of "political will" for the legalization of abortion at the national level.
Click here for the entire article.


Billboards promoting abortion by 'Catholic' group in Mexico taken down

    
    
City of Queretaro

Officials in the Mexican city of Queretaro decided this week to take down five ads that were placed on billboards around the city as part of a campaign by "Catholics for a Free Choice" (CFC) attempting to assert that abortion is not punishable by excommunication.

Bishop Felipe Arizmendi of San Cristobal de Las Casas warned that CFC has a biased interpretation of canon 1323 of the Code of Canon Law, which "contains a series of mitigating factors that exonerate not the sin but the penalty imposed by ecclesial legislation."
Click here for the entire article

June 14, 2010

Florida Governor Vetoes Pro-Life Bill

 
     Florida Gov. Charlie Crist
     Florida Gov. Charlie Crist

Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed an ultrasound bill today that would have allowed abortion-minded women in Florida the chance to see an image of their preborn child.  HB 1143 would have also banned taxpayer funding of abortion.  This is the fourth time an ultrasound bill has been defeated.

More than 63,000 people contacted the governor's office in the days leading up to the veto, with 36,104 of them asking him to please sign the measure.

John Stemberger, president and general counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council, said the move speaks volumes about Crist's duplicity and lack of trustworthiness.

"He has lost all credibility as a public official," he said in a statement.  "With this veto he demonstrates to Floridians that his representations on policy issues mean little to nothing.  Even his often-stated commitment as a populist for 'the people' is apparently meaningless, as the majority of Floridians are pro-life and support the bill as evidenced by the overwhelming show of support."

This week, Crist's website was purged of all mentions of his stand on life issues.  The Republican is running for the U.S. Senate as an independent.

"He has now gone full circle from being 'pro-choice' in his original U.S. Senate bid," said Stemberger, "to being 'pro-life' in his bid for governor and now he has clearly defined himself as pro-abortion once again."

Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Terri Schiavo's foundation sued by Michael Schiavo


     Banner for the Terri Schindler Foundation
     Banner for the Terri Schindler Foundation

Over 5 years after the very public, tragic and court-ordered execution of Terri Schindler Schiavo, the Schindler family still fights Terri's husband who sought and secured legal permission to murder his disabled wife by dehydration. Michael Schiavo, Terri's former husband, accuses Terri's family of trying to exploit her saga by raising money for the foundation named after her, and the media has been too happy to accommodate his platform and buttress his attacks.

Started while Terri was still alive as Terri's Fight, the foundation assists other disabled members of our society who may be deprived of their legal rights and medical care. The organization is run by Terri's mother, Mary Schindler, her brother, Bobby Schindler, who serves as the spokesman for the organization, and Terri's sister, Suzanne Schindler Vitadamo. The Schindler family began the foundation to defray the legal expenses and the costs of providing Terri the rehabilitative treatment and medical care of which Michael barbarically deprived her to thwart her recovery.

Following Terri's painful involuntary euthanasia death in 2005, the Schindler family changed the name to the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, and the organization has only has raised a modest amount of money, less than 6 figures, to support disabled people like her. Through the foundation, www.TerrisFight.org, Terri's family has fielded countless calls from Texans due to the draconian Texas Advance Directives Act (Chapter 166.046 of the Health and Safety Code). The foundation has assisted TX Right to Life in our efforts to protect the disabled from the denial and withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment.

Michael Schiavo claims that a court document gives him rights to the name Terri Schiavo, and he alleges that no one can use her name without his permission. His attorney has written to the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, instructing Terri's family to cease and desist using her name. Peculiarly, the man who denied Terri rehabilitative treatment because he wanted the money left for her medical care to himself, is now accusing Terri's family of profiteering with her name.

Ironically, Michael attempted to profit politically from Terri's death, by starting a political action committee, called Terri's PAC, to oppose "Bible-thumping politicians" who fought to protect her life. Eventually, the FEC closed down his PAC after repeated fines for late reports and violation of reporting guidelines.

No member of the Schindler is making any money of Terri's name, and Bobby's annual salary is under $40k. All the honorariums and fees earned as an international spokesman for the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation are paid to the foundation. Suzanne has not been paid any wages for over a year, and Terri's mom will not take any money for the endless hours she spends at the foundation office helping families.

Despite a 2008 exemplary audit by the IRS, the foundation and family still fend off such attacks. The media, and even Fox's "Family Guy," spin the story of the foundation's work, ignoring the facts and the low level of finances at issue in Schiavo's recent "wolf" cry.

At another level, TX Right to Life and the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation remind these irresponsible journalists, Michael Schiavo, and the rest of the world of their limitations and mortality. They may pray that they never have to live "like that," but organizations like ours will defend them from legal execution when other journalists pontificate about their diminished quality of life.

Source:
Texas Right to Life via Pro-Life Blogs
Publish Date: June 14, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Woman sues Church of Scientology for forced abortions, human trafficking


     Church of Scientology logo
    
Church of Scientology

There have been allegations made against the Church of Scientology for forcing its workers to get abortions.

On June 13 the St. Petersburg Times published findings of a significant investigation it conducted.

claire headley.jpgThe exposé includes information about a federal lawsuit filed in January 2009 by former Scientology member Claire Headley, who alleges church leaders forced her to undergo 2 abortions and also violated human trafficking laws.

Clearwater, FL, is home to one of the church's "2 most important operations, its spiritual headquarters," according to The Times, the other being its "500-acre international management base in the desert 80 miles east of Los Angeles."...

      Headley with her husband Marc with 1 of their 2 sons.
     Headley with husband Marc and 1 of 2 sons.

Headley, who left the organization in 2005 with her husband Marc (both pictured above with 1 of their 2 sons), alleges pregnant mothers were forced to endure increased manual labor if holding out against abortion.

Headley's complaint also requests a permanent injunction against the church, "prohibiting Defendants and their agents for ordering and/or coercing abortions with respect to their employees." That would be good.

RealityBasedCommunity.com reports Headley's suit "comes well corroborated" with at least 4 affidavits or statements made since 1986 by other Scientology members making the same accusation. RBC.com concludes:

    Claire's claim would seem to have a decent chance of success at trial, assuming she can prove her allegations to a jury; but if history is an accurate indicator, Scientology will go to significant lengths to make sure it doesn't get that far. Miles to go before we sleep, but the vehicle is promising for a change.

The Times also included a sad video story featuring 2 women aside from Headley accusing the church of forcing them to abort...


Click here for the video.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanke.com
Publish Date: June 14, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Rep. Smith Vows to Oppose Military Abortions in Defense Bill


     Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) 
    
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)

Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) has vowed to block an amendment to the FY 2011 Department of Defense Authorization bill that would permit abortions in military medical facilities.  The amendment would destroy a ban on abortion in military facilities that has existed since 1996.

"Our military facilities should be a place of hope and healing, not intentional destruction of innocent human life," said Rep. Chris Smith (NJ-04). "This amendment will mean that as many as 260 military medical facilities worldwide will now be in the abortion business."

The outgoing, Blagojevich-appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) introduced the amendment in the Senate Armed Services Committee.  The committee voted 15-12 to include it in the bill on May 27, the same day that they voted to include a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy in the military. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) was the sole committee Democrat to vote against the bill.

Unlike the case of DADT, however, the version of the Defense Authorization bill passed last month by the House of Representatives does not contain language like that of the Burris Amendment.  Smith expects that the House will not accept the legislation if it returns from the Senate with the Burris amendment.

"We will stand very firm," said Smith. "I believe there will be an overwhelming vote in the House to keep our military hospitals as nurturing centers, not abortion mills."

In 2006, a similar amendment by Rep. Robert Andrews to allow abortion in overseas military facilities was defeated 237-191.

Some have defended the amendment on the grounds that it both requires women to pay for abortions with their own dollars and does not require doctors to perform them.

"It's only done on a voluntary basis by a doctor," said Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). "There's no requirement, in other words, that doctors in military hospitals perform the abortions, but it authorizes them [if] they are prepaid, no expense to the government."

NARAL, Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations argued similarly, stating that the Burris amendment would "simply repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own private dollars to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities."

As Rep. Smith told Fox News, however, such a bill would still amount to the subsidizing of abortion.

"When we hire abortionists, when we provide operation rooms and recovery rooms and nurses, all of whom would participate in the killing of that child and wounding of that mother by the way of abortion, that is facilitation, that is public funding," Smith said.

The 1996 ban, which contains exceptions in case of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother, had been put in place after President Clinton signed a memorandum permitting abortions at military facilities in 1993.  This memorandum was in turn upsetting a Reagan-era ban on abortions in military facilities.

The Senate is likely to vote on the Defense Authorization bill later this month.

Contact:
James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 12, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Courageous Mom Refuses to Abort her Twins

     Missy Davert's Facebook photo
     Missy Davert's Facebook Photo

This week it was reported that a recent episode of 'Facing Life Head On', the weekly US pro-lifeTV show, has been nominated for a regional Emmy award. The episode, 'Little Miracles', tells the story of Missy Davert, a woman only two feet, eleven inches tall, who successfully gave birth to twins. Missy also has a condition called osteogenesis imperfecta, brittle bone disease.

The episode is very moving. While pregnant Missy knew that as her children grew there was a high possibility that they would put her life at risk by interferring with her heart or lungs. Missy met with several doctors who advised her to abort at least one of her children. This was never an option that she was prepared to consider and she was greatly relieved when she met Dr Daniel Wechter, a specialist in crisis pregnancies, who committed to helping her through her pregancy.

Reflecting on her pregnancy Missy says:

    God gave us both of these beuatiful children. I look at them today and think: which one of them wouldn't have been here if we'd made that decision?

Her reflection evokes the beautiful testimony of Andrea Bocelli, the famous classical singer, whose mother was advised to have an abortion.

Missy and her husband Ken will be forever grateful to the incredible care they received from Dr Wechter during the course of their pregnancy. Dr Wechter is a fantastic example to doctors and other medical professionals, who are coming under increasing pressure to practice their profession according to the prevailing anti-life principles of our time.

Missy and Ken's children, Austin and Michaela, are now eleven years old. They share their mother's similar courageous embrace of life. Michaela and Austin are both honour-roll students and Austin uses his spare time to fly aeroplanes!

Click here to watch this remarkable story.

Contact: John Smeaton
Source: SPUC Blog
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Creators of "A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities" Win Two Bronze Telly Awards


     The Telly Award
     The Telly Award

Rucinski & Reetz Communication, LLC, creators of "A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities," has been notified by the 31st Annual Telly Awards that the company has been awarded two Bronze Telly Awards. One award is for scriptwriting and the other for video production. "A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities" is one of over 13,000 entries from all 50 states and countries.

Telly was founded in 1978, and honors outstanding TV and video productions. Annual Telly awards showcase the best work of the most respected advertising agencies, production companies, television stations, cable, and corporate video departments in the world.

"A Baby's First Months: Infinite Possibilities" is a spectacularly breathtaking DVD which is available from the National Right to Life Educational Trust Fund.

While there have been many attempts over the years to convey the beauty of the unborn child's development, Infinite Possibilities immediately jumped to the front of the line.

Pam Rucinski not only wrote the script for the six-minute DVD, she also produced and directed.

"I filled a waste basket with script ideas before it dawned on me that I was trying to say too much," said Rucinski. "The next script took the form of a dance elegantly performed by mother and unborn child. I wanted viewers to lose themselves in the breathtaking moments of their first days of life."

Telly Award winners are in good company. Winners include prestigious names like Discovery, Harpo Studios (Oprah's studio), Warner Bros., The Weather Channel, Disney Destinations, PGA Tours just to name a few.

Rucinski & Reetz Communication has won four other Telly Awards over the years.

A Baby's First Months... Infinite Possibilities from Wisconsin Right to Life on Vimeo.

Click here to view the video.

Contact: Dave Andrusko
Source: NRLC
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR MONDAY

Dozens of Teenage Girls Have Had Three Abortions or More

     Screen Capture from the Marie Stopes TV ad.
     Screen Capture from the
     Marie Stopes TV ad.

Government data have disclosed that 89 girls aged 17 or under who terminated a pregnancy last year had had at least two abortions previously. The head of Britain's largest abortion provider said many young women were living chaotic lives that meant they could not organise contraception. Christian doctors said the statistics demonstrated the failure of liberal sex education policies. The Department of Health figures for 2009 show that, for the first time, more than a third (34 per cent) of abortions were performed on women who had already ended one or more pregnancies.
Click here for the entire article.


`Baby Killer Drug' Available Through Video Link

Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa are first in the nation to use this program

     Telemedicine
     Telemedicine

Like all of the 16 Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Clinics, Planned Parenthood of Ames offers abortion drugs to women desiring to end a pregnancy. As one would expect, a nurse begins the process with blood tests, a medical history, an exam and an ultrasound, along with counseling on matters such as what to expect from the procedure and plans for a follow-up. But then comes a twist. Since the clinic's closest licensed physician is in Des Moines, the attending doctor receives the patient's exam results via computer, and instead of meeting face to face, the doctor and the patient (at all times accompanied by the nurse) meet by videoconference over a private network.
Click here for the entire article.


N.J. Assembly Committee To Consider Bill Allowing Adoptees Access To Original Birth Certificates


     Joe DeGironimo is featured in a documentary about adopted adults finding their biological families.
     Joe DeGironimo

This is similar to the legisation that was going through Illinois not too long ago.

Every two years for the past three decades, a relentless group of people has told lawmakers their most personal stories in a plea for the most personal of details: They were adopted and they desperately want to know more about their background. Every time, their emotional efforts have failed to overcome lawmakers' contention that their birth mothers expected privacy. Then the legislation that would have allowed them to obtain their original birth certificates dies. Supporters are hoping their losing streak ends Monday when the Assembly's Human Services Committee convenes to debate and presumably approve the bill.
Click here for the entire article.


Doctors Should Warn of IVF Defect Risk, Says Report

    French scientists say that a possible link between malformations and fertilisation treatment requires more research. Photograph: ZEPHYR/SPL/Getty Images/Science Photo Library RF
   
Fertilization treatment

Geneticists urge medical professionals to highlight possibility of malformation for children of couples using fertilisation treatment. Doctors should warn couples attempting to have children through fertilisation treatment that there is a small risk that the child will suffer some sort of malformation, geneticists said today. Scientists in France looked at the records for over 15,000 children born as a result of treatment in 33 fertility centres and found that more than 4% of them had some sort of major congenital malformation.
Click here for the entire article.


99.84% of messages to government oppose Marie Stopes abortion ad

     Lord Alton of Liverpool
    
Lord Alton of Liverpool

Yesterday in Parliament Lord Alton of Liverpool asked Her Majesty's Government what representations they have received since 15 May about barring television advertisements for abortion services.

The response of Lord Shutt of Greetland, deputy chief whip in the House of Lords, was:

    At 26 May, 603 pieces of electronic correspondence have been received from members of the public about television advertisements for post-conception advice services. Five pieces of correspondence on the same subject have been received from MPs, and none has been received from Members of the House of Lords. Of the total received, 607 representations oppose the showing of television advertisements for post-conception advice services, including abortion services.
Click here for the entire article.


Lavish Women Deliver Meet Hijacks MDG 5, Delivers Muted but Aggressive Push for Worldwide Abortion

     2010 Women Deliver conference
    
2010 Women Deliver conference

The 2010 Women Deliver conference in the U.S. capital this week offered a rare glimpse into the heart of the pro-abortion, pro-contraception, and population-control movement in its many facets. The conference drew international UN and political leaders to a 3-day marathon on several topics tied together by one ambitious theme: using Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 5, the reduction of maternal mortality, to promote contraception and the dismantling of pro-life laws around the world.
Click here for the entire article.

June 11, 2010

Conference sponsored by UN agencies tramples on citizens' rights.


Every day it seems Americans lose more and more of their rights. Political speech is limited in ways that would be unimaginable to our Founding Fathers. Bills are passed that slash life-saving medical treatment for the elderly and disabled. Unborn babies are denied the basic right to life.

Now several taxpayer-funded groups have done the unthinkable: censoring even information about unborn babies.

     NRLC materials being confiscated by "Women Deliver" staff.
    
NRLC materials being confiscated by "Women Deliver" staff.

At the "Women Deliver" international conference held in Washington D.C. June 7-9, National Right to Life volunteers passed out information in pink bags proclaiming the message "Celebrate Motherhood." The conference was supposedly dedicated to exploring ways to decrease the mortality of mothers delivering their babies. But pro-abortion groups have all but taken over United Nations affiliated organizations, and have no intention of hearing from anyone "Celebrating Motherhood."

The conference hosts stood inside the entrance of the Washington Convention Center, confiscated the bags and threw them into the trash. The Conference attendees were told that the information inside the bags – including beautiful pictures of unborn babies – was "anti-human rights," "anti-life" and "anti-woman."

Sponsors of the conference included the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the U.S. government's USAID program, the World Health Organization (WHO), and the International Planned Parenthood, all of which receive funding from U.S. taxpayers.

That is taxpayer-funded censorship right in our nation's capital!

Source: National Right to Life
Publish Date: June 10, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Pro-Life Emmy Nomination


     Facing Life Head-On TV program graphic.
     Facing Life Head-On TV program

It's not every day a pro-life television show is nominated for an Emmy Award, but that's just what happened this week. Our own weekly broadcast, Facing Life Head-On, captured the attention of the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences! We're one of four nominees in the Ohio Valley Chapter's "Interview/Discussion Program" category. We find out how the judges voted at a black-tie awards ceremony July 31.

This is great news—not just for us, but for the whole pro-life community. We live in a society where, if abortion is mentioned on TV, it's almost always accompanied with a veil of lies. Four years ago, we set out to change that trend, and we're succeeding!

In a short time, Facing Life Head-On began airing on cable and satellite networks across the US and Canada, reaching more than 100 million homes each week. Viewers often write in to tell us the show changed their way of thinking about the life issues—matters like abortion, adoption, stem cell treatments and end-of-life care. Women are choosing life for their unborn babies. Parents are moving forward with the adoption of special needs children. Young people are getting empowered with the information they need to speak out.

Putting together a show like this takes a big investment, but our hard work is paying off. Though we'd certainly love to win that Emmy, our greater mission is to win the hearts and minds of America. This is proving to be a successful way of doing it!

If you'd like to be a part of the journey, please visit www.facinglife.tv to learn more about the program and help us broadcast more shows that change—and even save—lives. You can also watch the full episodes online.

Contact: Bradley Mattes
Source: Life Issues Institute
Publish Date: June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Women Deliver: Panel Pushes 'Harm Reduction' as Effective 'Facade' for Dismantling Pro-Life Laws

Top theme of conference: "unsafe abortion" the "most important cause" of maternal mortality

     From left to right: Leonel Prioxxo, Joanne Csete, Joanna Erdman, Vincente Diaz (Director, IPPF WHR)
  
A Wedesday panel at the 2010 Women Deliver conference provided a fascinating peek into the pro-abortion lobby's logical gymnastics regarding their "harm-reduction" strategy for advancing abortion worldwide. While saying the strategy treats the choice of abortion as "value-neutral" in order to push the provision of better abortion facilities, the panelists went on to admit that the method was little more than a "facade" to push their own "value" of expanded abortion.

A real-world analysis of the harm-reduction strategy was provided by Leonel Priozzo, Director of Strategic Programming for Uruguay's Ministry of Health. Although abortion is illegal in Uruguay, Priozzo boasted that the "harm reduction" mantra had helped public opinion become more favorable toward abortion in his country.

Priozzo briefly claimed that "unsafe abortion was the most important cause" of maternal mortality - the top theme of the Women Deliver conference. However, as confirmed by a crucial Lancet study released in April, pro-life leaders have repeatedly said that illegal abortion has little if anything to do with maternal mortality, which is most heavily dependent on other factors such as average income and trained medical professionals aiding at birth.

Despite the altruistic introduction, the remainder of Priozzo's presentation, and those of the other panelists, focused heavily on using the strategy simply to change the social and political climate in favor of abortion.

Priozzo revealed figures showing that, under his counrty's harm-reduction model, over half (55%) the women coming to the agency eventually choose to kill thier unborn child while only 21% follow up to say they will keep their baby. 13.8% do not follow up.

"The political target of our harm reduction model is important," he noted, "and in this decade, our model advanced to force legal change by means of less resistance."  Priozzo attributed the harm-reduction approach to the Uruguay Congress approving in 2008 a bill legalizing abortion, which was vetoed by president Tabare Vazquez.

    
Joanna Erdman at the 2010 Women Deliver conference

Dr. Joanne Csete, an associate professor at Columbia University, took the notion in a broader strategic context, defining harm reduction as "the idea that we will focus on the harms of this behavior, in this case the health-related harms, but we will not so much worry about the behavior itself," and "will not judge the behavior" or "worry about whether people abstain eventually from the behavior or not."

Csete said that a good model to follow for applying "harm reduction" to abortion was the UN's strategy for illegal drug use, which has prompted the organization to fund the distribution of clean needles for drug users. In another example, she bashed the 12-step approach to overcoming harmful behavior, such as Alcoholics Anonymous, for moralizing and having "done a very good job of convincing people that God is on their side." Csete claimed that simply controlling the timing and type of alcohol consumption is enough to "stabilize the lives of a lot of people who live with alcohol dependency."

However, because the harm-reduction model could be used to advocate for laws that bar such behavior, said the professor, it is sometimes necessary to make the concept "broader" by focusing on "the harms of criminalization of drug use" which can "cause drug users to spend a lot of time in prison" among other detriments, such as stifling information.

"Certainly we can't really talk in this framework about the excitement of drug use or the pleasure of drug use - those are completely verboten topics," she said, comparing the situation to the taboo surrounding contraception and sex.

To be successful in overturning pro-life laws, she concluded, the harm-reduction strategy must be linked to a "human rights" perspective demanding the decriminalizaiton of abortion, a theme resumed by University of Toronto professor Joanna Erdman.

"The evidence on criminal abortion laws causing harm is so overwheling that it becomes exceedingly difficult not to argue for law reform under a harm reduction model," claimed Erdman. "[A] human rights [approach will] provide us with the necessary moral grounding to say that prohibition is not only irrational as causing harm, it's impermissible. It's unacceptable."

A few commenting audience members following the panelists' presentations shed further light on the tenor of the session: one IPPF representative said that the "right to information" and doctor/patient "confidentiality" - i.e., prohibiting doctors to reveal when an abortion has been committed - are "definitely the most important" places to begin change.

Another revealing moment came when a pro-abortion advocate in the audience referred to an East Timor bill in which abortion would be legal "in cases where [a woman's] physical and mental health were to be affected - which as you all know can be broadly interpreted when need be" - and the panelists nodded in agreement.

In a conversation following the session, a third audience member asked Csete about the objection that, because the model was being used to push abortion as a value, some may call the "value-neutral" claim a mere facade.

"Yeah, I think facade is the right word," Csete conceded. "Sometimes it's the only choice you have to get anywhere politically and protect services ... I think it's really the sort of desperate, structurally very hostile circumstances where that becomes a very useful thing to fall back on."

Contact:
Kathleen Gilbert
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 9, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Broad Coalition Opposes Targeted Attack on First Amendment

 
     The U.S. House of Representatives in Session
     The U.S. House of Representatives in Session

More than 50 groups are asking the U.S. House of Representatives to oppose H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act. The group letter was sent today.

The legislation comes in response to the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that rolled back certain campaign-finance restrictions. It aims to expand the scope of such regulations to strangle free speech.

The DISCLOSE Act will place burdensome restrictions on the ability of nonprofits to engage in free speech and advocate for families and consumers. For example, the bill would force a group's top donors to appear in any political commercials, even those who aren't donors to the specific ad. It would also mean that all top donors' names would be disclosed, even if they aren't funding any part of the political communication. CitizenLink and other pro-family groups would be affected.

"The bill aims to silence political speech by intimidation and onerous regulation," the groups wrote.

The group letter is as follows...

Dear Member of the United States House of Representatives, We write on behalf of the millions of taxpayers and concerned citizens represented by our respective organizations to urge Congress to reject H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act, an egregious attempt by the majority to stifle political speech.

H.R. 5175 is being sold to the public as a "response" to the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC. However, this bill uses the ruling as an excuse to expand the scope of campaign finance regulations to strangle free speech. The DISCLOSE Act is constitutionally dubious based on its forced disclosure of the identities of members of an organization. The Supreme Court refused to uphold this type of comprehensive disclosure in NAACP v. Alabama, recognizing that compelled disclosure can be used to intimidate speech.

This bill runs afoul of this precedent in two ways: by forcing the top donors of a group, who are not necessarily the specific donors to an ad, to appear in a political communication and by forcing groups to disclose members of their organization who are not necessarily funding communications. This shifts the regulatory paradigm away from those who are actually funding advertisements and targets, for the first time, individual membership in a group. This inclusive treatment of organizational funding reveals that the intent of this legislation is not true disclosure – it is the intimidation of speech.

The bill also marks a stark departure from the traditional treatment of corporations and unions by applying punitive measures to associations in the corporate form, but not to labor unions. Historically, these entities have been treated interchangeably in campaign finance law. The attempt now to separate these associations amounts to nothing more than partisan maneuvering for political gain and sparks constitutional concerns under the Equal Protection clause.

Moreover, in its recent ruling in Citizens United, the Supreme Court held that the identity of the speaker cannot provide justification for the inhibition of its speech. By allowing union speech while punishing the speech of similar associations, H.R. 5175 does exactly this.

The Committee on House Administration's rejection of amendments that would have subjected unions to the same treatment as corporations under this bill illustrates the intention of this act – to exclude certain groups from the political dialogue.

The DISCLOSE Act is an unequivocal ban on free speech, masquerading as an exercise in accountability. The bill's sponsors opine these regulations are necessary after the Citizens United ruling, arguing that it allows corporations to prop up "shadow groups" through which money could be funneled to air independent advertisements.

Such fears are unfounded, since current law is based on the disclosure of money, not groups. Any group, including a 527 group or a 501(c)(4), (c)(5), or (c)(6), must disclose its donations above a certain amount given to fund an independent expenditure or an electioneering communication. The disclosure follows the money, not the actor publishing the ad, so it is impossible for the secretive spending envisioned by the proponents of this bill to take place. Lastly, the bill takes a tenuous stance on foreign entities and their participation in elections. The legislation somewhat vaguely states that a corporation with "foreign ownership" cannot make independent expenditures. This effectively proscribes the First Amendment rights of any American citizens employed by a domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation, a difficult position to reconcile with the safeguards of the Constitution. The definition of "foreign ownership" also presents pragmatic problems, as it relies on the constitution of a company's shareholders, which can fluctuate daily in the dynamic global market.

The DISCLOSE Act, while cleverly named, aims to silence political speech by intimidation and onerous regulation. Such efforts should be rejected swiftly. Thus, on behalf of the millions of Americans we represent, we urge you to reject this assault on free speech and to vote against H.R. 5175.


Source: CitizenLink
Publish Date: June 10, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Regulate Synthetic Life Science While the Horse is Still in the Barn


     First Synthetic Life
     First Synthetic Life

The CBC asked me to comment on the ethical implications of the recent scientific announcement that they have implanted an artificially created genome into a bacteria.  My main take is that the time to regulate this emerging field is now, not later, while we have time to deliberate and create proper protections that doesn't stifle science. From my piece:

    …it was an astounding scientific achievement that could lead, the scientists said, to man exerting "a new power over life." They weren't kidding. The potential safety and ethical consequences of learning to engineer new life forms—including eventually of the human variety—is hard to overstate. That being so, we had better get about the task of erecting legally enforceable safety and ethical parameters around this field while we still have time to act deliberately. And here's an important truth: If society doesn't decide where we want the science to go—and not go—the amoral inertial imperative of technological advance will fill the resulting vacuum with potentially terrible consequences.

I point out the terrible problems that fundamentally unregulated IVF has created:

    Indeed by failing to regulate IVF, it has, in effect, regulated us, leading directly to tremendous changes in the norms of family life (e.g., Octomom and aged motherhood), the reemergence of eugenics values (for example, in embryo selection), and an overall utilitarian objectification of unborn life (human cloning, embryonic stem cell research, and advocacy to permit fetal farming). If that was true of IVF—which, recall, had the original limited goal of helping infertile married couples have babies—imagine the potential epochal impact broadly synthesizing life could exert over the earth's biology and human morality.

But we have time not to make the same mistake with synthetic life:

    The good news is that unlike IVF, concerns over the impact of synthetic life could become a rare field about which the political left and right, so often at loggerheads, could agree. Thus, we should applaud President Obama for directing his new bioethics advisory panel (Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues) to investigate the implications of this field and report back to him with proposed societal responses. I also urge the proposed conservative "shadow bioethics panel" now being formed —which seems designed to continue the splendid moral analytical engagement of the now defunct President's Council on Bioethics—to engage the issue and publish recommendations for proper regulatory action.

    This is not to say that the science should be wholly stifled. But it is to say that we should refuse to assume the posture of mere flotsam and jetsam floating on the currents. For once, as a powerful new science emerges, let's control our own destiny. The last thing the world needs is a synthetic life science sector Wild, Wild, West.


Naked science is amoral, and hence potentially dangerous. However science conducted within proper ethical parameters provides tremendous benefit.  Part of being human is the power of self restraint. That is certainly necessary considering the safety and ethical implications of this new emerging science.

Contact:
Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Publish Date:
June 11, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Abortion Breast Cancer Link Raised in Victorian (Australia) Parliament


     The Victorian Parliament
     The Victorian Parliament

Peter Kavanagh, DLP (Democratic Labor Party) Member for Western Victoria, urged the Victorian Parliament last night to study scientific evidence of the abortion-breast cancer link and to warn women of the risk if it is confirmed by scientific studies.

Kavanagh raised an adjournment motion in the Legislative Council after he was made aware that neither the Cancer Council of Victoria nor the Cancer Council of Australia had replied to letters sent by experts from Endeavour Forum Inc., an NGO having special consultative status with ECOSOC of the UN, of three studies published in 2009 confirming the increased risk of breast cancer caused by induced abortion.

"My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Health and relates to the apparent link between abortion and breast cancer. During the abortion debate in this Parliament in late 2008 I went into considerable detail, listing some of the scientific evidence which demonstrates that having an abortion increases a woman's risk of developing breast cancer. Even more recent scientific studies released in 2009 confirm such a link," Kavanagh said in Parliament on June 9, according to VicHansard.

Babette Francis and Gabrielle Whiting of Endeavour Forum Inc. expressed their concern to Kavanagh after submitting published scientific research to the cancer groups and receiving no response.

The submitted research includes "Breast cancer risk factors in Turkish women" by Ozmen V. et al, published in the World Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2009; 7:37; "A case-control study of reproductive factors associated with subtypes of breast cancer in Northeast China" by Xing P. et al, published in Medical Oncology, e-publication online, September 2009; and "Risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer in women under the age of 45 years" by Dolle J. et al, published in Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009: 18(4), pages 1157-1166.

"Apparently these important warnings are being ignored by the health authorities to which they are being reported," Kavanagh said. "It seems difficult to avoid the conclusion that ideological commitment to unrestricted abortion may be preventing a proper assessment of the health risks of abortion."

"The action I seek from the minister is that he seek an objective review of the evidence of a relationship between abortions and breast cancer risk, and if such a link is shown to exist, to issue medical warnings along these lines, even if this has the effect of reducing the number of abortions," Kavanagh concluded.

To contact the Parliament of Victoria:
Parliament House,
East Melbourne, Victoria, 3002
Phone: (+61 3) 9651 8911
Fax: (+61 3) 9654 5284
Email: info@parliament.vic.gov.au

Click here for more information on the medical connection between abortion and breast cancer from the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer website
.

Contact:
Thaddeus M. Baklinski
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Publish Date: June 10, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

NEWS SHORTS FOR FRIDAY

Dawn Johnsen's Failed Self-Reinvention

     President Obama's former nominee to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel Dawn Johnsen
    
Dawn Johnsen

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post ("Restoring Leadership and Integrity to the Office of Legal Counsel"), President Obama's former nominee to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel Dawn Johnsen writes that "There is no simple answer to why my nomination failed."  However, she argues that her "torture memo" regarding the Bush Administration's position on handling terrorists was essential to the collapse of her attempted appointment.

Perhaps her view of the way to treat combatant prisoners was a source of consternation to conservatives.  But there is another reason why ultimately she withdrew her nomination: Ms. Johnsen is a pro-abortion zealot, and a sufficient number of pro-life Senators found her views outside the mainstream that she finally gave up her more than 14 month effort to achieve Senate confirmation.
Click here for the entire article.


Homosexual Group, Planned Parenthood & Judges Keep Personhood Amendment Off Nevada Ballot
     Personhood USA Logo
A Christian-based group's anti-abortion petition will not appear on the November ballot. A national leader of the Personhood movement said Thursday it will not collect the required number of signatures needed by Tuesday's deadline. The proposed constitutional amendment would halt abortions in Nevada. PersonhoodUSA co-founder Keith Mason said the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada and Planned Parenthood through litigation have "run out the clock on us" and prevented the organization from collecting the required 97,002 signatures to put the issue before voters. The state Supreme Court still has not ruled on Personhood Nevada's appeal of a lower court decision that prevented the group from circulating its petition.
Click here for the entire article.


Involuntary euthanasia found widespread in Belgium

     Involuntary Euthanasia

A new report on legal euthanasia in Belgium has found that a significant number of "terminations with request or consent." Although the country's law requires the patient to give informed consent for euthanasia, a number of nurses admitted to researchers that they had ended the lives of patients who had not asked for an earlier death. About 2% of the deaths in Belgium are classified as euthanasia; it is not clear how many of those deaths are involuntary.
Click here for the entire article.


Careless, negligent abortionist's license sought

     Gynecare Center Website

An abortionist at the Gynecare Center in Maryland is under state scrutiny for the death of one of his patients.

Because of his connection with the death of a 21-year-old woman in 2006, an initial proceeding has been held by the Maryland Board of Physicians (MBP) in a quest to revoke the medical license of abortionist Romeo Ferrer.
Click here for the entire article.


Alabama abortion mill closes; 2nd "emergency" appeal issued to keep last standing Mississippi mill open

     Beacon's Women Center Logo

Operation Rescue is reporting this afternoon that Beacon's Women Center in Montgomery, AL, has closed.

An AL Dept. of Public Health source informed OR that Beacon, one of Summit Medical Center's chain of 7 mills, decided to shutter its doors rather than face a revocation hearing after being placed on probation in 2007 for numerous violations.
Click here for the entire article.


FDA Takes Issue with Genetic Tests from 5 Firms


     Genetic Testing
     Genetic Testing

The Food and Drug Administration has put five genetic test makers on notice that they must get federal approval before marketing their products for use by consumers.
 
The regulatory letters posted online Friday are the first sign that the government agency plans to crack down on companies marketing products that claim to predict inheritable diseases using DNA samples.
 
The FDA letters notify each company that their products are considered medical devices and therefore must be federally approved as safe and effective.
Click here for the entire article.

June 10, 2010

Don't Let your Money Race off to Planned Parenthood!

Don't Let your Money Race off to Planned Parenthood!

     Susan G. Komen Race for the Logo
 
Nancy Brinker promised her dying sister, Susan G. Komen, that she would do everything in her power to end breast cancer forever.  That promise launched the largest global breast cancer fundraising organization, Susan G. Komen for the Cure. But the question can be asked, Is Komen doing everything they can to end breast cancer?  We think not, and again discourage you from supporting or participating in Quad Cities Race for the Cure.
 
The Komen website attempts to explain away the fact that a preponderance of studies shows there is a link between prior abortion and the later development of breast cancer.  For example, their website contains the following paragraph:
 
"Although there has been some debate in the past about the link between abortion and breast
cancer risk, research now strongly supports no link between the two [366]. This conclusion was further confirmed in a 2003 National Cancer Institute report [367]."
 
However, an April, 2009, paper headed by Jessica Dolle at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center included an admission from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) that a study headed by Louise Brinton of the NCI showed that abortion raises women's breast cancer risk by 40%.  Despite the fact Ms. Brinton had also found reported increased risk of breast cancer after abortion in a 1996 study she had worked on, she falsely assured women there was no link.  Thus, no cancer fundraising businesses, including Komen, have made any attempts to end, or at least decrease, breast cancer by warning women of the abortion-breast cancer link.  They even go out of their way to deny it!
 
Grants to Planned Parenthood
 
Komen Quad Cities gives grants to Planned Parenthood.  However, you won't find Planned Parenthood listed because starting in 2005, in an attempt to obscure the true grantee, grants for Planned Parenthood of Southeast Iowa began to be funneled through the Louisa County Health Department.  Also, part of the 25% that Komen Quad Cities forwards on to the national organization can be used to fund Planned Parenthood in other areas of the country by way of national grants.
 
Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortion in the U.S.  They do not tell women that the "service" they provide will put them at greater risk of breast cancer.  Komen partners with a business that increases the very disease they are fighting!  They state that Race money is not used for abortions, only mammograms, but these mammograms could be performed by any number of non-controversial providers if Komen chose to use them.
 
Grants to Researchers Involved in Embryonic Stem Cell Research

 
Komen gives grants to organizations whose research position statements show support of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).      

For further information:

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
 
Source: QC Right To Life
Publish Date: June 9, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

Washington, D.C. Protects Abortion and Planned Parenthood Yet Crushes and Prohibits the First Amendment and Free Speech


    
Police officers arrested Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney for praying on a public sidewalk in front of Planned Parenthood on Tuesday, June 8.

 It is now more important for government and law enforcement officials to protect abortion in our nation's capital then it is for them to protect the First Amendment, free speech and civil liberties.
 
Is this the future of America?
 
Police officers arrested Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney for praying on a public sidewalk in front of Planned Parenthood on Tuesday, June 8.

    

     Click here for the newly released video.
 
This arrest followed weeks of Washington, D.C. police officers threatening to arrest members of the pro-life community for praying and counseling on the public sidewalk in front of Planned Parenthood.
 
For years, the pro-life community has prayed, counseled and held peaceful witness on the public property in front of Planned Parenthood.
 
Click here to view photo of pro-lifers peacefully praying in front of Planned Parenthood
 
This situation developed after Planned Parenthood applied for a public permit to construct an iron fence around their property.
 
Click here to view pictures of the recently constructed fence with "No Trespassing" signs

However, the construction of the fence did not change the description of the land and according to city records it still remains public.  Also, Planned  Parenthood and the City of Washington, D.C. have not presented one piece of evidence or documentation showing the property has now become private.
 
James Henderson, Senior Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice who is representing Rev. Mahoney, states,

"After we learned that Planned Parenthood installed the fence, and that police were threatening to arrest those that prayed or counseled on the public spaces within the fence, we extensively researched the status of that property.
 
"The Public Spaces Branch of the District's Department of Transportation maintains the the database of public properties in Washington, D.C.  During meetings with that department, two different sources confirmed to us that Washington, D.C. owned a 50-foot right of way along the public sidewalk in front of Planned Parenthood.
 
"So, we know for a fact that Rev. Mahoney was arrested on public property when he was charged with crime of unlawful entry."

 
The Christian Defense Coalition plans a major national campaign to  address this ban on the First Amendment in Washington, D.C. later this summer.

Contact: Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney
Publish Date: June 10, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

40 yrs+ celebrity IVF pregnancies: Celine Dion and Kelly Preston


     Three weeks ago 47-yr-old actress Kelly Preston and 56-yr-old actor husband John Travolta announced they were expecting a baby.
    
Kelly Preston and husband John Travolta

Three weeks ago 47-yr-old actress Kelly Preston and 56-yr-old actor husband John Travolta announced they were expecting a baby. (Twins denied.)

 
    Celine Dion with husband René Angélila
    
Celine Dion with husband René Angélila

Then a week ago 42-yr-old singer Céline Dion announced she and 68-yr-old husband René Angélil were expecting twins.

Both pregnancies were reportedly conceived via in vitro fertilization.

(And if these things do come in 3s, keep an eye on 40-yr-old singer Mariah Carey, whose 29-yr-old singer Nick Cannon didn't exactly quash rumors a few days ago that she's pregnant as well.)

Congrats to all. We're praying for healthy babies.

Even though we recently observed in 44-yr-old Michelle Duggar that women over 40 do conceive naturally, pregnancy past 40 isn't the norm.

On May 31 OB/Gyn Dr. Jennifer Ashton described on CBS's The Early Show the staggering preborn death toll to achieve a successful 40+ pregnancy...

We're seeing this more and more among celebrities, and it appears that 40 would be the new 30 when you're talking about pregnancy and fertility. Not exactly the case.

"When you look at the numbers in terms of women and their fertility, there is no question it declines as they get older. We're meant to reproduce in our early 20s. So, when you look at women in the 20-to-24 age group, only 7% will be infertile. When you go up over 40, that number approaches 30%. That's because the quality of their eggs goes down and the number of their eggs goes down."

Outside intervention to help start such pregnancies is "pretty common," Ashton says. "Actually, there are 4 million births in the U.S. every year, approximately, and the estimates are that 1% of them, so that's about 40k babies, were conceived using what's called assisted reproductive technology. So, not totally mainstream, but very, very common.

     45-yr-old actress Sarah Jessica Parker, 48-yr-old actor husband Matthew Broderick, and 7-yr-old son James with twin daughters Marion and Tabitha, born June 22, 2009, via surrogate.
    
Sarah Jessica Parker, husband Matthew
      Broderick, son James with twin daughters
      Marion and Tabitha


"There's a whole spectrum of what we call assisted reproductive technology," Ashton continued, "and it could be anything from in-vitro fertilization, which could be due to anything from sperm problems or egg problems, and then it could encompass donor egg, donor sperm and, in the most aggressive cases, uterine surrogacy....." [Photo above is of 45-yr-old actress Sarah Jessica Parker, 48-yr-old actor husband Matthew Broderick, and 7-yr-old son James with twin daughters Marion and Tabitha, born June 22, 2009, via surrogate.]

How often do such pregnancies take hold and get carried to term?

"When you look at ... all cycles using non-frozen embryos, the success rate approaches about 30%," Ashton says. "Now, that is heavily dependent on age. The older you get, whether you're using your own egg or not, the success rate of a live birth goes down. Again, just because we're seeing it in the 40s does not mean it's easy."

Dion underwent 5 failed IVF fertilization attempts before the 6th took.

Now to the hard truth. While these children are all blessings, the pathway of death to get them was immoral.

More of the hard truth: Liberal feminism trampling over biological norms has brought us to this point. The fertile female human body during her early 20s as well as the simultaneous increased male and female sex drive indicates women and men were instinctively built to have babies much earlier than is now societally accepted.

Feminists have actually not told women they "can bring home the bacon and fry it up in the pan." They've told women to 1st get educated to learn how to bring home the bacon, then begin bringing home the bacon, and then begin thinking about the home in which to fry it up in the pan, tinkering by 5 to 10 to 15 years with their biological clocks.

Conversely, feminists have told young women and men not to strive for relational maturity during their prime reproductive cycle of the early 20s.

They say instead to sow wild oats during that highly fertile span of time. This only increases the likelihood abstinence until marriage cannot be achieved and that both parties will be bringing along damaged hearts and bodies when saying "I do." And of course there's abortion, highest in that age group, of course.

Women have been instructed to replace the desire for a husband and family with a desire for a career. They have been told children detract from rather than enhance whatever else women have going on.

This is not to say career and kids cannot coexist. The most perfect wife and mother ever described in the Bible, the Proverbs 31 woman, independently purchased real estate, planted her own vineyard, and made and sold goods.

But today's career options often separate mothers from families rather than synergize them.

And so today we see women past their child-bearing prime pumping themselves with dangerous artificial steroids to conceive and bear children they belatedly realize they long for, killing many along the way and also increasing the odds of killing themselves.

Contact: Jill Stanek
Source: jillstanek.com
Publish Date: June 10, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.

People 'being killed for their organs'?


     Human Organ Transplant transporation cooler bag.
     Human Organ Transplant transporation cooler bag.

A dangerous precedent was set in Belgium, an ethicist said, when a woman chose assisted suicide and then opted to donate her organs.

Wesley Smith, a bioethics fellow at the Discovery Institute, said agreeing to harvest organs from euthanasia "raises the very realistic prospect that despairing people with terminal illnesses or disabilities (or perhaps, just despair) could latch onto being killed for their organs as a way of bringing meaning to their lives."

"This very dangerous territory, made all the more treacherous by doctors, spouses and a respected medical journal validating the ideas that dead is better than disabled and that living patients can, essentially, be viewed as a natural resource to be killed and mined," Smith wrote on the Secondhand Smoke blog at FirstThings.com in May.

The woman in Belgium was not terminally ill, Smith said. She was fully conscious but completely paralyzed, a state he called "locked-in." She asked for her doctor's assistance in carrying out her desire to die, and the day before the euthanasia procedure, she decided to allow her organs to be transplanted.

In the presence of her husband, Smith recounted, the woman was killed intravenously and her body was moved to the operating table 10 minutes after cardiac activity had ceased. Her liver and both kidneys were removed, and a year later the three recipients have responded well.

"If this doesn't set off alarm bells about how the sick and disabled are increasingly being looked upon not only as burdens (to themselves, families, and society), but potential objects for exploitation, what will?" Smith wrote. "A disabled woman was killed, even though people with locked-in states often adjust over time to their disabilities and are happy to be alive."

The woman's story appeared in the bioethics journal Transplantation, perhaps authenticating the coupling of the two procedures in the minds of some.

"This case of two separate requests, first euthanasia and second, organ donation after death, demonstrates that organ harvesting after euthanasia may be considered and accepted from ethical, legal and practical viewpoints in countries where euthanasia is legally accepted," Smith wrote.

"This possibility may increase the number of transplantable organs and may also provide some comfort to the donor and his (her) family, considering that the termination of the patient's life may somehow help other human beings in need for organ transplantation.

"Taking the organs was the easy decision. Once you've pulled medicine into the forbidden zone of active killing, finding self-congratulatory justifications becomes a most desirable quest," Smith wrote, adding that "once society accepts that the two can be joined, saving others could easily become a frequent motivation for asking to be killed."

Also in May, articles in the Canadian Medical Association Journal said about one in 25 deaths in Belgium is by euthanasia, and of those, 2 percent take place after a direct request of a doctor; 1.8 percent occur without such a request.

Voluntary euthanasia must be performed by a physician in Belgium, but it is done 12 percent of the time illegally by nurses, the report said. In 2009, Belgium officially had 700 euthanasia deaths, a jump from 500 such cases in 2008, according to a March report by Flanders News. These are officially reported figures, and experts say they represent only 25 percent of the actual totals.

Contact:
Erin Roach and Tom Strode
Source: Baptist Press
Publish Date: June 9, 2010
Link to this article.
Send this article to a friend.