No surprise, but this 60 Minutes report way oversimplified–and I think misled–about the very real problem of the costs of end of life care, with supposedly too many people dying in ICUs:
* First, the economics of hospital payments by Medicare promote earlier releases. This is because hospitals are paid on a capitated basis by Medicare (the diagnosis related group system), which is why so much emphasis is placed by hospitals on "discharge management." As a consequence, some patients and doctors worry about patients being released "sooner and sicker." Yes, doctors are paid to consult, but the program should have mentioned hospital compensation that uses economics to reduce length of hospitalization. Indeed, hospitals lose money if a patient remains in hospital beyond the average stay for their condition.
* A lot of people who die in ICUs are not necessarily terminally ill. Doctors often don't know whether someone is going to die, which is why such treatment is rendered. Indeed, the initial patient discussed in the report wasn't dying from an illness and being kept alive despite her condition, but was unconscious due to complications of treatment coupled with a hospital acquired infection.
* Third, when a heart patient says he wants CPR, Dr. Ira Byock–who I know, like, and greatly admire for his work in hospice–says, "It wouldn't be my choice." But it should be the patient's choice. (Also note, the patient later died without CPR because his family acknowledged how poor his condition became.)
* Yes, inappropriate tests are sometimes done–example, a pap smear for a dying octogenarian–but that can be remedied without draconian rationing and refusing efficacious approaches based on quality of life value judgments made by a physician or bioethics committee.
* Rationing is definitely on the agenda–and I think, a major purpose of the report: Byock promotes withholding "defibrillators" from certain patients based on their age and function, but bristles when Steven Croft says that "is pulling Grandma off the machine." But then he couples that issue with the number of uninsured. Doctors cannot represent both societal interests and fulfill their fiduciary duties to individual patients. Indeed, whether Byock likes it or not, he is promoting rationing, and that means, by definition, not providing some patients efficacious treatments based on subjective quality of life judgments.
I agree completely with Byock that doctors need to do a much better job of educating terminally ill patients about their care options and exploring the many benefits of hospice. (The new health care law reduces budgets for this!) But the last thing the American people will (or should) stand for, is coercion. Nothing could sow greater distrust in medicine.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
The Pro-life Freedom Rides, which were inaugurated last month with a ride from Birmingham to Atlanta, will initiate the second phase of this movement with a nine-week period of prayer and action starting on September 1 and concluding on Election Day. People can sign up at www.ProLifeFreedomRides.com.
This period will be marked by the following elements:
1. A nine-week novena of Prayer for our National Elections (Sept 1 - Nov 2): Sign up at www.PrayerCampaign.org
2. A national webcast on Tuesday night, September 7, to discuss how people can participate in their own communities in the activities of these weeks.
3. National Voter Registration Sunday on September 12, when Churches are urged to have voter registration drives. Organizations and individuals can promote voter registration in a wide variety of other ways as well. www.priestsforlife.org/vote has details of how to carry out these activities.
4. The second Pro-life Freedom Ride from Knoxville, TN to Chattanooga, TN on Friday, Oct. 15 - Saturday, Oct. 16. Sign up at www.ProLifeFreedomRides.com
5. A national call to post-abortion healing and testimony, symbolized by the event in Chattanooga on Oct. 16 which will be held at the National Memorial for the Unborn. At this site, mothers and fathers from around the world who have lost children to abortion memorialize those children with special plaques posted on the walls. At the October 16 event, Pro-life Freedom Riders will express their solidarity with all who have lost children to abortion. Some will give their testimonies at that event. Meanwhile, everyone can a) spread the word about healing, and b) spread the testimonies in their own circles of influence. We will provide training on how to do this, through the Silent No More Awareness Campaign (www.SilentNoMoreAwareness.org).
6. Voter education and Get-Out-The-Vote activities throughout October, with training offered through two more webcasts, one on October 6 and the other on October 27.
These activities are part of the 10 Steps to End Abortion, that provide the practical steps that Pro-life Freedom Riders will implement throughout their various campaigns. This second Freedom Ride emphasizes steps 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7 of those 10 steps.
Contact: Margaret Sciarrino
Source: Priests for Life
Date Published: August 17, 2010
Because Idaho doesn't have a specific law about assisted suicide, euthanasia activists are now focusing on that state.
Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC), tells OneNewsNow a familiar voice recently stated the pro-euthanasia case.
"Kathryn Tucker, who is the legal counsel for Compassion [and] Choices, made a presentation to the Idaho Medical Association, trying to tell them that because there is no specific law on assisted suicide in Idaho that...doctors could just go ahead and just do this," he reports.
Alex SchadenbergBut the EPC executive director points out that Tucker's claim is simply not true, as Idaho common law prohibits assisted suicide.
"Idaho doesn't have something specific like that, but it does deal with it under their homicide provision," he explains. "Therefore, it is illegal in Idaho, and a doctor who would go ahead with this would very likely be prosecuted and go to jail...as they should."
Schadenberg suspects the pro-suicide group is trying to find a doctor to test the law "because if the courts were to either treat it extremely leniently, or if the court were to say that Compassion [and] Choices' legal counsel was correct, then of course that would mean that other doctors could go ahead and do it."
He wonders why the organization's officials continue to lie to the government and the public if they want acceptance of assisted suicide.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: August 17, 2010
Pro-Abortion Group's "Sarah Palin Doesn't Speak for Me" Campaign Calls Authentic, Pro-life Women Candidates "Backwards"
Today, the Susan B. Anthony List criticized a new campaign by the pro-abortion group, EMILY's List, called "Sarah Palin Doesn't Speak for Me." EMILY's List called pro-life female candidates "backwards-looking" and criticized Gov. Palin's support of authentic women running for office.
"EMILY's List is running scared -- and it shows," said Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser. "Clearly, in this 'Year of the Pro-Life Woman,' which Sarah Palin helped make possible, women have found their political voices. Pro-life 'Mama Grizzlies' represent the majority of women across the country."
The Susan B. Anthony List's latest bus tour, which just returned from 23 cities throughout Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania, confirms that women are rejecting the abortion-centered women's movement model. A Rasmussen poll this week shows that 53 percent of women think that "abortions are too easy to get." The Susan B. Anthony List's candidates represent this majority of women.
"We are looking for women leaders who affirm the best in women -- who seek to include rather than exclude the rest of humanity as we find our fulfillment," said Dannenfelser. "EMILY's List is busy perpetuating what it purports to abhor: using women candidates with whom they disagree as punching bags. On the eve of the 90th anniversary of women's suffrage, the SBA List calls upon EMILY's List to come to grips with reality. Our academic panel next week, August 26th at the Yale Club on that anniversary will explore the roots of why Susan B. Anthony has influenced our views and why EMILY's List does not."
Since the 1992 so-called "Year of the Woman," the Susan B. Anthony List has elected 75 pro-life women to the U.S. House of Representatives, seven to the U.S. Senate and seven more to other statewide offices. At its breakfast event in May, Sarah Palin rallied the pro-life "Mama Grizzly" female candidates.
Contact: Kerry Brown
Source: Susan B. Anthony List
Date Published: August 17, 2010
![]( "City of Chicago has yet again dropped charges of")
The City of Chicago has yet again dropped charges of "disorderly conduct" against another pro-life advocate accused by Planned Parenthood staffers of violating the city's controversial "Bubble Zone" ordinance.
David Avignone, an MBA student at Loyola University Chicago, was arrested on July 8 while standing outside Planned Parenthood's Near North Side clinic just five days after police arrested Joe Holland, a Northwestern University graduate student, while he prayed his rosary at the same place.
Like Holland, Avignone was accused of violating a city ordinance passed in 2009 that prohibits individuals in the 50 foot radius of an abortion clinic from approaching within eight feet of its clients, without consent, "for the purpose of passing a leaflet or handbill to, displaying a sign to, or engaging in oral protest, education, or counseling."
Holland's case was dismissed on August 3, after the city dropped the charges.
The Thomas More Society, which represented both Avignone and Holland, contend that Planned Parenthood staffers' accusations of "disorderly conduct" within the "bubble zone" are meant to intimidate pro-life advocates, who discovered that they could comply with the ordinance and carry on their pro-life witness, simply by standing near the entrance of the clinic, instead of approaching the abortion facility's clients as they enter.
"We are pleased that for the second time, the City of Chicago has dismissed the false charges of disorderly conduct against a man who was properly and legally exercising his First Amendment rights on the public way," said Peter Breen, executive director and legal counsel at the Thomas More Society.
"We hope these two baseless cases involving alleged 'Bubble Zone' 'infractions' show the Chicago City Council why it should repeal this controversial ordinance altogether and cease efforts to scare pro-life people away from Planned Parenthood."
Both the Thomas More Society and the Illinois chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union have challenged the constitutionality of the law.
Pro-life advocates with the Pro-Life Action League have stated that Chicago police have previously misinterpreted the ordinance after getting their interpretation from Planned Parenthood's employees. Pro-Life Action League's projects coordinator, Corrina Gura, said that Planned Parenthood gives the officers "their version of what they wish the law said, then they ask the police to enforce their imaginary law."
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: August 13, 2010
After the Federal Drug Administration recently approved the new drug ella, which is being marketed as emergency contraception, numerous pro-life groups reacted strongly to the move, claiming that the pill acts as an abortifacient.
On Aug. 13, the FDA released a statement announcing the approval of ella for distribution in the United States, explaining that in June, an advisory committee "unanimously voted that the application for ella provided compelling data on efficacy and sufficient information on safety for the proposed indication of emergency contraception." Ella has been approved for distribution in Europe since May of this year.
Although the drug is being marketed internationally as a morning after pill, the FDA statement also noted that "women with known or suspected pregnancy and women who are breastfeeding should not use ella."
Numerous pro-life critics denounced the FDA's approval of the pill, with many arguing that the drug is mislabeled and misleading because it acts as an abortifacient.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) wrote on Friday that rather "than doing its due diligence on the impact this harmful drug will have on women and developing unborn children, the FDA has turned a blind eye to the serious dangers posed by ella."
"By misclassifying ella as emergency contraception, this administration has paved the way to covertly allow federal funding for abortion through Medicaid, Title X, and international family planning programs," he noted.
Explaining how the drug works, the American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) said that ella "is the first selective progesterone receptor modulator (SPRM) available in the United States for the indication of 'emergency contraception (EC).'"
"This class of drug (SPRM) blocks progesterone which is necessary to maintain a pregnancy. It disables the uterine lining, compromising it's (sic) ability to form 'secretory' endometrium – the lining which nourishes the fertilized, implanting new human baby."
"This effectively deprives the brand new human child of oxygen and nutrients, and the child dies," AAPLOG underscored. "This is abortifacient action."
Dr. Charmain Yoest of Americans United for Life cited concerns on the potentially harmful effects that the drug will have on women.
"The chemical make-up and mechanism of action of ella are very similar to RU-486, which is known to cause serious adverse health risks such as severe bleeding, ruptured tubal pregnancies, serious infections, and even death," Yoest wrote on Aug. 13.
The Americans United for Life leader also said that several members on the FDA advisory panel in June raised concerns about the effect that the drug would have on pregnancy, noting that there was "insufficient data."
"However, at the end of the meeting," Yoest said, "the panel inexplicably voted unanimously in favor of approving the drug as a contraceptive, and specifically recommended that the FDA not require a pregnancy test before dispensing ella."
Family Research Council Jeanne Monahan, director of the organization's Center for Human Dignity, echoed Yoest's criticisms, saying that the "FDA advisory panel largely ignored important questions, including impacts on women's health and the abortifacient capacity of Ella."
"By approving this drug quietly on a Friday afternoon when most of Washington was on vacation," Monahan added, "the Obama Administration and the FDA once again placed politics above science, women's health and informed consent."
Source: CNA
Date Published: August 16, 2010
Washington city officials have admitted that the sidewalk outside of a Planned Parenthood abortuary is in fact public property, not private property as Planned Parenthood had claimed. The city has therefore retreated from its threat to arrest as a trespasser anyone who prays on the sidewalk.
"Now that Planned Parenthood's lie has been exposed, it is time for the City to demand that the signs that falsely claim the public land as private property be removed," said Operation Rescue's President Troy Newman.
Pro-lifers have prayed and counseled for years on the sidewalk in front of the Planned Parenthood, but earlier this year Planned Parenthood built a fence around the yard and put up signs claiming that the area was private property.
On June 8, Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, was arrested while praying and reading the Bible within this area.
Jim Henderson of the American Center for Law and Justice told LSN at the time that Planned Parenthood's claim was false. He said that District of Columbia owns everything within 50 feet of the curb face on the street--practically up to the front doors of the Planned Parenthood. He also said that when Planned Parenthood had attempted to put up a fence before it had even been cited for illegal construction.
"We thank God for this important victory for free speech, public prayer and the First Amendment," said Patrick Mahoney. "The City of Washington, D.C. got it right when they reversed their tragic decision to arrest American citizens for simply praying on a public sidewalk."
He also warned, however, that pro-life efforts against Planned Parenthood must continue with equal force.
"If we did not stand for our rights and go to jail; if we did not mount an aggressive legal effort and if we did not invite people do come from around the country to pray on the public sidewalk even under the threat of arrest, that sidewalk would still be closed to the First Amendment."
He continued: "This struggle reminds us all of the famous quote from Thomas Jefferson in which he said, 'Eternal Vigilance is the price of liberty.' We must recognize that our rights, freedoms and liberties must be constantly defended."
The city's admission comes on the eve of the "A Time to Stand" project, in which pro-life activists from around the country were going to challenge the city's ban on prayer on public property and thereby risk arrest.
Advocates of unborn rights still plan to gather on Saturday, August 14, at 10:00 AM to pray and counsel on the public sidewalk.
"We encourage everyone that can to attend tomorrow's gathering in front of the Planned Parenthood in Washington, D.C. to exercise their legal right to pray and offer help to abortion-bound women there," Newman said.
He also said that pro-lifers must continue to be vigilant so that Planned Parenthood does not turn the law against them.
"If we ignore our rights, you can bet that Planned Parenthood will be more than happy to try to take them away again so that they can continue the unabated abortion of innocent babies," he said. "We must assert our rights not for ourselves, but on behalf of the babies that would surely perish if we were not allowed to make a public stand against the killing."
Contact: James Tillman
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: August 13, 2010
The Iowa Board of Medicine will meet August 20 to discuss the controversial abortion method known as "telemed" abortions.
The telemed approach involves an abortion patient who sits in front of a computer and takes part in an audio-video link with a doctor, who only views a sonogram of the woman's baby. The patient does not see the sonogram. If the doctor gives the go-ahead for an abortion, he or she pushes a button and a drawer containing the RU-486 pills opens for the patient. But since the doctor does not actually perform the abortion, as Iowa law requires, pro-life groups contend this method is illegal.
"Iowa law right now requires that a doctor must be present to perform an abortion," explains Jenifer Bowen of Iowa Right to Life.
Since the patient takes the pills at home and essentially aborts the baby without a doctor, the Planned Parenthood abortionist is not available should complications develop. Iowa Right to Life has known the clinic has utilized this method for two years, but Planned Parenthood has denied it.
"I would say in the last three or maybe four months is when Planned Parenthood finally admitted that this is what they were doing," Bowen reports. "So we've been doing the best that we can to sound the alarm, but they are multiplying the number of clinics [where] they are offering it, rather than stopping it."
The abortuary chain has admitted it plans to spread the telemed method nationwide. Operation Rescue has filed a complaint with state officials, and a meeting has been planned for Friday. Meanwhile, Iowa Right to Life is asking people to sign a petition on their website, to be presented to the state during that meeting.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: August 16, 2010
In this clip (click here to view), Peter Singer pretends that his call for allowing infanticide is merely about preventing the suffering of infants with ultimately terminal conditions, and limited to situations in which a decision has been made by parents and doctors to let them die by withdrawing life-extending medical treatment. At that point, he says, he supports taking actions to end their lives "swiftly and humanely" since they are going to die within a relatively short time anyway after a miserable life. And he can't understand why disability rights groups would oppose such humane ideas when they should support eliminating the suffering of their doomed brothers and sisters.
But that is lying by omission. Singer believes infants are not persons and thus, do not have a right to life. But knowing most people would not support killing "normal" infants, he uses examples of killing a disabled baby to promote the morality of infanticide based on utilitarian equations. And this is a very calculated strategy to make the odious concept more palatable (which it shouldn't) to general society.
Indeed, he has written in support of killing babies with non lethal disabling conditions, not to alleviate otherwise unending misery, but to benefit parents and siblings. In Practical Ethics,for example, he argued that hemophiliac babies can be killed to benefit the life of a hypothetical future sibling–even if the killed infant could have been happy had he been allowed to live:
When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would according to the total view, be right to kill him.
In Rethinking Life and Death he argued in favor of allowing babies with Down syndrome to be killed–based on the burden of care for the parents–not on an unlivable suffering life for the baby, using euphemistic language to soften the cold harshness of his beliefs:
Both for the sake of 'our children'…and for our own sake, we may not want a child to start on life's uncertain voyage if the prospects are clouded. When this can be known at a very early stage of the voyage we may still have a chance to make a fresh start. This means detaching ourselves from the infant who has been born, cutting ourselves free before the ties that have already begun to bind us to our child have become irresistible. Instead of going forward and putting all our efforts into making the best of the situation, we can still say no, and start again from the beginning.
In the same book he states that the life of a mackerel is equivalent to that of a baby:
Since neither a newborn human infant nor a fish is a person, the wrongness of killing such beings is not as great as the wrongness of killing a person.
Disability rights groups disdain Singer's views–as should we all–because he harnesses antipathy toward disability in the cause of supplanting human exceptionalism and the Judeo/Christian ethic–in the entirely secular sense, as he admits–with a broader utilitarian transformation of society that would destroy universal human rights. We should never let him disingenuously attempt to pretend that he is not seeking just such a radical and oppressive transformation of society.
Oh yes: Disability rights activists do oppose letting babies die by non treatment because they will be disabled. That is why, for example, they oppose futile care theory. So, once again, Singer lied by omission.
Contact: Wesley J. Smith
Source: Secondhand Smoke
Date Published: August 16, 2010
Today, Thomas More Society attorney Peter Breen will once again be in a Cook County Circuit Court to enter a "not guilty" plea on behalf of a man arrested for standing on the sidewalk outside the Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Chicago. David Avignone is the second arrestee under Chicago's controversial "Bubble Zone" ordinance, which applies outside an abortion clinic to prohibit approaching within eight feet of a person to present a leaflet, sign or oral message to that person. Avignone, an MBA student at Loyola University Chicago, was arrested on July 8 and has been charged with disorderly conduct.
"David did nothing wrong -- he was exercising his First Amendment rights on a public sidewalk, and this arrest is another sad attempt at scaring pro-life people away from Planned Parenthood," said Breen, executive director and legal counsel at the Thomas More Society. In 2009, Breen presented testimony on behalf of the Society that the "Bubble Zone" ordinance is unconstitutional during committee hearings.
On August 3, the City of Chicago dismissed the same charges against Joe Holland, a Northwestern University graduate student who was arrested as he prayed the rosary outside Planned Parenthood's Near North Side facility. Video of the incident showed Holland standing outside the entrance to the facility and praying, not approaching any individual to leaflet, picket or engage in "sidewalk counseling."
Breen commented, "David and Joe, arrested within a week of one another, were arrested even though they were both standing still, which is perfectly legal under the ordinance. We call on the City of Chicago to end this pattern of illegal arrests and repeal its 'Bubble Zone' ordinance."
The court previously granted the Thomas More Society permission to serve subpoenas on Planned Parenthood for relevant security footage and on the City of Chicago for relevant "911" call tapes. The responses to those subpoenas are due tomorrow in court.
Contact: Stephanie Lewis
Source: Thomas More Society
Date Published: August 12, 2010
This Saturday, August 14, over 40 young people from colleges around the country will meet in Washington, D.C. to mark the conclusion of their 3 simultaneous pro-life walks across America. They are walking with a group called Crossroads, who has sponsored these pro-life walks across America every summer since 1995. Passing through 36 states and thousands of towns and cities, they have witnessed the reality that the overwhelming majority of Americans identify themselves as pro-life.
"The mainstream media may tell you different, but we can say with authority and through actual experience at the grass-roots level, that America is truly a pro-life country." observed Martha Nolan, National Director of Crossroads Pro-Life. "The reality is that the Obama Administration is sadly out of touch with the values of mainstream America. We know because what we experience firsthand from the hundreds of thousands of people we meet along the way is in stark contrast to the strident stances now coming from the leadership in Washington, D.C."
These 3 walks started on May 24th on the west coast and conclude here in Washington, D.C. tomorrow on August 14th with a Rally at 12:00 noon at Upper Senate Park on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol building. Walking night and day, through rain or shine, these young people have spent the last 12 weeks witnessing to hundreds of thousands of Americans. Wearing shirts that are emblazoned with the words "PRO-LIFE" in big letters on the front, these dedicated walkers have had an amazing summer. "The youth of America are rejecting the lies of previous generations and are the real future of the pro-life movement," stated Nolan. "We've seen this each year as we conduct these cross-country pilgrimages -- each summer more and more young people are taking a stand for life and being a voice for the voiceless."
Since 1995, Crossroads has organized 12 week long walks across America from the west coast to Washington, D.C., to actively take part in rebuilding a Culture of Life in the United States. During the journey, each walker averages over 1,000 miles and takes an active role in the organization's mission by speaking to churches and youth groups as well as doing radio and newspaper interviews. Crossroads walkers also engage local communities through peaceful, prayerful protests and sidewalk counseling at abortion clinics in the cities they travel through.
This summer, Crossroads is also sponsoring their 3rd Annual Pro-Life walk across Canada. Made up of volunteer colleges students from throughout Canada, this walk started in Vancouver, British Columbia on May 24th and ends tomorrow, Saturday, August 14th at the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa, Ontario.
Contact: Jim Nolan
Source: Crossroads
Date Published: August 13, 2010
The City of Washington, D.C. reverses their position and will allow prayer and free speech activities on the public sidewalk leading up to Planned Parenthood.
For the past several months, Washington D.C. police officers have been threatening peaceful pro-life activists with arrest for simple praying and counseling on the public sidewalk in front of Planned Parenthood.
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, was arrested on June 8 for simply praying and reading from the Bible on that public sidewalk.
However, late this week, Rev. Mahoney was told by Washington, D.C. police officials that the City had reversed their position and will allow prayer and free speech activities on the public sidewalk.
Their decision came on the eve of a project called "A Time to Stand," in which pro-life activists from around the country were coming to challenge the ban on free speech and were willing to risk arrest for public prayer.
Hundreds of activists will still gather in front of Planned Parenthood on Saturday, August 14, at 10:00 A.M. to pray, worship and counsel on the public sidewalk and embrace the First Amendment and religious freedom.
Planned Parenthood is located at 1108 16th Street NW in Washington D.C.
The activists would also like to thank the American Center for Law and Justice who was representing them and did an incredible job of fighting for the truth.
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, states,
"We thank God for this important victory for free speech, public prayer and the First Amendment. The City of Washington, D.C. got it right when they reversed their tragic decision to arrest American citizens for simply praying on a public sidewalk.
"It would have been unthinkable for our nation's capital to ban and prohibit prayer on a public sidewalk, just blocks from the White House, to protect abortion and Planned Parenthood.
"There is a word of caution however. If we did not stand for our rights and go to jail; if we did not mount an aggressive legal effort and if we did not invite people do come from around the country to pray on the public sidewalk even under the threat of arrest, that sidewalk would still be closed to the First Amendment.
"This struggle reminds us all of the famous quote from Thomas Jefferson in which he said, 'Eternal Vigilance is the price of liberty.' We must recognize that our rights, freedoms and liberties must be constantly defended.
"Finally, this episode shows the lack of integrity and commitment that Planned Parenthood has to the First Amendment and the truth. They constantly lied about the nature of that sidewalk saying it was 'private' when they knew it was public. It should remind every American if an organization has no respect for the dignity and sanctity of life why would they respect the dignity of free speech?"
Contact: Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney
Source: Christian Defense Coalition
Date Published: August 12, 2010
A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee says it doesn't make sense for liberals in Congress to push for cuts in the Defense Department while simultaneously trying to pass a Defense Authorization Bill that would authorize taxpayer-funded abortions at military medical facilities.
Earlier this week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced his intention to eliminate the Virginia-based Joint Services Command, which employs about 6,000 military and civilian workers who account for at least $240 million in the defense budget's personnel costs. He declared that while some military and civilian employees could be reassigned elsewhere, a substantial number of full-time workers would have to leave the DOD. Gates also explained he would seek cuts elsewhere in the defense budget.
But Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi), a member of the Armed Services Committee, does not think Congress should suggest slashing Defense Department jobs while at the same time wanting to add a misguided additional expense at military health facilities.
"We're going in the wrong direction in this defense re-authorization bill. There is a provision in the Senate version that would allow abortions in military health facilities, not only for military members, but their families," the senator reports. "Now if we're looking to save money, the first thing we need to do is not add additional expenses and additional demands on our healthcare professionals and our facilities by saying that abortion on demand can be performed in our [military] health facilities."
Wicker feels pro-abortion senators should even understand that it makes no sense to put this additional burden on the defense budget at a time when there are so many more important and pressing priorities that should be dealt with first.
Contact: Chad Groening
Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: August 13, 2010
American Life League celebrated a free speech victory after a federal court entered a judgment on Thursday that a California elementary school and three school officials violated the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights of a sixth-grade student who participated in ALL's National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day (NPLTD) in 2008.
School officials barred Tiffany Amador from wearing her American Life League T-shirt at McSwain Union Elementary School in Merced, California. NPLTD (now a week-long event) was organized to increase awareness of the personhood of the child in the womb and the tragedy of abortion.
"So often, pro-life students learn that free speech is a constitutional right that, in practice at least, doesn't apply to them," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "For too long, pro-abortion demagogues have had a stranglehold on the country's educational institutions and have sought to stifle dissenting opinions -- by force, if necessary, as seen in this case. We are so grateful to Tiffany for her courage in the face of injustice -- both the bloody injustice of abortion and the tyrannical injustice of government institutions violating free speech rights."
The shirt featured the word "ABORTION" over a series of panels, two of which depicted pictures of a developing preborn child and the third filled in with black. The caption read, "Growing ... growing ... gone."
According to William J. Becker Jr. of the Becker Law Firm, representing Amador, the school claimed the images were "disruptive" because of their "graphic nature" but could not explain what made them so graphic that they would have caused any disruption, much less a substantial one, which the U.S. Supreme Court has held is a requirement for a school infringing upon a student's expressive rights.
In addition to claiming that her First Amendment right of expression was violated, Amador, who has since graduated from the eighth grade, alleged in the lawsuit that her Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure was violated when the school's secretary forcefully pulled her into the principal's office because of her shirt.
"Public school employees work for the government," Becker said. "Any time a school official uses physical force to suppress non-disruptive student expression, the government has gone way too far in enforcing its own political views."
Contact: Katie Walker
Source: American Life League
Date Published: August 13, 2010
Teenage parents in Greenville, South Carolina, have a place to go for help with problem pregnancies and raising their children.
In only a few weeks, New Spring Church volunteers changed an aging, molding building into a modern, bright center called Little Steps. Television station WYFF spoke with founder Mandy Black, who tells more about the facility's purpose.
"Little Steps is a non-profit organization. We work with teen parents and young parents here in the Greenville area," she explains. "Some of the biggest things are the balance of how to take care of a baby, stay in school [and] work to be able to provide for that child."
One of the intriguing aspects of the center is that the building formerly operated as an abortion facility. But now it features a playroom for children and a system for the teenage moms and dads, where they attend classes for "baby bucks" that can be used to purchase items like clothes, diapers, toys, and baby food.
Little Steps depends heavily on volunteers such as Kent Johnson. "A lot of the families who are involved in our program, had this still been what it used to be, could have possibly been a client or a patient here or used this facility for other reasons," he recognizes. "But now they're here dropping off their babies and getting information on how to be more effective as a parent."
The organization founder adds that it is not enough in some cases to convince a young mother not to abort a child because they do not always know what to do next. And that, says Black, is why she decided to establish this facility.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: August 13, 2010
There is a growing body of evidence that, clinically, abortion has serious consequences. It is further becoming obvious that abortion has ingrained in the culture an attitude toward others that invites all manner of violence. Perhaps part of the reason for this is society's denial that abortion kills people.
The current issue of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology published a fascinating study regarding the various causes of premature birth. Among those causes, Professor Jay D. Iams of Ohio State reports that "elective terminations [abortions] in the first and second trimesters are associated with a very small but apparently real increase in the risk of subsequent spontaneous preterm birth (PTB)."
The latest report is but one in a very long series of clinical studies that has shown that abortion can be the forerunner to premature birth as well as various types of disabilities in children born subsequent to an abortion. This is critical information that should be available to all expectant mothers. It is factual evidence that should be provided without prejudice since every expectant mother has a right to know the truth.
If at least some of those contemplating abortion were given all of the facts regarding the deleterious effects of abortion -- not only on their bodies but on the bodies of the future preborn children they might wish to carry to term -- they might change their minds and choose to carry their babies to term instead of abort.
In another report this past week, we read that the remains of a pregnant teenager were found in a landfill just two days before police had planned to end a two-month search for her body. The 17-year-old expectant mother, Anyssia Escamilla, was murdered by her boyfriend because she refused to abort their baby.
This sort of dastardly crime is but one of the fruits of the abortion culture in which we live. It proves the age-old proverb that violence begets violence. Such acts result from a misconception among many in our culture that abortion is exclusively a "woman's right."
These ideas are mouthed by those who tell America that abortion is just a choice and will have no serious consequences on anyone other than the woman [mother] exercising her choice.
It is obvious that, in Anyssia's case, her choice not to kill resulted in her murder. Sadly, this is not an isolated incident.
Advocacy of abortion has serious consequences. Abortion is not a mere surgical procedure; it is a grizzly act of killing. It is violent. It is obscene, and a society that accepts it has already become capable of all manner of evil. Anyssia's murder and that of her preborn child are but one example.
In the same way that aborting a child can result in a future child being born too early and suffering because of it, so too the idea of abortion as a solution to a problem can be the seed bed for crimes of other types. There is nothing good about abortion.
So when someone makes the statement, "I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice," he has deceived himself and everyone else. Whether it is the expectant mother who chooses death for her preborn child or the expectant father who murders his family because he chooses abortion while his partner does not, there are serious consequences to aborting the truth by denying that pro-choice is exactly the same as pro-abortion. A play on words does not make murder any less of a threat than it is.
Hillary White summed this up quite nicely in a recent article, writing,
"In championing the pro-life position, we simply say that between life and death, there is no third thing. You are either alive or you are not. Abortion kills or it does not. It is morally permissible or it is not. There are simply some things that do not admit of a 'neutral' third position. Between these two opposed possibilities, there can only be 'confrontation, distasteful as that may be to some sensibilities."
If every expectant mother understood the truth about her dignity, her baby's dignity as a human being and why her responsibilities extend to this child as well, we would be a long way down the road to restoring a culture of life.
But as long as mainstream America argues that the abortion "choice" affects nobody but the chooser, human beings are going to die, families are going to be destroyed, subsequent children are going to suffer, and all manner of sadness is going to plague our nation. What else can we expect?
Contact: Judie Brown
Source: CNSNews.com
Date Published: August 12, 2010
Adult stem cells have been used successfully to treat children with a deadly skin disease known as recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (RDEB; one of the most severe forms of epidermolysis bullosa, a set of genetic skin diseases.) EB affects the skin and lining of the mouth and esophagus. It causes skin to blister and scrape off with the slightest friction. The blistering, peeling skin also leads to recurrent infections, and an aggressive form of skin cancer. Most children with EB do not live past their 20′s. Previously, there was no treatment and it was considered incurable.
Now University of Minnesota researchers led by Dr. John E. Wagner and Dr. Jakub Tolar, along with international colleagues, have used adult stem cells from donor bone marrow or donor umbilical cord blood to treat EB successfully. Since 2007, they have transplanted a total of ten children with the most aggressive forms of EB; all of the children have responded to the therapy to varying degrees. Wagner said:
"To understand this achievement, you have to understand how horrible this disease actually is. From the moment of birth, these children develop blisters from the slightest trauma which eventually scar. They live lives of chronic pain, preventing any chance for a normal life. My hope is to do something that might change the natural history of this disease and enhance the quality of life of these kids."
This is the first time researchers have shown that bone marrow stem cells can home to the skin and upper gastrointestinal tract and alter the natural course of the disease.
Tolar said:
"This discovery is more unique and more remarkable than it may first sound… what we have found is that stem cells contained in bone marrow can travel to sites of injured skin, leading to increased production of collagen which is deficient in patients with RDEB.
"Bone marrow transplantation is one of the riskiest procedures in medicine, yet it is also one of the most successful. Patients who otherwise would have died from their disease can often now be cured. It's a serious treatment for a serious disease."
Added Wagner:
"This discovery expands the scope of marrow transplantation and serves as an example of the power of stem cells in the treatment of disease."
Yes, ADULT STEM CELLS.
Contact: David Prentice
Source: FRC Blog
Date Published: August 12, 2010
As a virgin of not quite fifteen years of age in 1975, my life changed forever when I was raped after entering the vehicle of a man from whom I had innocently accepted a lift home. After he was finished with me, I started on my journey in the darkness of that three-kilometer walk, alone with my trauma. I had trusted him and he had shattered that trust, much as I had trusted those who assured me that adoption would be an option for the son I had thereby conceived.
The removal of my son Michael James Howard on the 29th September 1975, was a foregone conclusion as I was funneled into an unlawful adoption system from Saint Anthony's Home for Unmarried Mothers. It was from there that the unborn children of unmarried mothers were systematically marked for removal at birth on behalf of childless married couples.
My Social record notes my response to the question, "Relationship with the natural father?" as "holiday romance". Though those words were the only ones directly quoted as mine, they were among those suggested by the Social worker herself as I struggled to answer that question. It was no doubt expedient for her to concur with my awkward, affirmative nod, as she maintained that my child needed a father and, as we both knew, it was obvious that my son's was not going to qualify. And so within the space of nine months, I had lost my sense of innocence as well as the son who had helped to restore it.
The stolen babies were adopted through the Supreme Court once deemed medically fit, though many were left behind to languish in institutions due even to minor health problems. My own son's adoption was deferred due to an innocent heart murmur, though I loved him unconditionally and begged for his return.
My experience contradicted the fears inspired by pro-choice rape propaganda, as the trauma and aftermath of the rape of my virginity paled into insignificance beside the trauma and aftermath of the rape of my womb. My son's day of birth is not recalled as one on which I gave him birth but as the day I was subjected to various medical intervention to remove him from my body for the benefit of married strangers.
Subsequently, in encountering those 'moderate' words: "I am opposed to abortion except in cases of rape," a stark contradiction lived side-by-side with the healing I had received through my son conceived in rape. The six hourly periods I was permitted to hold him in fact gave purpose to the pain of the violation that had brought him into existence.
Unbelievably, a significant percentage of the adoptions of babies unlawfully taken from their mothers at birth during the era in question became deferred on the basis of inconsequential accidentals such as red hair or a birthmark. Tragically, in the end my own son proved to be a healthy specimen, a prime commodity coveted by many as the firstborn child of a vulnerable and young, unmarried mother.
Reprinted by LifeSiteNews.com with permission from the author.
Visit her website: http://gift-not-choice.tripod.com/index.html
Contact: Lizzy Brew
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: August 11, 2010
It's a feminist adage that "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle", but Hollywood actress Jennifer Aniston is taking that message a step further, saying that women don't need to "fiddle" with men in order to have and raise a child, thanks to artificial insemination.
Aniston, 41, is the star of an upcoming Miramax film "Switch," in which Aniston's character decides she is tired of waiting for a man to come into her life to have a baby, and elects for artificial insemination. Apparently the film is supposed to be a romantic comedy, as it turns out that the best friend of Aniston's character is the sperm donor.
A reporter at a Sunday press conference in Los Angeles, where the actress was highlighting her movie, questioned Aniston's character, suggesting it was "selfish" to deprive a child of a father in order to fulfill a personal dream of parenthood.
"Women are realizing more and more that you don't have to settle, they don't have to fiddle with a man to have that child," the actress asserted in their exchange. "They are realizing if it's that time in their life and they want this part, they can do it with or without that."
"The point of the movie is, what is that which defines family?" Aniston continued. "It isn't necessarily the traditional mother, father, two children and a dog named Spot."
She stated, "Love is love and family is what is around you and who is in your immediate sphere."
The comments have drawn criticism from pro-family and other conservative leaders and commentators, who say that Aniston is devaluing the important role that fathers play in the lives of their children.
"What 'can' be done is not always what 'should' be done," Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America told LifeSiteNews.com in response to Aniston's statements. "A woman can have children without a father to raise them, but it's the children who pay the high price for that decision."
Wright added that while traditional family values may be "boring" for those in Hollywood, "they develop stable, secure and healthy people."
"Children need a dad. No amount of insisting 'but I can do whatever I want' can change that fact," she said.
National Catholic Register Columnist Tim Drake, also took umbrage at Aniston's comments, saying the actress needed a basic lesson in biology.
"While a woman may choose to have a child without a man in her life, she'll still need something that only a man can provide to help her conceive that child," remarked Drake. "Hence, they do have to 'fiddle' with a man, in one way or another, to bear children.
Contact: Peter J. Smith
Source: LifeSiteNews.com
Date Published: August 11, 2010
Authorities in Fontana, California, last week found the body of a pregnant 17-year-old girl whose boyfriend admits killing her because she refused to have an abortion.
After a two-month search through a mountain of trash, 18-year-old boyfriend Jesus Avitia, Jr. was formally charged in the death of Anyssia Escamilla. The death was not premeditated, but it most likely took place because Avitia wanted to pursue a nursing career but was afraid a baby would interfere with those plans.
The girl's father, Jorge Escamilla, responded to the news on television station KCAL 9, saying, "I cannot wish this, not even to my worst enemy because this is a pain that will never, never go away."
The teen had been missing three months before the body was found, and volunteers had assisted in searching and in spreading the word about the missing girl. Escamilla's brother reacted upon learning that the boyfriend confessed to the crime.
"I didn't think it was him, and it hurt me when I found out it was him because he was helping us hand out flyers," he laments.
Avitia has admitted to stuffing the teenager's lifeless body in a trash container, but he claims he did not intend to kill her.
The Elliot Institute points out that incidents such as these are not uncommon as research confirms that many women face pressure to have abortions -- and that much of that coercion comes from the child's father.
Contact: Charlie Butts
Source: OneNewsNow
Date Published: August 12, 2010
