 |
| photo credit: Bill Oxford / Unsplash |
Among the pro-life measures that Arkansas can now enforce are a ban on sex-selective abortions, regulations on the preservation and disposal of aborted children's remains, a ban on "dilation and evacuation" abortions (which involve the dismemberment of unborn children), and a requirement that abortionists notify the police where abortion patients under 14 years old reside.
The Associated Press reported that the laws could take effect as soon as Dec. 22.
 |
| photo credit: American Life League / Flickr |
The laws in question also require a patient seeking an abortion to see a doctor on two separate appointments before having an abortion procedure, and that patients receive abortion pill prescriptions directly from a doctor.
By having these laws overturned, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin would be able to have midwives and nurses give prescriptions and commit abortions without a doctor being present.
Tanya Atkinson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, told Wisconsin Public Radio (WPR), “Planned Parenthood Wisconsin is challenging these restrictions because they do interfere with a person’s ability to make their own health care decisions and make it more difficult to access the care they need.”
She also told WPR that Planned Parenthood would offer abortions at more of its facilities if the pro-life laws are overturned. Currently, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin only offers abortion at three of its 21 facilities in the state, and abortions are only completed by part-time physicians.
Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action, argued that having these laws overturned would put women at risk. “We believe this is a dangerous road for the state to go down,” she said. “Medical abortion [the abortion pill] is not without risk. If Planned Parenthood prevails, and they open up all of their sites to do these, women will suffer from that, and certainly their unborn children will be killed because of the courts.”
The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Wednesday that it filed a civil lawsuit in federal court against a Vermont hospital for forcing a nurse to participate in an elective abortion against her will in 2018.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) investigated the incident at the University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMMC) and came to the conclusion in August 2019 that the hospital had forced a nurse to participate in an abortion against her will. At that time, it filed a notice of violation against the hospital for violating the Church Amendments, a statute that prohibits health care entities from discriminating against health care workers who refuse to participate in abortions as a matter of conscience.
The DOJ alleged in the new lawsuit that UVMMC has not updated its policy to comply with the Church Amendments since the incident, and they are seeking for a federal court to acknowledge the violation and force UVMMC to change its policy.
An excerpt from a DOJ press release reads:
"The United States’ complaint alleges that UVMMC violated the Church Amendments when it chose intentionally and willfully to discriminate against a nurse who plainly made her objection to participating in abortions based on her religious beliefs or moral convictions known to UVMMC. Despite knowing of her objection, UVMMC deliberately scheduled this nurse to assist with an elective abortion while deceptively misleading her to believe the procedure did not involve abortion. Once the deceived nurse entered the procedure room she learned the true nature of the procedure. After she reiterated her objection, UVMMC refused to find a non-objecting nurse to take over, effectively forcing the nurse to continue assisting in the abortion (or abandon the patient) despite her well-known religious objection. This example makes up just part of UVMMC’s ongoing pattern, practice, and policy of discriminating against health care providers who believe that the performance, or the assistance in the performance, of abortions is contrary to their religious beliefs or moral convictions."
 |
| Roger Severino, Office of Civil Rights Director at the Department of Health and Human Services |
Unless California starts complying with the Weldon Amendment, which bans state and local governments from discriminating against entities that don't pay for abortions, the state will withhold $200 million per quarter starting on Jan. 1, 2020.
The OCR found California in violation of the amendment on January 24, 2020. Health plan issuers in the state were being forced to fully cover the cost of all abortions or be banned by California from issuing any insurance plans there. The HHS warned California at that time that it would face consequences unless it complied, but has refused to do so for 11 months now.
“Entities that receive HHS funds should think twice before flouting federal law and refusing to come into compliance. As a result of our actions today, California will be losing $200 million in federal funds per quarter […],” said Roger Severino, OCR Director. “Whatever one thinks of the legality of abortion, no one should be punished for declining to pay for or assist in the taking of human life.”
 |
| Screenshot from House Appropriations Committee video |
The Hyde Amendment has been attached to every spending bill Congress has passed for decades, and its purpose is to prevent federal tax dollars from being used to fund abortion. Pro-abortion legislators are threatening to end the Hyde Amendment by arguing that it prevents poor women from having abortions that wealthier women can access. With the same logic, these lawmakers argue that the Hyde Amendment is inherently racist. Arguments over this topic started earlier this year, even holding up a federal stimulus bill to which pro-abortion lawmakers refused to add Hyde Amendment language.
Bennett was the only person to give pro-life testimony last week, but she was able to cover several different reasons why government funding of abortion is unethical.
Afterward, Bennett spoke Live Action about several of the arguments she made in her written and spoken testimony. Among them were how government-funded abortions enabled sex-traffickers and abusers to coerce women into abortion who otherwise may not have chosen to abort, how abortion disproportionately ends the lives of minority unborn children, and how unethical practices of the abortion industry would be rewarded by simply paying it with tax dollars.
“This is a government that has had so many abuses against people of color, and to think that on top of that, it’s going to fund abortion!” Bennett wrote in her written testimony to the subcommittee, “[It is] at the least irresponsible and at the most sinister to allow the federal government with a history of eugenics, slavery, Jim Crow laws, and other forms of systemic racism to pay for-profit organizations to end the lives of the vulnerable.”
 |
| photo credit: Joe Gratz / Flickr |
 |
| Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker (R) |
Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL) Executive Director Patricia Stewart, while frustrated with parts of the legislation that he accepted, thanked the governor for taking the stance he did. “Although there remains much in this bill with which to take issue, we thank Governor Baker for the common sense recommendation to raise the age for consent to abortion to 18.”
C.J Williams with MCFL wrote, “He retained the section permitting abortion at and after 24 weeks in cases of so-called ‘fatal fetal abnormalities,’ even though that term is ambiguous and not defined in the bill and opens the door to fatal error.”
Pro-lifers and Gov. Baker have all expressed frustration that this policy was mixed with the state's annual budget.
“I do share some of the unhappiness that was raised by a number of members of the Republican Party — that putting policy in the budget was something that both leaders in the House and Senate said they would not do,” said Gov. Baker. “And it’s pretty hard to argue that this isn’t a major policy initiative that is now in the budget.”
Legislators can either accept the governor's changes, amend the bill further, or attempt to override his veto with a two-thirds vote in both houses. The House of Representatives could override his veto with the same votes the budget had when it passed.
 |
| Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf (D) |
 |
| California Attorney General Xavier Becerra photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr |
Stanton Healthcare, which has a branch in southern California, has dealt with Xavier Becerra during his time as Attorney General for the state. Becerra attempted to compel pro-life pregnancy centers to refer patients to abortion clinics using the force of law. In NIFLA v. Becerra, the Supreme Court ruled that this kind of compelled speech violated the rights of pro-life pregnancy centers, but a "packed" court could potentially change this stance. The original vote only protected the rights of pro-life clinics by a 5-4 vote.
In a statement from Stanton Healthcare, Swindell said:
"AG Becerra has a track record of working against life-affirming women's medical clinics like Stanton. How do we judge future behavior? By past behavior.
"If he is confirmed, it will be a nightmare for women's health. We strongly urge the Senate to oppose the confirmation of AG Becerra and to do everything within their power to protect pregnancy centers and clinics.
"I want to make it clear as the Founder and CEO of Stanton Healthcare: if Becerra becomes the HHS Secretary, our Stanton Healthcare clinics will never refer for abortions regardless of any mandates set forth by HHS. We will not comply. We would risk arrest, jail time, and fines to defend our right to provide quality compassionate, medically-accurate care to the clientele we serve. And we encourage pregnancy centers and clinics across the nation to refuse to be intimidated into compliance with abortion referrals. Now is the time for us to fight and stand like never before."
 |
| photo credit: Ivan Radic / Flickr |
 |
| photo credit: Operation Rescue |
Near 11:000 a.m. on Dec. 8, pro-life activists witnessed emergency medical workers enter the facility before exiting with a woman on a gurney. She was completely covered with a sheet. After the workers loaded her into an ambulance, they drove about a block away before turning on their sirens. This practice is often requested by abortion businesses that are trying to avoid negative press or that don't want to scare women from having abortions.
Until recently, the Manhattan Planned Parenthood clinic was called the Margaret Sanger Center, after the abortion giant's founder. Margaret Sanger's name was removed from the clinic earlier this year after the company come under fire for the systemic racism of its past. Sanger was well-known for her racist policy of encouraging abortion among the black population specifically so she could reduce the reproduction of genes that she felt were bad for society.
 |
| Rep. Tulsi Gabbard photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr |
 |
| Joe Biden photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr |
Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson told Newsweek that Planned Parenthood is pushing Biden to “hit the ground running day one” with pro-abortion actions. “The first thing we would like to see would be an executive order on day one, within the first 100 days, that demonstrates the administration’s commitment to sexual and reproductive health care,” she said.
She went on to say that Planned Parenthood wants to not only have Title X guidelines instated under President Trump to be lifted, but it also wants Title X funding increased from $280 million to nearly a billion dollars per year.
President Trump enacted rules for Title X which prevented funding recipients from providing abortion, referring patients to abortion, or cohabitating with businesses that provide abortion. Rather than comply with these rules, Planned Parenthood instead chose to leave the program and walk away from $60 million in federal taxpayer funding.
Johnson told Newsweek that Planned Parenthood is also keeping a close watch on who Biden is choosing to appoint for various federal positions. The abortion giant has reached out to the Biden team to recommend nearly 200 people for these positions. “We know that personnel is policy,” she said. “So we’re making sure that those positions are filled with sexual and reproductive health champions.”
 |
| Ohio State Capitol photo credit: Jim Bowen / Flickr |
Women who have their children aborted will have the ability to decide whether they would like the remains of their child to be buried or cremated, but the abortion facility must choose an option of the mother does not.
Abortion businesses will be required to pay for these expenses and must maintain documentation of the cremation and burial of the aborted children.
If an abortion business knowingly fails to comply with this bill, it would be guilty of a first-degree misdemeanor. The woman whose child is aborted would never be liable for this charge.
Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis gave a statement applauding the bill's passage:
“Whether pro-life or pro-choice, everyone should be able to agree that the bodies of babies should never be thrown into the trash. The unborn victims of abortion deserve the same basic decency that we afford to all humans: a dignified burial. The passing of Senate Bill 27 will make that simple request a reality. Although we look forward to the day when we no longer have to lay to rest the broken bodies of Ohio’s abortion victims, we are proud to say that our state has taken another step towards recognizing not only the humanity of the unborn, but of ourselves as well.”
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine is expected to sign the bill into law.
 |
| photo credit: Jim Rush / Flickr |
The report, which includes statistics for the year 2018, reveals that abortions killed 50,000 unborn children who had developed for 14 weeks or more. Almost 6,200 of those deaths were children who had reached 21 weeks gestation. Children who developed to that gestational age have survived birth and developed healthily with proper medical aid.
The CDC also noted a four percent increase in the number of late-term abortions between 2016 and 2018. Both the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute and the CDC agree that abortions completed on unborn children at 21 weeks gestation or later comprise 1-1.3% of all reported abortions.
Using this information, Live Action estimated that 6,196 late-term abortions occurred in states that choose to report abortion data to the CDC. This number would be lower than the actual total, since California, Washington D.C., Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Wyoming did not meet reporting standards for the 2018 report.
Planned Parenthood wants to allow nurses and other employees to administer abortion pills to women, but the current law prevents them from legally doing so. According to Right to Life Wisconsin, Planned Parenthood only performs abortions at four of its 24 clinics in the state. If the law is struck down, abortion would be available at all 24 clinics and the abortion business says it will open at least two more clinics in the state.
“We cannot overstate how significant this case is,” shares Kristen Nupson, legislative director of Wisconsin Right to Life. “It has been heartbreaking and disappointing to watch today’s trial unfold. Thousands of human lives are at stake, and yet these Planned Parenthood executives shroud their intentions by making abortion seem like any other medical procedure. Abortion isn’t health care; it cannot be compared to a biopsy or a birth control procedure. Abortion, whether chemical or surgical, takes the life of a human being. The physician-only law exists to protect women. Why is Planned Parenthood fighting against the protection of women?”
 |
| California Attorney General Xavier Becerra photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr |
After Becerra became California Attorney General (when previous Attorney General Kamala Harris moved on to the U.S. Senate) he continued Harris's work of prosecuting pro-life investigators for exposing Planned Parenthood's harvesting of fetal body parts. He filed a barrage of charges against Center for Medical Progress investigators David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, many of which were overturned in court. He sought to muzzle their journalism with the force of California privacy law, something that had never been done before.
Becerra is also known for fighting legal battles against pro-life pregnancy centers. He was the defendant in NIFLA v. Becerra, a case in which California was attempting to force pro-life pregnancy centers to promote abortions with government-mandated signage. The Supreme Court narrowly voted in favor of the pregnancy centers with a 5-4 decision.
In response to Biden's announcement regarding Becerra, National Right to Life President Carol Tobias said, “As California’s attorney general, Becerra repeatedly and aggressively attacked protective pro-life laws and organizations with rancor. While a congressman, he had a 100% pro-abortion voting record.”
National Right to Life also noted that Becerra was one of several pro-abortion state attorneys general that sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requesting that they lift restrictions on abortion pills, going as far as to file an amicus brief in support of a court challenge.
“Becerra has been especially aggressive in pushing for widespread access and use of chemical abortions without any FDA restrictions,” said Tobias. “Becerra and other pro-abortion attorneys general have repeatedly acted on behalf of the abortion industry and this is just another example of Becerra’s advocacy.”
“Xavier Becerra is an abortion activist plain and simple,” said Tobias. “Anyone doubting whether Joe Biden is a ‘moderate’ on abortion has the answer: he’s not. Nominating Becerra and picking Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate are clear indicators that he will give the abortion industry whatever it wants. Tragically, women and their unborn babies will be the ones to suffer.”
 |
| Obianuju Ekeocha screenshot from Ekeocha's video |
Kalina V.E. Gillum and Braden C. Mull ordered the abortion drug misoprostol from India with the intent to end the life of their third-trimester unborn child, simply because they did not want him. There were several problems with their plan, however.
The first of these was that the abortion pill process is designed to be used earlier than the third trimester. At this late stage in pregnancy, an abortion via abortion pills was more likely to fail regardless of how it was administered.
The second problem was that misoprostol is the second pill in the abortion pill regimen. This pill is only designed to cause contractions and allow the mother to give birth to a child starved and suffocated to death by the first pill, mifepristone.
Gillum gave birth to a born-alive child while she was alone in an apartment. She texted Mull, who came to put the child in a plastic bag and clean up the bathroom before taking his girlfriend (and not the child) to the emergency room. Medical professionals quickly noted that Gillum still had an umbilical cord attached and notified the police. When police found the child, they found the child dead. The coroner said there was "nothing medically wrong" with the baby.
If at-home abortions continue to increase with the increased availability of abortion pills, situations like this will be a more common occurrence.